The amazing pattern in Jesus' teachings that disproves Hebrew Roots theology

Jesus didn’t come to abolish the Law or the Prophets, but to fulfill them (Matt 5:17-20). His goal wasn’t to tear down the Torah, but to elevate it in preparation for the New Covenant He was about to inaugurate. And in light of this, there is an amazing pattern in His teachings that brings tremendous clarity to the issues that our Torah-keeping Hebrew Roots friends are continually arguing with us about. And today we are going to identify that pattern and unpack what it means for followers of Jesus. This is how Jesus transposed the Torah, making Hebrew Roots false.
OTHER VIDEOS MENTIONED
Is Jesus our Sabbath?
• Is Jesus our Sabbath?
DONATE TO OUR MINISTRY
TheBiblicalRoots.org/#donate (Thank you!)
OUR LINKS
linktr.ee/rlsolberg
CHAPTERS
00:00 Open
00:54 The Law of Moses and the New Covenant
02:36 From the external to the internal
04:01 How the law is fulfilled under the New Covenant
07:12 Case Study: Sermon on the Mount
09:21 Scriptural examples of God's law becoming internal
09:41 Sacrifices
10:57 The temple
11:49 The priesthood
12:23 Feasts
13:54 Sabbath
14:05 Circumcision
14:12 Food (kosher or kashrut food laws)
16:31 Wrap it up, Solberg
Subtítulos disponibles en español
Jesús no vino a abolir la Ley o los Profetas, sino a cumplirlos (Mateo 5:17-20). Su objetivo no era derribar la Torá, sino elevarla en preparación para el Nuevo Pacto que estaba a punto de inaugurar. Y a la luz de esto, hay un patrón sorprendente en Sus enseñanzas que aporta una claridad tremenda a los temas sobre los que nuestros amigos de las Raíces Hebreas que guardan la Torá están discutiendo continuamente con nosotros. Y hoy vamos a identificar ese patrón y desglosar lo que significa para los seguidores de Jesús. Así es como Jesús transpuso la Torá, haciendo falsas las Raíces Hebreas.

[@darlenerodgers9910]

Thank you so much for making these videos and explaining them so effortlessly. Makes complete sense! I have a good friend who left our non-Torah focused church to move into Torah keeping one so your videos are so helpful!

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

I'm so glad to hear these videos are helpful for you, Darlene. Thank you! ~Rob

[@Jeffmacaroni1542]

Paul Teaches The Law To Timothy kzbin.info/www/bejne/j6TEh6CcnrhspMk

[@DavidTschoepe]

Wow. this was just the best summary of old covenant vs new I have ever listened to and so clearly explained. THANK YOU for your service to the Christian community.

[@waynehobbs5175]

Hi Rob, excellent message. Help pleas with the link you mentioned about church being available below?

[@leo11190]

So happy to see you have so many views… your teachings are excellent and edifying . Thank you for teaching us and bringing clarity . God bless you brother 😊

[@earlsmith2862]

Enjoyed this Brother Solburg

[@jnastally196]

Rob, Don't you think it's strange that God would want us to stop doing something that is a prophetic act signifying what will happen in the future? You quoted Col 2:17 in this video. "...a shadow of things *to come* and the body is Christ." In other words, the shadow leads us to the person of Messiah. The Apostle Paul wrote that these things hadn't happened yet; they are to come. And, according to your teaching, we are not required to do it anymore, why? Have those things that were to come during the Apostle Paul's time now happened? Since you brought up the New Covenant, let's look at the description. Does the whole world know God from the least to the greatest? Does no one need to teach His neighbor saying, "know the Lord"?

[@tbishop4961]

He promised a while back to address that last paragraph from hebrews. I'm still waiting

[@justinbutcher44]

Ezekiel, Zechariah, and Micah are all good reference points regarding the New Covenant as well.

[@tbishop4961]

Perhaps the change isn't in people knowing God, but in our own acceptance of the fact that people DO know him already. We have all known him since conception

[@jnastally196]

@@tbishop4961 Yes, Hebrews 13:14 references Jer 31:38-40 re: the new city language of the New Covenant, notice the "*to come*" in that phrasing as well!

[@tbishop4961]

@@jnastally196 this idea is the crux of my argument with Muslims. They of course believe a person needs the Quran to know God, whereas I contend that I know him directly and personally and do not need a 3rd party introduction

[@rbenabeniamina1902]

Aman, written on the tablet of our spiritual HEART 🙏

[@ChildofGod98765]

Jesus has given me strength, to keep going, even though I want to give up. I have two beautiful boys both are autistic. My husband passed away years ago. I’m all alone. I lost my job over declining the vaccine. LIKE MANY OTHERS! I declined due to my pre existing health conditions lupus and heart disease. I’ve been struggling to provide for myself and my children since losing my job as a social worker from Forsyth hospital. I’m now waitressing, and I’m thankful, but I’m not making nearly enough to get by. Every month is a battle to not end up on the streets with my two children. I’m constantly in fear of losing my home. To even think about being on the streets with two young children is terrifying. But even as I face homelessness seemingly every month. I have faith, God will provide. With GOD ALL THINGS ARE POSSIBLE! Faith over fear.

[@tbishop4961]

Find someone who has less going for them than you do and pray for that person

[@edraymond2657]

Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; in all your ways acknowledge Him, and he will direct your paths. Proverbs 3:5-6 ...I will pray for you whenever I think of you sister.

[@katielee4892]

It was always the churches responsibility to care for the widow, even though most of them don't and leave it up to the world and governments to do it now instead. Where are you located?

[@stinksterrekerinski4450]

There was something so liberating that jesus brought- It's odd people would desire bondage.

[@judemichaelvelez6789]

For me its either u follow the torah or follow Jesus the Christ. U can never follow both, either u will love the one or hate the other. Make ur stand and let go and let God do His work. No words can convince me to change my view, only God in Christ can. So, leave ur comments below in love and respect and let God do the conviction. Me? Torah is allowed but never required. Shalom😄

[@justinbutcher44]

My love for Christ is what compels me to pursue Torah. For me, the Torah provides foundational principles of how to love God and my neighbor. I don't see Christ and Torah as an either or for discipleship. Christ practiced Torah perfectly which is what made Him worthy of being our Messiah. So as one who has come into faith through faith in Christ, for me, once I understood that I should keep Torah, it was a natural transition as I desired to walk more closely to how my Messiah walked. Though you might object to my view that a Christian ought to practice Torah, I would say. Okay. Keep up the faith and do what you believe the Spirit is calling you to do. I am not personally called to change anyone's mind. Blessings

[@jontoubeaux7361]

What? No 'expelled' jokes this time? LOL. Brother, as a musician I understand patterns and transposing. This makes so much sense to me and was an absolute blessing to my heart. God bless you Rob, keep contending for the faith! All glory and honor to our King!

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

Thank you, Jon! ~Rob

[@freeblom]

Very interesting and cool perspective ty sir

[@justinbutcher44]

Rob, if I may. How were people saved prior to Christ? Thanks in advance.

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

That's a great question with a long answer, Justin! The requirement for salvation has always been faith; what Dr. Heiser calls "believing loyalty." The object of our faith for salvation has always been God. And technically, the basis of salvation has always been the sacrifice of Christ. No one before or after the cross would ever be saved without that one event in the history of the world. Christ’s death paid the penalty even for past sins. "Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant" (Heb 9:15). Prior to Jesus, God's people did not yet have the full picture of salvation, and after Him we do. Blessings, Rob

[@justinbutcher44]

@@TheBiblicalRoots thank you for your response. Just trying to establish a baseline on your position. I am glad that you affirmed faith as the basis for salvation in the Old Testament. Not everyone does. Sholom

[@deborahriley7355]

I was hoping you would play something on your guitar 🎸!;!! I've been playing for 60 years 45 of which are songs the Lord, Yahshua has given me. My husband and I are so thankful for your ministry!

[@patnoon1544]

Thanks for another great teaching. I also agree many of the folks in the HRM movement appear very condescending towards biblical Christians and the teachers I have heard all seem to have a new revelation that no one else got over the last 2,000 years. Not that this does not happen in some non HRM teachers but is typically a sign of taking scripture out of context or making it their desired outcome. I believe Paul warned us of these things and that they would increase as the day approaches. Shalom and I don’t use Hebrew to impress people as many in HRM do , but to understand the deeper meaning in the Hebrew written scripture and to understand the language better for my upcoming trip to Israel in December. I love the land and the people and pray for the veil to be lifted their eyes as well as all unbelievers. For we are called as stated in this video to walk in love even towards our enemies and those who may disagree with our doctrine.

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

Amen., Pat. Thank you. I, too, love the land the people of Israel. Blessings, Rob

[@hosea4660]

Just wondering what your stance was on the rapture?

[@patnoon1544]

@@hosea4660 I believe the rapture will take place just before the revealing of the antichrist which would be at the beginning of the 7- year tribulation period or Jacob’s 70th week. I believe the restrainer in 2 Thess 2:6-8 to be the Holy Spirit within the believers in Jesus.

[@hosea4660]

@@patnoon1544 I was just wondering because you had mentioned new revelation two thousand years later and the rapture doctrine wasn’t founded until 1830. This doctrine is just shy of 200 years old but majority of Christians believe it. As for Paul, Peter actually stated in 2 Peter 3:15-16 that people don’t understand Paul and twist his words to their own destruction. Lastly you also mentioned doctrine. Proverbs 4:2 says the following “for I give you good doctrine, forsake ye not my Law”. The messiah himself said the following “My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me” in John 7:16. The point of my message isn’t judgment or condemnation, I agree there is a lot of that in the Torah community. However there is a lot of that within modern Christianity as well. There is a lack of love within the body and I hate to see it. I mainly messaged you to see your stance, iron sharpens iron and as siblings in the faith It’s good to talk these things out and get to the truth.

[@matiyasalemayehu5198]

This is a good summary of what the New Covenant is all about. Keep up the good work. We are blessed by your videos.

[@kolyomhashem8711]

Not really Matiyas - Through Moses Hashem said "Keep my commandments so I can bless you". And through Yeshua Hashem said, "I'm going to bless you, so you can keep my commandments". See Ezek 36:26-27 - "A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you; and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh. And I will put My spirit within you, and cause you to walk in My statutes, and ye shall keep Mine ordinances, and do them."

[@matiyasalemayehu5198]

@@kolyomhashem8711 I think we should understand the New Covenant as St. Paul sees it in 2 Corinthians and Galatians 4. In 2 Cor. 3.7- 18, a contrast between his own ministry and that of Moses, involving a contrast between the Old Covenant and the new one that Jeremiah spoke of. St. Paul’s reference in v. 3 to that which is “inscribed not with ink but by the Spirit of the living God” alludes to Exod. 31.18 (cf. Deut. 9.10- 11), where we hear about the stone tablets inscribed by the “finger of God.” If so, it is a contrasting comparison, because when St. Paul speaks about the New Covenant, he says in 2 Cor. 3.3 , “not on stone tablets but the tablets of fleshy hearts.” Again, St.Paul is thinking of yet another passage as well, this time Ezek. 36.26 (LXX), where we have the phrase “fleshy hearts” there contrasted with hearts of stone. In the view of St. Paul, something written on the heart eclipses the Ten Words written on stone tablets. The problem with the Old Covenant is not that it involves written texts. So does the New Covenant, indeed it involves various texts from the Old Covenant! The problem is that without the Holy Spirit inscribing things on the heart, the situation with God’s fallen people will never significantly change.

[@matiyasalemayehu5198]

St. Paul is also talking about the effects of the two covenants on fallen human beings. The Old Covenant came attended with glory and was a good and holy revelation of God (cf. Rom. 7.1- 5 and 9.4). The effect , however, of the Old Covenant on fallen people was not merely to reveal their sin, but, as Paul will put it, to turn sin into trespass - a willful violation of a known law. The Law was purposed to be life- giving, but its effect without the work of God’s Spirit is death- dealing on people trapped in sin. St. Paul has an additional point, however. The ministry of Moses, and the “Old Covenant” (here referred to as such for the first time), has had its day. The eschatological hour has arrived and the New Covenant of Jeremiah is the covenant for the eschatological age. Just as the glory on Moses’ face was annulled or eclipsed by the greater glory from the face of Christ, so the Old Covenant of Moses has been annulled in the light of the coming of the New Covenant prophesied by Jeremiah. In v. 9, St. Paul contrasts the “administration of condemnation” (the effect of the Law, not its intent) with that of righteousness. Note that the neuter participle τὸ καταργούμενον agrees with “that which was glorif ied” in v. 10, and so applies to the whole Old Covenant, symbolized or even embodied by Moses. This means that what is said to be annulled in v. 14 is not merely the veil over the minds of God’s people, but the obsolete Old Covenant.

[@matiyasalemayehu5198]

When St. Paul says “the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life”, he is talking about the difference between the effect of the Old Covenant without the Spirit, as opposed to the salvific effect of the New Covenant applied by the Spirit. It is a tale of two covenants he is telling, not a tale of two ways of reading the OT. As in Gal. 3- 4 , St. Paul is arguing on the basis of his covenantal theology, and what he says quite plainly in Gal. 4 is that the Mosaic covenant was good but pro tempore, for a certain period of time or age that is now passing away, in the light of the eschatological age and the New Covenant. The OT remained Holy Writ, and St. Paul will continue to use it as such, again and again, even with audiences largely Gentile. The issue is not that the OT is passing away. Rather the issue is that God’s people are no longer under the old Mosaic covenant, but rather under the New Covenant, which has its own commandments, its own obligations, and, in due course, its own written texts, the text of the NT. The age of the Spirit changes the ability of God’s people to respond to the demands of God’s Word, even inscribing that Word on their hearts. To further reflect on Paul’s covenant theology, we must turn to Gal. 4. In Gal. 4.21- 31, St. Paul is countering the possible arguments not of non- Christian Jews, but of some fellow Jewish Christians whom he sees as bewitching his converts in Galatia. This passage contrasts considerably with 1 Thess. 2.14- 16, where St. Paul is quite clearly talking about some non- Christian Jews. St. Paul viewed the Mosaic covenant as an interim solution for God’s people, a sort of guardian of them, until Messiah came. It is not surprising, then, that he saw Jewish Christian advocates of the Mosaic Law being imposed on Gentile Christians after the coming of Christ as being almost as misguided as Hagar when it came to the issue of who was going to inherit the Abrahamic blessings and promises and how they would do so. In short, though the Mosaic Law had an important function in its day and time, its day and time had come and gone, and had been superseded by what Christ brought to God’s people. In this argument, then, it is not an accident that St. Paul tells us that Sarah and Hagar represent two different covenants. The story of two women becomes a tale of two covenants in St. Paul’s creative hands. To go back to observing the Mosaic Law was tantamount to submitting again to bondage and a renouncing of the Gospel of Christ and the New Covenant he instituted. Christians no longer have Jerusalem, or the Mosaic covenant and Law, as their mother. Rather “the Jerusalem which is above is free and she is our mother” (Gal. 4.26).

[@joe4369]

@@matiyasalemayehu5198 You wrote, "I think we should understand the New Covenant as St. Paul sees it...." . Before you get into the writings of Paul then you probably should understand the teachings of Yeshua. You know...the red letters in your Bible? Paul's words can be easily twisted or misunderstood as in your case. Paul certainly was not advocating abolishing the Law. He was saying that we are to continue the Law of God that encompasses Love via a heart of flesh. The parable of the good Samaritan is a good example of the difference between the heart of stone and the heart of flesh. The priest and Levite had the heart of stone while the Samaritan had the heart of flesh. For example, I keep the Sabbath. If I see my 80 year old neighbor struggling to carry a trash can, I will not say to myself, "I would help you if it only weren't the Sabbath". Of course I will help him even if it is the Sabbath. Keeping the letter of the Law would have kept me from a loving act of kindness. Heart of stone vs. heart of flesh. Have a nice day! Shabbat Shalom!

[@truthwatch2858]

Amen Praise The Lord Jesus

[@nancycorbin7317]

2 questions 1. Why did Paul acknowledge at the end of his ministry, testifying before king....He never even broke a custom of his forefathers? 2. Why after 10 years of peters ministry, after the ascension does it say , he said he still had never put anything in his mouth God said was not food?

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

Hi, Nancy! What passages are you referring to?

[@nancycorbin7317]

@@TheBiblicalRoots both of those I think are in the Actions of the Apostles. Chapters 10, and 28

[@shellyblanchard5788]

It Is duet 6: 5 where it says you shall love the Lord with all your soul.

[@yaredmakabate1150]

Brother I am so happy to listening your teaching May God Bless you ! I have seen your debate with Jewish Rabi I am so proud of you !!!

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

Thank you, yaredmak! Blessings, Rob

[@jaylar6442]

One of the things that stuck out to me from this video -- Solberg mentioned it a few different times -- is a common misunderstanding among mainstream Christianity, that the Pharisees kept and taught the Torah. This was not the case. In the same chapter Solberg references, Mark 7, we see Messiah rebuking the Pharisees. For what? Keeping and teaching the Torah to the letter? No. But for neglecting, making void the Torah for the sake of their own man made TRADITIONS. (Mark 7:9,13) Torah obedience was always ALWAYS a matter of the heart. That has always been what Father has desired. From the beginning.

[@rocksolidmn69]

Another amazing video, very thorough. You have become an expert when it comes to debunking the Hebrew roots movement. Be on the lookout for David Wilber and his list of scholars not scripture to prove you are wrong, lol. May God continue to Bless you and your family Rob.

[@Jeffmacaroni1542]

Rob is a wolf in sheeps clothing, An enemy of Truth.

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

Thanks, David! ~Rob

[@Jeffmacaroni1542]

@@TheBiblicalRoots Acts 8:9-10 “But there was a certain man, called Simon, which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one:” To whom they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is the great power of God.

[@cynthiahunter2570]

It is my understanding that when Jesus said, YOU HAVE READ, this was referring to what had been written by God, the Law; but when He said, YOU HAVE HEARD, this was the Pharisees’ tradition, which they added to the Law.

[@YvetteDH]

Thank you for making this video. It explains it beautifully. God bless you

[@johanneangers2]

Part#1 if 8 parts... R.L Solberg stated at timeline 1:17-1:22 that Pharisees tested Jesus on the issue of divorce they challenged him on the law of Moses... (But were the Pharisees actually quoting the Laws of Moses or Man made Talmudic Oral laws?) and at timeline 1:37-1:36 R.L Solberg stated that divorce wasn't part of God's original plan for humanity (Which is true) but the law of Moses contains a compromise that was given because of the hardness of the human heart (Lets see if R.L Solberg statement of the Law of Moses is true) . Let's take a closer look at the New Testament Context of Matthew 19:3-9 that R.L Solberg referenced and lets look at the actual context of a possible divorce scenarios that is written in Laws of Moses, not in arguing attitude nor debating, just presenting what hasn't been addressed in R.L Solberg video for the viewers. Let's actually cross reference verses that Jesus is quoting from in the Laws of Moses from context of Matthew 19:3-9! 3 Some Pharisees came to Jesus, testing Him and asking, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife " **FOR ANY REASON AT ALL** ?" 4 And He answered and said, “ **HAVE YOU NOT READ** that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, **NO PERSON IS TO SEPARATE** .” 7 They said to Him, “Why, then, did Moses command to give her a certificate of divorce and send her away?” 8 He said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. 9 And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.” Matthew 19:3-9

[@johanneangers2]

Pt#2 Jesus is not agreeing with their premise, the Pharisees premise was is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife **FOR ANY REASON AT ALL** ? and Jesus is disagreeing with them by quoting to them genesis 2 (Which Moses wrote as Jesus stated **HAVE YOU NOT READ**). Let's now read from the law of Moses to see if the law of Moses contains a compromise for a man to divorce his wife **FOR ANY REASON AT ALL** ? 24 “When a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens, if she finds no favor in his eyes because **HE HAS FOUND SOME INDECENCY IN HER** , that he writes her a certificate of divorce, puts it in her hand, and sends her away from his house, 2 and she leaves his house and goes and becomes another man’s wife, 3 and the latter husband turns against her, writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand, and sends her away from his house, or if the latter husband who took her to be his wife dies, 4 then her former husband who sent her away is not allowed to take her again to be his wife, after she has been defiled; for that is an abomination before the Lord, and you shall not bring sin on the land which the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance. Deuteronomy 24:1-4 do you see what the Pharisees quoted a man to divorce his wife **FOR ANY REASON AT ALL** or do you see what Jesus quoted whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality?

[@johanneangers2]

Pt#3 the Pharisees are saying in Matthew 19:3 a man can divorce his wife " **FOR ANY REASON AT ALL** ?", let see if that's true... A newly married couple and a jerk trying to divorce his wife with false accusation and publicly announcing it to everyone... Deuteronomy 22:13-19 it says: 13 “If any man takes a wife and goes in to her and then turns against her, 14 and **HE CHARGES HER WITH SHAMEFUL BEHAVIOR** and **PUBLICLY DEFAMES HER** , and says, ‘I took this woman, but when I came near her, I did not find her to have evidence of virginity,’ 15 then the girl’s father and her mother shall take and **BRING OUT THE EVIDENCE** of the girl’s virginity to the ELDERS of the city at the gate. 16 And the girl’s father shall say to the elders, ‘I gave my daughter to this man as a wife, but he turned against her; 17 and behold, he has charged her with shameful behavior, saying, “I did not find your daughter to have evidence of virginity.” But this is the evidence of my daughter’s virginity.’ And they shall spread out the garment before the elders of the city. 18 Then THE ELDERS of that city shall take the man and rebuke him, 19 and they shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give it to the girl’s father, because he ]publicly defamed a virgin of Israel. And she shall remain his wife; **HE IS NOT ALLOWED TO DIVORSE HER all his days Deuteronomy 22:13-19 again do you see that it is “lawful for a man to divorce his wife " **FOR ANY REASON AT ALL** ?"

[@johanneangers2]

Pt#4 In this first scenario of when the couple first comes together this man is claiming to have found an indecency in her that she actually wasn't a virgin that she had actually had sex with someone else okay so then he's literally turning against her right, she's lost favor in his eyes, but for whatever reason if the guy is wrong about his accusation and that's proven by the testimony of the mother and the father with the evidence, then we have a man that's being fined and he cannot divorce her. This guy is literally trying to find a reason to divorce her but it's not even true what he said and he's actually defaming her at the same time which is really unfortunate and she regains her honor by the way of the monies of the 100 shekels of silver to the father which legally was a transactional process that literally would regain her honor amongst the community and with her family! Her father and her mother already knew the guy was lying but because of the process she's been vindicated so that in the community she's not defamed against false accusations. So this now this disqualifies that a man can just come up with any reason at all to divorce his wife (I wonder why the Pharisees testing Jesus in Matthew 19:3 don't seem to know the laws of Moses as R.L Solberg claims they do?)

[@johanneangers2]

Pt# 6 Numbers 5:11-30 this is the situation where the husband and wife are already married, but unfortunately like for example 10 years down the road, sometimes men stray or women stray, numbers chapter 5 lays out pretty much what happens if it's suspected that the woman did actually have sexual immorality in which she actually was indecent by being unfaithful and in these circumstance if there's no witness against the woman so she's not under the death penalty if the husband says did you cheat on me and if she says yes well then they got some decisions to make they don't have to go through this process this is like a severe case where the husband feels very justified in his suspicion but the wife's holding to her guns. Okay so this is a severe situation but they could have had already a conversation beforehand and worked it out either stay together or parted. but in this specific extreme case where the husband is feeling like the woman is not being honest, but if the woman be not defiled but be clean then she shall be free and shall conceive seed. This is a test in a severe circumstance where the woman's being dishonest now if she was honest and the husband just had a jealousy for no reason or his jealousy was without good cause then she's vindicated. Numbers 5:11-30 since there is no witnesses and there's a spirit of jealousy, they have to present themselves before God and he will proclaim the truth. so do you see that it is “lawful for a man to divorce his wife " **FOR ANY REASON AT ALL** including jealousy for no reason or his jealousy was without good cause?

[@johanneangers2]

Pt#7 18 Now the birth of Jesus the Messiah was as follows: when His mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together **SHE WAS FOUND TO BE PREGNANT** by the Holy Spirit. 19 And her husband Joseph, since he was a righteous man and **DID NOT WANT TO DISGRACE HER**, planned to **SEND HER AWAY** secretly. 20 But when **HE HAD THOUGHT THIS OVER** , behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for the Child who has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. 21 She will give birth to a Son; and you shall name Him Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins.” 22 Now all this took place so that what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet would be fulfilled: 23 “Behold, the virgin will conceive and give birth to a Son, and they shall name Him Immanuel,” which translated means, “God with us.” 24 And Joseph awoke from his sleep and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took Mary as his wife, 25 but kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he named Him Jesus. Matthew 1:18-25 Joseph: He's a righteous man means he has right behavior and he's not wanting to disgrace her so even though in his mind he thinks that she stepped out and at this point the angel comes to tell him that is from the holy spirit and it's not another person that's okay trust her she literally gets validated by heaven but before that happens he thinks oh man you know she she stepped out on me and uh but instead of bringing her forward to disgrace her by publicly shaming her he's gonna put her away quietly, mercy could be extended between a husband and wife and joseph is actually planning to do that himself he was actually just to let it go just be gone and just move on and not try to defame her you know she would have to answer questions to other people raising the child on her own but he wasn't gonna, to him it wasn't his child so he thought at the time so he just wasn't gonna defame her he just sent her back to her parents house.

[@Taushathetech]

I would like to ask for help. Dont know if you can help me. I have a friend who is a proclaimed Christian and is trying to convert to Judaism. I gave her biblical truth and warnings. Just asking for any help if possible in speaking to her

[@pben004]

This is excellent. Thank you!

[@nancycorbin7317]

So, why is there not only a written test, but a physical test for receiving a driver's license. Don't we have to go through a time period of knowing the Law of Driving , before it becomes second nature, to not look and reach for the brake pedal?

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

Well, I am more of a theologian than a driving instructor. But I’m pretty sure it’s because it’s not enough to know what the rules of the road are, you also have to know how to physically operate a vehicle.

[@nancycorbin7317]

@@TheBiblicalRoots so, in that analogy using the Law of God's kingdom, wouldn't you have to know what His rules are , kinda before they are written in flesh, so that one's second nature is the messiah's nature.

[@nancycorbin7317]

So, another question since you see yourself as a theologian. " Sabbaths " in the " KJV " according to one search is 33 times....in the plural. Starting at Exodus 31, which Is a " SIGN" that one even believes in the Creator. Moreover, all through Isaiah, Ezekiel 20, all the way to the back at Revelation 12:17....which states, of those that are true worshipers Of spirit and truth , that obey The Commandments of Adonai, and have a testimony of Jesus the Christ (Yeshua the Messiah of Israel). So, I assume by your continued flawed arguments you seriously think the Creator of Everything changed His mind about what Day the Sabbath is. Especially when it's #4 on the Tablets.

[@timgrady4630]

Excellent clarification Rob. It's all about the "inner person", and never about outward rituals to merit justification before God . Having been a Roman Catholic monk (New Camoldoli/Big Sur , Ca.) , this central soteriological issue defined my persuasion that justification before God was indeed apart from all behavioral performance (works) : Ephesians 2:8-9 ; Romans 3:20-5:11,11:6 ; Titus 3:5 . The New Covenant is available only to those who believe in the Christ (Jesus) FOR His doubtless Guarantee (John 3:16,4:10-14,5:24,6:28-47,11:23-27,20:31 ; Acts 16:31 ; 1 Timothy 1:16 ...etc.) . Assurance of eternal life - at the moment of faith in Jesus - is of the essence of saving faith . Purely objective . Whereas , repentance/ perseverance till death in an unknowable level of "hopefully good enough " behavior , is the denial of the Promise .

[@johanneangers2]

I would highly recommend this video which also touches on the context of Matthew 19 with the Cross references that are not presented in Solberg video inwhich theology is presented in light of Jesus comment concerning the Law of Moses “vs” the theology of the Pharisees kzbin.info/www/bejne/iWWpo2WPbdKKrsU

[@joe4369]

Oh wow, brings back memories of Catholic school. The monks were always the coolest. I'd like to bring up that the word that gets translated to "believe" is from the Greek pisteuo. The best translations are "commits to" or "being faithful to". So, perhaps we can profess with confidence that the New Covenant is available only to those who *commit to* Jesus. The vision behind "believe" renders more of a do nothing approach . I am sure the goats in the parable of the goats and sheep where only the believers. We want to be the sheep which are the doers. If anyone thinks they cannot contribute to their own righteousness then they will end up like the goats. Have a blessed and peaceful day.

[@adamguy33]

Goats do things to, we all to good and bad works. The difference is those who believe Jesus is the Christ and those who don't. I've seen non-believers (goats) do lots of good works and help other people and be genuine decent people. Yet they deny Jesus is the Christ ......and I've seen believers in Jesus( the sheep) not be as good as this other guy, but yet his sins are forgiven. What about the theif on the cross? What good works did he have. It is not of works that your saved lest you have something to boast about. A gift is not earned and a gospel plus works is not a gospel at all. I am gonna struggle with sin in my heart tell the day I die or I get raptured first. Sin that doesn't even go beyond the meta physical into the physical realm. Its like a virus of the heart and mind. The longer I live and learn of the Lord the more I see how deep the problem of sin really is.

[@brigitteludwig4572]

Blessings ❤

[@charitybrook6279]

As we see in our world today, if you define love by human standards you wind up with all kinds of wacky ideas... God gave us the standards that He defines love by, why don't we listen? If you just say, "love God and love neighbor", but you are defining love on your own terms... How can you expect God to be pleased at that? Our works mean nothing for salvation... But as we work for our Master because we love Him don't we want to define love the same way He does, so that we can stay in right relationship? If you are married and both spouses define love in different ways, it is going to lead to a rocky marriage for sure... I also find it interesting that the first law given to Adam and Eve that they broke was a food law. And it was covetousness, idolatry and questioning God's authority that led to the fall in the first place. Food for thought...

[@judemichaelvelez6789]

No, first sin was not about food....it was about OBEDIENCE to Gods command not to eat. Sorry sis but doesnt sound sound. Shalom

[@charitybrook6279]

@@judemichaelvelez6789 you don't even realize that we are saying the same thing 😅 I said the first law they broke was a food law, therefore their sin was DISOBEDIENCE to said-food law. Don't you see? It's not about food, it's about obedience. If we can't even listen to God on a command as simple as "though shall not eat", how are we supposed to listen to Him on weightier matters such as idolatry or murder?

[@johanneangers2]

Very well said :)

[@codyalexander3290]

@@charitybrook6279 it’s almost like if you can’t entertain the idea of being a Muslim you shouldn’t be able to call yourself a Christian.

[@charitybrook6279]

@@codyalexander3290 excuse me? I'll need more context to respond. I don't even know what you are getting at. And I read the Quran before I ever read the Bible thanks, I know the truth. Muhammad builds his entire religion on the Bible, but twists it. Even down to which son of Abraham was to be sacrificed! God gave us a test for prophets, Muhammad does not qualify.

[@radostinvasilev599]

Rob. You just proved the torah is binding and is required. Its the same song needs to be played.

[@thomasjohns65]

Hello brother, I just love listening to your channel. I love how you lovingly appeal to the listeners and Biblically make your case. I just ordered your book "Torahism: Are Christians Required to Keep the Law of Moses? " and cannot wait to get it. Thank you for what you do. God bless.

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

Thanks so much, Thomas! Shalom, Rob

[@harryabrahams2770]

Matthew 5:1 who received the sermon on the mount? Was it the multitudes or just His disciples? He sat down, His disciples came to Him. Vs 2 And opening His mouth He began to teach them ( disciples ). Luke 6: 20 And turning His gaze on His disciples, He began to say, The teaching starts with the word blessed which points to the Torah because by keeping it you are blessed. Got Torah Got Truth

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

Thanks, Harry.! That's an interesting observation and you might be right. Matthew 5:1 says, "Seeing the crowds, he went up on the mountain, and when he sat down, his disciples came to him." Did Jesus see the crowds and walk away from them and instead talk with His disciples privately? Or did He see the crowds and go up on the mountain to address the crowds from an elevated position, and His disciples join Him there? Or did the crowd follow Him up the mountain to hear him speak? The text doesn't tell us explicitly. But let's take your position and say that the sermon was given only to the disciples. What are we to conclude from that fact? R.

[@harryabrahams2770]

@@TheBiblicalRoots I realize we are not going to agree but this is my understanding. Matthew 13:11 and He answered them ( disciples ) to you it has been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of Heaven, but to them it has not been granted. It’s all about being a disciple and a disciple is not about his master. The rulers of the world long ago understood that the masses want bread and circus. Yeshua gave the multitude free food ( bread ) and parables ( entertainment ) soon as He said something hard, they walked away. This is why He kept a lot of His teaching for the serious students. He said seek first the kingdom. Most people have little interest in the kingdom because they are going to be raptured and going to Heaven. And when the rapture doesn’t happen how many will walk away? I was shocked at first what the scriptures actually said. Thanks for your question. Got Torah Got Truth

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

@@harryabrahams2770 FYI In my Bible reading this morning I discovered that Luke 6:20-49 is an extract of what appears to be the same sermon we read about in Matthew 5. And, interestingly, verse 17 says, "And he came down with them and stood on a level place, with a great crowd of his disciples and a great multitude of people from all Judea and Jerusalem and the seacoast of Tyre and Sidon" (Luke 6:17). Blessings, Rob

[@anguspure]

Beautiful brother!

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

Thank you! ~Rob

[@berglen100]

We will take a simple little verse and show you why it is not addressed to the natural man, Ecclesiastes 3:15: “That which is, already has been; that which is to be, already has been; and God seeks what has been driven away.” The “natural man” cannot grasp that, for to him reality is based only on the evidence of the senses. The man of reason could justify the verse’s end, saying if it has any meaning then the writer must mean recurrence. The sun comes every day and the moon completes its cycle and the seasons come and go. If we took a picture of the universe today, the scientists can compute how long it will take to return to this point in the picture. So the intellectual man could justify the verse; but that is not what is meant, for it is addressed not to the man of reason or the man of sense, but to the man of Imagination. What is it all about? “That which is, already has been; that which is to be, already has been, and God seeks what has been driven away.”

[@jasonhomey3108]

"The Word was made flesh" (John 1:14) "In Him dwells all the fullness of the Deity bodily" (Col. 2:9). So, the internal and external have become in Jesus unified with each other. The body is important, as the hope of resurrection from the dead taught by the Hebrew prophetic scriptures teaches us. And we learn in the New Covenant, that it is in Jesus that all will be raised bodily from the dead, and that Holy Communion is the communion of the body and blood of Jesus and the pledge of the resurrection on the last day, whereby the Church is one body with Him, members of Him, and whereby we become living sacrifices to God. (1 Cor. 15, 1 Cor. 10, John 6, Eph. 5; Rom. 12)

[@carminefragione4710]

The difference between Spirit and Soul is personal transfiguration of the Spirit into the identity of a unique person, which is mathematical not a difference in substance. What God is as substance is the same for Spirit and Soul, but the transfiguration , just as in the Transfiguration of Christ in Matthew 17 points to a definite article of compliance of the Spirit to take on a face or personna, to be an individual , and yet adjusted mathematically for the next human being, the same substance of Spirit takes on the character of a uniquely apart other face of a person. Jesus was a Person of God according to the mathematical calculation to show the Spirit of God as the man Jesus, apart from all other men. But the same Spirit is the substance Jesus gave up to the Father, to let the physical body of Jesus to die , and then God preserved the flesh of Jesus' body from decay , so it was viable to rise again and continue to serve the Temple, as a Nazirite Priest with a Vow of Dedication that the personal death of a man's body could not cancel out the service of the Spirit within the form of a man doing a Priestly Unction. So we all have a number, a calculation to separate us as individuals even though we come from the same substance of God , the Spirit to exist.

[@berglen100]

For God we all came down from had to experience good and evil blind weak, hat, lust, etc..........................or respect is about also needing grace and mercy for I AM then repect is easy.

[@skywriter89]

This is such a crucial point to the big picture. Thank you for sharing in a succinct and respectful format!

[@SmartVideosJarkaWatched]

This would be a good 'chapter' in a new book of The Bible (kinda like The Epistles serve to interpret The Gospel for the then-new church, making this 'an amendment to those Epistles'). And maybe your other posts are like that too. I'll listen to them with the same respect as if you were reading & interpreting Scripture (the way Shepherd's Chapel does).

[@michaelestrella2791]

Thanks Rob, always learn a lot from you, keep up the good work brotha and God bless you and yours

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

Thank you Michael! Blessings, Rob

[@nathanoogies1073]

I like it💯🇿🇦

[@davbra12]

Thank you for these videos of sound and reasonable interpretation and instruction. Keep them coming and may G-d move, inspire, lead, and provide continued revelation to practice and share! Thank you for who you are in Christ, and what you do in His name for the sake of our brothers and sisters! God bless! Shalom!

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

Thank you, Brandon!

[@alexblack6634]

@@TheBiblicalRoots The problem Christians has with the law, is, you think we do the law to get/be saved. But that's not true. We do it because we are saved, and out of love for God. I wish Christians could make that distinction.

[@sorgulayanbirinsan7466]

Hello! I am a Turkish Christian and I would like to want you something. Please add Turkish subtitles to your videos. Thanks in advance!

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

Merhaba, Sorgulayan. I have added Turkish subtitles to this video. Please let know if you find it helpful. Blessings, Rob

[@sorgulayanbirinsan7466]

@@TheBiblicalRoots You've helped me a lot, professor! Thank you. If you add Turkish subtitles to your video called Psalm 22 and İsaiah 53 I will be prayer to you! Thank you!

[@AProdigalSonReturned]

Jesus wasn't making things harder by telling us not to look with lust. If anything, he was elaborating. People think they can look but not touch. Paul also explains where this is wrong. Romans 7:7 [7]What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet. Jesus wasn't making new laws, sir. Everything He said in that passage can be found in the Torah. Matthew 5:43-44 [43]Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. [44]But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; Exodus 23:4-5 [4]If thou meet thine enemy's ox or his ass going astray, thou shalt surely bring it back to him again. [5]If thou see the ass of him that hateth thee lying under his burden, and wouldest forbear to help him, thou shalt surely help with him. Jesus wasn't a cover band, or a remix. Even if the background noise changed, the lyrics still remain the same. John 5:39-47 [39]Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. [40]And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life. [41]I receive not honour from men. [42]But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you. [43]I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive. [44]How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only? [45]Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust. [46]For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. [47]But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words? Those last couple of verses are important. Some parables make the same point. Luke 16:19-31 [19]There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day: [20]And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, [21]And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. [22]And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; [23]And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. [24]And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame. [25]But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. [26]And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence. [27]Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: [28]For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. [29]Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. [30]And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. [31]And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead. Again, those last verses. In the parable of the husbandmen, who were the servants and who was the Son? Did they have a different message? I'm sure people have found some way to twist this next verse, but it's pretty clear. Matthew 23:1-4 [1]Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, [2]Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: [3]All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. [4]For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. When they read straight from scripture, obey. When they try to subvert God's Word through their own ideas, disregard their words. How many times did Jesus rebuke the Pharisees for keeping their manmade laws/doctrine over God's Word. The disciples said we should obey God rather than men. 1 Corinthians 7:19 [19]Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God. Circumcision (being a Jew). Uncircumcision (being a non-Jew). We have to be careful with Paul's writings because he uses these words for groups. There are some times when he actually means circumcision and uncircumcision for their literal meanings, but not too often. Ephesians 2:11-22 [11]Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; [12]That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: [13]But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. [14]For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; [15]Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; [16]And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: [17]And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh. [18]For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father. [19]Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; [20]And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; [21]In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: [22]In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit. Verses 14-16 are the same as what Paul says in Colossians 2. Jesus is destroying the enmity (hate) contained in ordinances. This is what Acts 10 is actually about. Peter tells Cornelius that it's unlawful for a Jew (the circumcision) to even visit a non-Jew (the uncircumcision), but God has shown him that it's not against God's Laws. Peter withdraws and stops visiting non-Jews when men come to him from James. Paul corrects him, and this also has nothing to do with eating unclean meat. Everything ties together until we start trying to formulate a remix after our own lusts.

[@billyhw5492]

No one will read an encyclopedia in the comboxes.

[@AProdigalSonReturned]

@@billyhw5492 I agree. There aren't many people that actually read their Bibles either. I wrote maybe five somewhat short paragraphs, and the rest was scripture. My comments are not required reading, sir. I apologize for making my comments so long, but it's hard to make points of evidence without actually making points and referencing scripture. I try to keep them as short as I can while not going through all of the connections in the Word.

[@sundownsam3369]

You pull verses out of context to continue to aggressively attack God's law like a mad man. Why don't you continue reading Romans 8? Verse 10 explains verse 4. In Christ, the body is dead because of sin (not because of the law); but "the Spirit is life because of righteousness." Because of this, the righteousness of the law is able to be fulfilled in us who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit. Why don't you continue reading? For those who follow the flesh mind the things of the flesh, but those who follow the Spirit mind the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Why don't you continue reading? The carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed it can be. Why? Because the carnal mind is enmity against God. What this verse also implies is that those who walk after the Spirit subject themselves to the law of God. Why don't you continue reading? So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. It is clear that you want nothing to do with the God of Israel, nor do you want anything to do with God's law. You are deliberately distorting the Scriptures to teach your false doctrine. Remember what happened to Nebuchadnezzar? At the end, he acknowledged the God of Israel. I'd rather see you eat grass so that at the end you would acknowledge the God of Israel and his laws than have God drive you deeper into your delight, which is aggressively attacking God's law. Read Romans 1.

[@pjdolor7824]

May the good Lord bless you and keep you my brother 🙌🙏

[@huskermmc]

I believe that your interpretation concerning the words of Jesus in Matthew 19:8 are incorrect because of the verse being taken out of context. Proper biblical hermeneutics would require us to take into account who was speaking, to whom they were speaking, the cultural norms of the society, the historical background, reading the verses before and after so that we can get the proper context. An isolated verse taken out of context becomes a pretext and that leads to bad doctrine or teaching. So now let’s look at the verse. “He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.” So now lets get the proper context using hermeneutics. Jesus is speaking to the Pharisees concerning divorce and whether it was lawful for a wife to be put away for every cause. (Matt 19:3) At that time the there were two schools of thought in the scribes and Pharisees. One was a very high standard that limited divorce to reasons of her leaving for another man or if she remained unrepentant in her adultery. The second was much like California in that I was liberal and basically one could divorce for any reason. They already knew what Jesus’s standard concerning marriage and divorce was as he had spoken the Sermon on the Mount already and had expounded the idea of adultery to lust in the heart. Pharisees were marrying and divorcing their wives for any reason, hence the reason for the question, which was why they asked why Moses then gave a command of a writing of divorce. (Matt 19:7) So why did GOD allow a writ of divorce? Is it possible that because GOD knows human thought that by allowing this writ of divorce it was actually showing His mercy? Consider what the punishment for adultery was, it was death (Lev 20:10-12), a capital punishment. That because GOD knew how the human heart could be, that there were be some who would become so severe and unkind to their wives that they would literally take and seek occasion to prosecute their wives with the Law with severity and oppression to the point of killing them though they were innocent? John Lightfoot in his commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica gives a better understanding of what the Pharisees believed and how they had perverted the scripture to allow for divorce outside of adultery. This is why when Jesus told them that a man who divorces for other than adultery and marries another commits adultery (Matt 19:9) was a direct assault on their belief and teachings. Remember that GOD divorced Israel for their adultery (Jer 3:8) and did not destroy them, but had mercy and dispersed them. In the new covenant GOD once again marries Judah and Israel, which is what Paul eluded to in Romans 7 but unfortunately most of the church is biblically illiterate, including most pastors, when it comes to the Old Testament. This is why they don’t understand the true significance of what Jesus did on the cross and how GOD can remarry Israel (which we have been grafted into) and not violate His Law. Granted this is because of the church has swallowed the lies of dispensationalism and adopted antimonianism as doctrine. Then they cut a covenant with the government through their 501(c)3, then same covenant as Planned Parenthood and the Church of Satan, and replaced Christ as the head of the church with the government. This is because they have turned from GOD’s perfect Law of Liberty and became lawless. But that is a whole other discussion.

[@catpat6492]

Evcellent vid! JESUS IS LORD!!!

[@tbishop4961]

Also.. I'm not sure that this video was a response to the challenge I made to you, but it contains the answer

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

Serendipity, perhaps?

[@ancientfiction5244]

*The Enuma Elish would later be the inspiration for the Hebrew scribes who created the text now known as the biblical Book of Genesis.* Prior to the 19th century CE, the Bible was considered the oldest book in the world and its narratives were thought to be completely original. In the mid-19th century CE, however, European museums, as well as academic and religious institutions, sponsored excavations in Mesopotamia to find physical evidence for historical corroboration of the stories in the Bible. ***These excavations found quite the opposite, however, in that, once cuneiform was translated, it was understood that a number of biblical narratives were Mesopotamian in origin.*** *Famous stories such as the Fall of Man and the Great Flood were originally conceived and written down in Sumer,* translated and modified later in Babylon, and reworked by the Assyrians ***before they were used by the Hebrew scribes for the versions which appear in the Bible.*** ***In revising the Mesopotamian creation story for their own ends, the Hebrew scribes tightened the narrative and the focus but retained the concept of the all-powerful deity who brings order from chaos.*** Marduk, in the Enuma Elish, establishes the recognizable order of the world - *just as God does in the Genesis tale* - and human beings are expected to recognize this great gift and honor the deity through service. Google *"Enuma Elish - The Babylonian Epic of Creation - Full Text - World History Encyclopedia"* Also discussed by Professor Christine Hayes at Yale University in her 1st lecture of the series on the Hebrew Bible from 8:50 to 14:30 minutes, lecture 3 from 28:30 to 41:35 minutes, lecture 4 from 0:00 up to 21:30 minutes and 24:00 up to 35:30 minutes and lecture 7 from 24:20 to 25:10 minutes. From a Biblical scholar: "Many stories in the ancient world have their origins in other stories and were borrowed and modified from other or earlier peoples. *For instance, many of the stories now preserved in the Bible are* ***modified*** *versions of stories that existed in the cultures and traditions of Israel’s* ***older*** *contemporaries.* Stories about the creation of the universe, a cataclysmic universal flood, digging wells as land markers, the naming of important cultic sites, gods giving laws to their people, and even stories about gods decreeing the possession of land to their people were all part of the cultural and literary matrix of the ancient Near East. *Biblical scribes freely* ***adopted and modified*** *these stories as a means to express their own identity, origins, and customs."* *"Stories from the Bible"* by Dr Steven DiMattei, from his website *"Biblical Contradictions"* ------------------------------------------------------------------ In addition, look up the below articles. *"Debunking the Devil - Michael A. Sherlock (Author)"* *"The Greatest Trick Religion Ever Pulled: Convincing Us That Satan Exists | Atheomedy"* *"Zoroastrianism And Persian Mythology: The Foundation Of Belief"* (Scroll to the last section: Zoroastrianism is the Foundation of Western Belief) *"10 Ways The Bible Was Influenced By Other Religions - Listverse"* *"January | 2014 | Atheomedy"* - Where the Hell Did the Idea of Hell Come From? Watch *"The Origins of Salvation, Judgement and Hell"* by Derreck Bennett at Atheologica (Sensitive theists should only watch from 7:00 to 17:30 minutes as evangelical Christians are lambasted. He's a former theist and has been studying the scholarship and comparative religions for over 15 years) *"Top Ten Reasons Noah’s Flood is Mythology - The Sensuous Curmudgeon"* *"The Adam and Eve myth - News24"* *"Are The Ten Commandments Based On The Forty-Two Principles Of Maat That Appeared 2,000 Years Earlier? - Ancient Pages"* *"Before Adam and Eve - Psychology Today"* *"Gilgamesh vs. Noah - Wordpress"* *"No, Humans Are Probably Not All Descended From A Single Couple Who Lived 200,000 Years Ago"* *"Adam & Eve: Theologians Try to Reconcile Science and Fail - The New Republic"* *"Adam and Eve: the ultimate standoff between science and faith (and a contest!) - Why Evolution Is True"* *"Bogus accommodationism: The return of Adam and Eve as real people, as proposed by a wonky quasi-scientific theory - Why Evolution Is True"* *"How many scientists question evolution? - **sciencemeetsreligion.org**"* *"What is the evidence for evolution? - Common-questions - BioLogos"* (A Christian organisation) *"Why scientists dismiss 'intelligent design' - Science"* *"Old Testament Tales Were Stolen From Other Cultures - Griffin"* *"Parallelism between “The Hymn to Aten” and Psalm 104 - Project Augustine"* *"Studying the Bible"* - by Dr Steven DiMattei (This particular article from a critical Biblical scholar highlights how the authors of the Hebrew Bible used their *fictional* god as a mouthpiece for their own views and ideologies) *"How do we know that the biblical writers were* ***not*** *writing history?"* -- by Dr Steven DiMattei *"Contradictions in the Bible | Identified verse by verse and explained using the most up-to-date scholarly information about the Bible, its texts, and the men who wrote them"* -- by Dr. Steven DiMattei

[@ancientfiction5244]

*Let's briefly run through the 'ten plagues':* First the rivers are turned to blood, all the fish die and the waters stink. No one has any water to drink. This lasted for seven days and would have resulted in mass deaths due to dehydration. Amongst the first to die would have been the children. *The author doesn't think to explain how the Hebrews were saved from this. No record of it was made anywhere in any Egyptian records.* Exodus 7:17-25. This is followed by a plague of frogs which had somehow survived the rivers of blood that had killed all the fish. A mere inconvenience, nothing more, and a big stink when they all died, *but no record anywhere.* Exodus 8:2-13. Next we have the plague of lice about which very little is said *and of course no record was made.* To a people who would have been accustomed to lice this would probably have been nothing remarkable. Exodus 8:16-18. Then the flies. Apart from the land being 'corrupted', whatever that means, there don't appear to have been any ill effects from this and they disappear as quickly as they came a few days later. *Nothing worth recording there, obviously.* Exodus 8:21-31. Now the author seems to begin to lose the plot and describes a 'grievous murrain' *which kills all the Egyptians' cattle, horses, camels and sheep.* ***They all died - hold that thought.*** *No Egyptian historian or keeper of official records deems it worthy of mention.* Exodus 9:3-6. Next come the boils which afflict everyone and everything, including all the livestock ***even though they had been killed by the 'grievous murrain' a few days earlier,*** *apparently, and yet no-one thought to write anything down anywhere.* Of course, anyone who understood anything about microorganisms and the aeteology of boils would have described this as an infestation with Staphylococcus - the signs of faecal contamination - but the author was obviously unaware of these. Maybe he was just in too much of a muddle by now to care. Exodus 9:8-11. Now it's hailstones so bad that every plant, every tree, every servant (for servant read slave) ***and even the livestock (that our story-teller has forgotten already that he killed off in the fifth plague before given them boils in the sixth) were harmed.*** It looks like our story-teller has learned from his earlier silly mistake with killing all the livestock too soon then having to resurrect them later. He mentions that some plants survive. Do I smell stinking fish again? *The greatest hail storm in all Egyptian history, apparently, but not worthy of being recorded.* Exodus 9:18-25. It's the turn of the locusts and it's suddenly obvious why some plants had to survive. *How could the locusts turn Egypt into a barren desert if the hail storm had done it earlier?* Good thinking there. Shame about the earlier boob! *Mysteriously, no Egyptian scribe appears to notice any of this or the inevitable famine and mass starvation which would have ensued.* Exodus 10:4-15. And for the penultimate trick, it's going to be dark for three days. *No one makes a record of this, obviously.* Exodus 10:21-23. The last 'plague' is not so much a plague as a ritual genocide. *Here our tale takes a nasty turn and the true character of the Hebrew god is revealed in all its glory - a petty, vindictive, homicidal psychopath who has not yet acquired the omniscience he will be granted later. He kills every firstborn Egyptian in a single night,* ***including the firstborn of all the cattle that died in the fifth plague.*** *For some reason he needs the Hebrews to leave a secret sign so he doesn't kill them too. Weirdly, he can't tell his own chosen people from ordinary Egyptians and doesn't even know where they live.* And he had been leading up to this, apparently, because after every plague he 'hardens the heart' of Pharaoh so that he wouldn't let the Hebrews go. He had actually been planning this genocide all along just to impress people with his powers. *And still no-one thought even this mass killing in a single night worth making a note of in any Egyptian records.* Exodus 12:1-30. And then, of course, Pharaoh could muster up 600 horses to pull the chariots ***from amongst all the dead livestock from the 5th plague*** (Exodus 14:7). Google *"Rosa Rubicondior: Origins Of The Exodus Myth"* ------------------------------------------------------------------ In addition, look up the below articles. *"Debunking Christianity: PATTERNS OF POOR RESEARCH- A Critique of Patterns of Evidence:Exodus"* *"For you were (not) slaves in Egypt: The ancient memories behind the Exodus myth - Archaeology - **Haaretz.com**"* *"Why the Exodus Story Has Value Despite Being Complete Myth - Psychology Today Australia"* *"Is the Exodus a Myth? - Worlds Beyond"* *"Historicity of Exodus and Moses - The Creatively Maladjusted"* *"Biblical Contradiction #81. When did the Exodus allegedly happen: during the reign of Rameses II (1279-1213 BC) OR in 1447 BC?"* - by Dr Steven DiMattei *"Biblical Contradiction #87. Does the god of the Hebrews reveal himself to Moses in Midian OR in Egypt?"* - by Dr Steven DiMattei *"Bible Contradiction **#134**. Which Ten Commandments?"* - by Dr Steven DiMattei *"Bible Contradiction **#147**. Who writes the laws and commandments on stone tablets: Moses OR Yahweh?"* - by Dr Steven DiMattei *"Ten Reasons Why the Bible’s Story of the Exodus is Not True - by Tim Zeak - ExCommunications - Medium"* *"Why Moses Did Not Write the Torah - Thomas Shoemaker"* *"Sargon the Great and Moses - The Word of Me… Wordpress"* *"The Documentary Hypothesis | Fewer Lacunae"* *"The Death of the Documentary Hypothesis | Rev. David Bokovoy"* *"The Neo-Documentary Hypothesis | Rev. David Bokovoy"* *"How do we know that the biblical writers were* ***not*** *writing history?"* -- by Dr Steven DiMattei *"Contradictions in the Bible | Identified verse by verse and explained using the most up-to-date scholarly information about the Bible, its texts, and the men who wrote them"* -- by Dr. Steven DiMattei

[@billyhw5492]

Why did you post a book-length tract in the combox?

[@sundownsam3369]

I understand that sometimes one needs to write three pages, but keep this in mind: most will not read what you posted because most agree with Rob Solberg's distorted doctrine. Your "Time Markers" alone should open eyes, but then I heard one pastor say, many sing the song, "Open My Eyes, Lord, I want to see Jesus," and God responds, if I open them, you still will not see Jesus. Your comment was clear, but they cannot accept the truth because they have been engraved with the lie that the laws of God have been done away with, and I have no doubt that it all began with the council of Nicaea, which I am slowly writing about. Numerous times I asked Rob, is the God of Israel your God or is Yeshua your God, he could not truthfully answer the question, which is why he just said "yes." Luis asked him if Yeshua was the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and he answered with an absolute "yes." I was correct all along and pointed it out to Rob that the God of Israel is not his God, that he wants nothing to do with the God of Israel, and neither with the law of God. For him to say that Yeshua is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is to introduce another god, and a polytheistic view of the One God. Now one can understand why most Jews who don't accept Yeshua as Messiah want nothing to do with Christianity. Another thing is that God address Yeshua as his Son, which is how we should address him. This is what I wrote him and it was time to do so; Rob, remember what happened to Nebuchadnezzar? At the end, he acknowledged the God of Israel. I'd rather see Rob eat grass so that at the end he would acknowledge the God of Israel and his laws than have God drive him deeper into his delight, which is aggressively attacking God's law. To read Romans. Under no circumstances am I denying Yeshua's deity, but there is order in the Godhead. God addressed Yeshua as the Son of God, "This is my Son," insinuating that he is Yeshua's Father. Rob Solberg is a false teacher who want's nothing to do with the God of Israel, nor with the laws of God, which is why he aggressively attacks the as a mad man. He might already be in the field eating grass.

[@jacobso223]

Thank you for your teaching. Fully agree with your teaching. Thank God that He send Jesus our Lord to make the New Covenant clear to us.

[@waitstill7091]

The new covenant is not a human sacrifice, as that is an abomination. The new covenant is the same covenant with a righteous latter-day Israel. NEW = Covenant restored with a righteous latter-day nation. "...And on a day of salvation I help you- I created you and appointed you covenant people -Restoring the land, Allotting anew the desolate holdings, Isaiah 49:8 NEW = Covenant written on Israel's hearts, rather than stone tablets. "Not like the covenant that I made with their fathers...that they BROKE." "...I will place My LAW in their midst and I will inscribe it upon their hearts...Jeremiah 31:31-32 NEW = The laws so widely known, it will not need to be taught. "...no longer shall one teach his neighbor or [shall] one [teach] his brother, saying, "Know the Lord," for they shall all know Me from their smallest to their greatest, says the Lord." Jeremiah 31:33

[@judemichaelvelez6789]

We pray for Dr. Solbergs continued video to open up many eyes and hearts towards Jesus Christ, the only Lord of the sabbath. Always continue Dr. Solberg, irregardless of comments. If this video is not of God, let it die a natural death for God is not mocked. Shalom

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

Amen, Jude. Thank you! ~Rob

[@cynthiahunter2570]

I do not believe we keep the OT moral law in order to obtain or maintain righteousness, but I do believe it is our guide for life. Jesus said the greatest commandment was to love God and the second was to love neighbor. How can we know how to do that without instruction from the OT moral law? In this culture, many professing Christians feel that it is loving your neighbor to condone homosexuality or transgenderism. We must keep the moral law in mind as a “rule for life” to know how to love properly.

[@radostinvasilev599]

Rob, keeping torah is loving your neighborhood and God. If you love me keep my (God's) commandments.

[@foolfether]

what the new covenant is about is making things stronger. that's why Jesus 'strengthened the covenant' in his blood poured out 'for many', like daniel and Jesus say. now, love is the highest principle. then, there's love God and love your neighbor. but how do you love? well that's what's described in the torah. you just can't make things up - like the pharisees. after the torah, God sends more of his people to reveal how to love. the prophets - including Jesus - went deeper, then the apostles. it's been a revelation process. btw, the proper translation of that colossians text is not 'but Jesus is the substance', but 'but the body of Jesus'. and it doesn't say 'they were shadows' but 'they are shadows' of things to come. so, the real meaning of that text is 'about these matters written on the torah, ask the body of Messiah'. that meant of course the jewish apostles, who knew that gentile converts wouid attend a synagogue on shabbat to learn the torah (acts 15.21), which is our tutor towards Messiah, like paul says.

[@JoJo-wq7uz]

Amen! Excellent teaching. Explained simply and truthfully.

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

Thanks, Jo Jo! ~Rob

[@nothingbutthetruth613]

Just think for half a second here. You really believe that God, for the first 3000 years of the world, was of the opinion that these "ritualistic" laws were necessary for the growth of humanity and were essential to our daily lives. Then, all of a sudden, he changed His mind??? If these things were integral to our spiritual growth before, how is it possible this stopped and if this was truly changed and we didn't really need these laws, why were they there in the first place? None of the emotional, moral laws found in the nt are new. They are all from the ot and all very vital to our spiritual growth and they always were. The nt just comes and abolishes the laws which are not understood and not those which are emotionally charged laws and then pretends to be some sort of extremely righteous book inventing this lifestyle which has never been known before when in essence nothing new was added.

[@johnpratts2856]

Your thinking pattern about God is correct. God doesn't change and He is a God of promise. He does change His ways of managing His relationship with us however. Examples: Adam and Eve only had 1 commandment, and it was broken. Prophet Jeremiah proclaimed that the Mosaic covenant is broken in Chapter 11 (Which was broken several times since King Solomon). Prophet Jeremiah has also proclaimed in Chapter 31 that a New Covenant shall be made in place of the Mosaic Covenant. (Because WE broke it) So with all that being said, it is shown that God is forever merciful. His ways never change because He is perfect. And we constantly fail Him. This is why the Moral parts of the Law never change. The ritualistic parts do change because it's part of a New Covenant.

[@nothingbutthetruth613]

@@johnpratts2856 My friend, I am simply showing you why logically it makes no sense. Obviously, I disagree with your interpretation of all these verses for good reason. Of course they broke the covenant and yes, they did it many many times. But God is clear so many times that this doesn't matter. Look at Leviticus 26:44 where God is clear that no matter what, He will never abandon Israel. Jeremiah 31 has not happened yet as is clearly evidenced from the very next verse. In the future when this happens "they shall ALL KNOW ME" Not sure what planet you live on but there are still billions alive today who not only don't know God but are complete atheists. Just look at verse 36, 4 verses later. How much clearer could you get in the same chapter that God will never reject Israel, NO MATTER WHAT. But putting all that aside, I'm just focusing here on the logic of it all and despite it clearly making no sense in the verses, it makes no sense logically. Why would God make these laws if they were not necessary in the first place? Don't tell me you never thought of this. If we needed them before and they were all vital for our spiritual growth, how could that have changed? Please just answer this logically.

[@johnpratts2856]

@@nothingbutthetruth613 I live on the planet where everyone of every race, creed, and tongue knows one *particular* Jewish mans name and all the things He's done for us. ☺️ If these people CHOOSE not to follow Him, that's their own individual issue. I have no idea where you're getting the whole "God will never reject Israel" concept. I already know that. I'm not a fan of replacement theology. The Bible will always be about Israel. But more importantly, it's about the salvation of the world from Sin. Remember, the goal of all this is to go back to our heavenly Father. To go back to Eden and paradise. Not to constantly live under Law. Crazy enough, I found a new video that could help you better than I can. kzbin.info/www/bejne/d2qym36Ef66rfpY

[@sharonlouise9759]

Brother, you did an amazing job of showing believers the truth! I appreciate you and your ministry. Praise God!

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

Thank you SharonLouise! Blessings, Rob

[@shellyblanchard5788]

Jesus came to give a better covenant, not a renewed as some want to say. He doesn't write old covenant rules on our heart, but a different covenant.

[@carmensiekierke3579]

Question to the Torah Observant: Why do you not speak of the Cross and the Gospel?

[@justinbutcher44]

Whoever doesn't should. From my perspective. The Gospel and the Cross is the root of our faith, while Torah (or in mainstream theology, discipleship) are the branches. In my analogy, the root feeds the branches and the branches produce fruit. Hopefully that makes sense. 😀

[@charitybrook6279]

I don't know what you have been exposed to... But every "Torah teachers" I know of preach the gospel primarily. They connect everything in the Bible to Jesus, which relies on explaining the gospel frequently. Spreading the good news should be all of our missions as christians. Does that mean we don't discuss other things amongst ourselves as well?

[@carmensiekierke3579]

@@charitybrook6279 Hmmm......You think Torah teachers connect everything to Jesus. Really? I've only seen them talk about Moses, Moses, and Moses. Many of them claim the new covenant is the " renewed Mosaic Covenant." They argue against the Mosaic Covenant being only types and shadows.

[@charitybrook6279]

@@carmensiekierke3579 i haven't heard much of any of that... Although I have heard lots of talk about Moses and I think for good reason... How do you make an argument unless you first establish that argument as valid? Also, any talk that I hear about Moses is typically aimed towards expressing that it wasn't Moses law, it was God's Law. And the witnesses of the covenant are heaven and earth. That's why Jesus said "until heaven and earth pass away not one jot or tiddle will pass away from the law". If it seems clear to a believer in Christ that they should walk as He walked as He told us to do, then by rights you must defend Moses. Because Jesus defended Moses. Repeatedly. As for the new covenant, who is it made with according to Jeremiah 31? And what does it do? Also, if you read the last chapter in the last book of your OT, (which is prophecy) what do you see there?

[@carmensiekierke3579]

@@charitybrook6279 Hmmm.....The last chapter in the last book of the Old Testament? You don't understand that the 12 books of the minor prophets are really one book. Jesus asked the Jewish Pharisees, who followed the Babylonian Talmud, why they didn't believe He was the Messiah.......because Moses spoke of Him as the Messiah. Adam was under a covenant of works. He was promised eternal life based on obedience. Adam was to love God with all his heart, all his mind, all his strength. Adam was to love his neighbor as himself. Adam failed. Jesus Christ, the second Adam, the last Adam, DID love God with all his heart, mind and strength. Jesus Christ loved his neighbor as himself. Jesus Christ was also under a covenant works......which is why the law came 430 years after the promise. @Charity, the gospel is connected to Abraham.......not Moses.

[@shellyblanchard5788]

He doesn't write old covenant rules on our heart. Since the priesthood has changed so has the law. We don't love God through laws and rituals but through faith.

[@shellyblanchard5788]

Jesus taken examples all the time out of the old covenant, but they were only examples, because he was under it. He hadn't died yet. Now we are to live by faith in Christ, our flesh is still not under subjection to his law of love. That why Jesus said come to him for rest.

[@simonskinner1450]

Jesus fulfilled the Torah of Abraham by faith, the law of Moses was an amendment according to the letter of the law, a transposition of the Torah to condemn sin.

[@tactup23]

The “new covenant “ was offered 500 years before Jesus existed. It was offered to the exiles in idolatrous Babylon. Just like God offered a covenant to exiles in idolatrous Egypt. Just like Abraham was given a covenant after leaving his idolatrous father’s house. Just like Noah was given a covenant after leaving an idolatrous world. This is the pattern of salvation and redemption. We, in faith, obey God by doing what he asks. We (nations and individuals) are only under the “curse of the law” when we are idolatrous. We are under the blessings of the law when we are obedient. This is a moment by moment condition. This mystical modern message of eternal, heavenly salvation based on belief in Jesus alone isn’t found in the Tanakh. TRUTH: When the nation of Israel begins performing like the pagan nations of the world, God raises up a prophet from among them. The prophet will warn wicked Israel that if they continue breaking the law they will be exiled. This warning is God’s grace because he doesn’t automatically dish out punishment for violating the law. Prophets always follow up with a message of hope that if they return in obedience to His law they will be redeemed, DESPITE their previous sin. This is God’s mercy. This is the plain understanding found in the Tanakh over and over again. It remains as the evidence of God’s salvation to those that love and obey Him. Jeremiah is not bringing hope to the exiles in Babylon by telling them that 500 years from now, no one will have to obey God’s law anymore. That somehow future humanity will get a ticket to a supernatural place called heaven despite their unwillingness to be obedient to his law. Imagine the look on the exiles faces who are being tortured and oppressed by wicked Babylonians if this Christian idea of Jesus and eternal salvation was Jeremiahs message to them. -SMH

[@rc-vd8vm]

This guy is not going to reply on your argument because he has cancelled scriptures. The days are coming when we don't need to say know the Lord would seemingly apply in the new Jerusalem which is not now. But then give many the flattery and the delusion will deliver the cash.

[@kolyomhashem8711]

So how do you spiritualize Isaiah 2:2-3? "And it shall come to pass in the end of days, that the mountain of the LORD'S house shall be established as the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it. And many peoples shall go and say: 'Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and He will teach us of His ways, and we will walk in His paths.' For out of Zion shall go forth the Torah, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem."

[@sundownsam3369]

Rob, I commented this in your conversation with Luis. Please read the following carefully... I twice asked you, "Who is your God-the God of Israel or Yeshua?" You could not truthfully answer my question, which is why you responded with just a "yes." Now, Luis asked you if Yeshua is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and you boldly answered with a "yes." Tell me, where in the Scriptures does it address the Son of God (Yeshua) as the God of Abraham? Don't tell me because Yeshua is God, therefore he is the God of Abraham, Isaiah, and Jacob. Throughout the Tanakh, God was addressed as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and to my recollection, no where does the Tanakh address God as the Father of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and this is important because the phrase "the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob reflects to God as the creator, the God who made covenants with his people. With this being said, show me where in the Tanakh and the Brit-Chadashah does it address the Son of God (Yeshua) as the God of Abraham, Isaiah, and Jacob? God addressed Yeshua as his Son, and here you come and address Yeshua as the God of Abraham, Isaiah, and Jacob. There is order in the Godhead; the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and it is safe to say that God put it in that order, so we do not introduce a polytheistic view of the one God. The Jews who do not believe in Yeshua as the Messiah are correct when they say that Christianity believes in two gods, and one reason is your comment addressing Yeshua as the God of Israel. When it comes to addressing the God of Israel, he is to be addressed not as the Father of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, but as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Under no circumstances am I denying Yeshua's deity, but there is order in the Godhead. God addressed Yeshua as the Son of God, "This is my Son," insinuating that he is Yeshua's Father. So to you, the Father is your Father and his Son is the Father, which is what you call Yeshua the God of Israel. Is it correct that Yeshua is also your Father? Is that what you believe? Another question is, do you believe in the oneness doctrine? At least truthfully respond to the last three questions. I guess you have been eating grass.

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

The "yes" I gave you as an answer was 100% truthful. My God is triune: Father, Son and Spirit. Blessings, Rob

[@sundownsam3369]

​@@TheBiblicalRootsMy God is not triune; my God is one! Within the Godhead, the Father sits on the throne, the Son at the right hand of the Father, and the Holy Spirit, whom Yeshua sent to teach, convict, and lead one to Yeshua through the law. Maybe you are better off saying God is one, but within the Godhead there is a compound unity. I can show you from the Scriptures that God is one, but you cannot show me from the Scriptures that God is a triune God. "Tri" means three, but God is one.

[@thetruth871]

Our exploration of the patriarchal formula of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob has disclosed that, rather than being a mere linguistic or literary feature, it is a recurring and unifying biblical motif, which carries great significance. First and foremost, it reinforces the truth that God is supreme and sovereignly controls all things. Second, the Lord is a faithful God who has been true to his word through all the course of history in his dealings with mankind. This is especially seen in regard to his divinely chosen patriarchs and their Israelite descendants with whom he has established the Abrahamic Covenant with its attendant blessings. God’s faithfulness is further demonstrated in the Mosaic Covenant, whose blessings and cursings he has administered in accordance with the terms of the covenant. Third, both covenants are solemn reminders that the Lord in turn expects faithfulness from his followers. Such entails not only genuine faith in God .but also an adherence to the high standards in his revealed Word. Fourth, even in the midst of administering his chastisements God could and did demonstrate that he also forgives his people when they truly repent of their sin. In still other times God’s patient tolerance of his peoples’ spiritual stubbornness testifies of his graciousness and mercy. Fifth, the repeated use of the patriarchal formula in connection with God’s covenants finds its most significant application in the promised Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ, the One in whom all of the assured promises of God will be fulfilled. Yet, there is still more. The truth of the need of covenant faithfulness has application for today’s world as well, not only for the people of Israel but for Christian believers. God’s people in Old Testament times were to live in accordance with God’s revealed standards of righteousness and proper conduct. It is no less the case for believers today. It is true that Christians, whether Jew or Gentile, are free from the ritual requirements of the Mosaic Law (Gal. 4:21-5:1). Nevertheless, as united to Christ believers must remember that Jesus said, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have not come to abolish these things but to fulfill them” (Matt. 5:17). Moreover, the principles of holiness in the law are now written on the hearts of true believers under provisions in the New Covenant, which Christ himself has initiated (cf. Jer. 31:31-34 with Matt. 26:27-29; 2 Cor. 3:6; Heb. 8; 12:24). Accordingly, believers are to live in faithfulness to the Lord and his revealed holy standards (Col. 2:6-10; Titus 2:11-15; 1 Pet. 2:9-12; Rev. 2:10). As we do, it is of comfort to realize that the Abrahamic Covenant, channeled through the Davidic Covenant (cf. Jer. 33:23-26; Ps. 89:1-4, 20-27), finds its fulfillment in the New Covenant, so that in a special sense as united to Christ all believers are “one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s descendants, heirs according to the promise” (Gal. 3:28-29; cf. Rom. 4:1-5, 23-25). Indeed, as “heirs of God and also fellow heirs with Christ” (Rom. 8:17) we too look forward to a land of promise, an even better land, to which our Lord will bring us in the everlasting state (Rev. 21-22). And as believers in Christ who await that promised glorious future, we, no less than Abraham (Rom. 4:20-22), may have full confidence in the promise of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob/Israel to meet our every need (cf. Deut. 30:20; cf. 2 Cor. 1:19-22; Gal. 3:16).

[@worldneedsgod5645]

Can you respond to @Jesus Words Only

[@camilo5437]

Blasphemy

[@billyhw5492]

What is love? Baby don't hurt me, don't hurt me, no more.

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

Thanks for putting that song in my head!

[@tactup23]

Circumcision of the heart was a Torah law. Clearly this is not verifiable but is a law regardless. God judges hearts and men judge actions. When God’s people purposely violated God’s laws outwardly they were referred to as uncircumcised inwardly. This is exemplified by certain Jews who would reverse their outward circumcision in order to participate in the Greek and Roman events. When they remove the foolishness and fleshly desires of paganism through repentance they are removing the foreskin around their inner person (heart). In this state God accepts their observance of the law. “..I will place My Torah within their midst and inscribe it on their hearts…” And furthermore: Jeremiah 31:35 “If these laws [Torahot] depart from before Me, says the Lord, so will the seed of Israel cease being a nation before Me for all time.” Circumcision was/is an outward expression of an inward commitment to be obedient to the covenant terms that God made with his people. It is done in faith that God is real and will abide by his own terms. Abraham had this faith inwardly and outwardly and was declared righteous. If he didn’t have faith then his circumcision would have only been surgical and without merit. As Jews we have believed works without faith is spiritually void long before the NT was dreamed up. Although we have also long understood that faith without works is no different than one who hides, reverses, or refuses their circumcision.

[@NXN66]

They challenged him on the Law of Moses as given to Moses by God. There is not one word of the "Mosaic" law that Moses did not receive from God Almighty. This is another attempt to divide God's laws into categories that we can justify doing away with. Only laws applying to the Temple and Temple service have been done away with, as God allowed the destruction of the Temple in 70AD as an admonishment to the Jewish people for not receiving and recognizing the Messiah. Moses did not “command” divorce. Jesus declaration does not mean that Moses made up a command that allowed something God abhored. What did He mean by His use of the term “allowed” (ESV/RSV), “suffered” (KJV/ASV), or “permitted” (NKJV/NASB)? The underlying word provided by Matthew is epetrepsen. This Greek word means “to allow someone to do something, allow, permit,” “to give over, to leave to the entire trust or management of any one; hence, to permit, allow, suffer.” The English words “allow” and “permit” do not necessarily imply permission or approval. For example, the Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines “allow” as “1a: permit; 1b: to fail to restrain or prevent.” For the latter definition, this example of usage is given: “allow the dog to roam.”3 You may not want your dog to roam the neighborhood, yet do nothing to prevent it. The Cambridge Dictionary defines “allow” as “to give permission for someone to do something, or to not prevent something from happening.”4 And the American Heritage Dictionary gives as the first meaning of “allow”: “To let do or happen; permit.”5 The word does not include the idea of sanction, authorization, or approval-let alone forgiveness. God allowed divorce in the sense that He tolerated it-like He does the wicked behavior of the world’s population throughout history. He “puts up with it.” He allows it to go on-without implying endorsement. Why do we try so hard to explain away the things that God said help us to be holy as he is holy. Shall we just cut out Psalms 119?

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

HI NXN. We refer to it as the "Law of Moses" because that is the term that Scripture consistently uses to refer to the commands that Yahweh gave Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Josh 8:31-32, 23:6; Judges 4:11; 1 Kings 2:3; 2 Kings 23:35; 2 Chron 23:18, 30:16; Ezra 3:2, 7:6, Neh 8:1; Dan 9:13; Luke 2:22, 24:44; John 7:23; Acts 13:39, 15:5, 28:23; 1 Cor 9:9; Heb 10:28). RLS

[@NXN66]

@@TheBiblicalRoots Exactly my point. The Mosaic Law IS GOD's law. On this we can agree. So no comment about the other 99% of my post?

[@marlanthomas3567]

His name is Jesus not Joshua.

[@alexblack6634]

Have you got scripture that the Torah was only for a time? So because of OUR hardness of OUR hearts, God changes His laws to suit us? 2min24sec. Please do a teaching on "circumcision of the heart" in the old testament. Rom 13,8 so I can also fulfill the law. The Torah is only about love, every command. Even if I don't eat clean, it's about love. Even keeping sabbath is about love

[@ruth4019]

Jesus Christ fulfilled the Jewish law. Jewish law is no more relevant. We Christians have to obey the commandments of Jesus Christ that are commandments of God. So, you are boasting of eating clean cooked on the gas stove that is invention of a British Christian...wow. You asked why don't Christians eat clean...Jesus Christ said, "Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man; but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man." (Matthew 15:11) You must know that every one in the world eat clean.No one eat dirt and filth. And,don't think that by observing sabbath on saturday you Jews are following the Jewish law.Sabbath is not any day's name.The true meaning of sabbath is rest on seventh day. Saturday is seventh day accordingly Babylonian calendar not Jewish. Repent, believe in Jesus Christ and be saved. Every single end times prophecy of Jesus Christ is coming to pass around the world dangerously fast.The Second Coming of Jesus Christ is at the door !

[@judemichaelvelez6789]

No, love and obligation is a very thin line to cross over. How can u prove what u do is out of love and not out of obligation? U cannot coz our heart is most deceptive of all. For me, the 613 laws of moses was such that i dont see Gods love (but i also know He is love) thats why He called it His LAWS & COMMANDMENTS and not His LOVE COMMANDMENTS.

[@alexblack6634]

@@judemichaelvelez6789 If you read Mat 22 v37-40. ALL 613 commandments are about love. Also John 14v15 "if you love me, keep my commandments"

[@sundownsam3369]

Rob, previously you could not truthfully respond to my question on Jeremiah 31:31-34, so I am surprised to see that you now agree that the laws that were engraved on stones are now stored in the minds and written in the hearts, and from your video, Christian Gentile believers accept this truth. This would imply that you understand what the New Covenant in Jeremiah 31:31-34 is all about, though you believe some (like the Sabbath day, the dietary laws) are done away with. Maybe the taste of grass you are spitting out and gradually coming to the realization that God's laws still stand. Time will tell. I am surprised that you used the NIV to quote Romans 8:3-4. If you are a theologian, you should know that you should not quote verses nor draw a view from poor translations, especially from translations like the NIV, which has so many errors. Another thing is that in the Greek the word "requirement" is not even mentioned. It is read this way in the Greek interlinear, so that the righteousness of the law should be fulfilled in us not according to the flesh walking, but according to the Spirit. The NIV translates it this way: in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. Let's bring out the first part of this verse in the Greek so you may know what I am saying; so that the righteousness (not requirement) of the law should be fulfilled in us (not might be fully met in us). Do you see the difference? I will keep listening to your videos.

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

Thanks, Sam. The English word "requirement" in Romans 8:4 comes from the Greek word δικαίωμα (dikaiōma), which means "requirement; commandment; ordinance; decree; regulation." Blessings, Rob

[@sundownsam3369]

@@TheBiblicalRoots According to the NASB Translation it is defined as an act of righteousness (1), justification (1), ordinance (1), regulations (2), requirement (1), requirements (2), righteous acts (2). The Greek defines it as an act which is right according to the Lord, an act of righteousness, a concrete expression of righteousness, and does not even mention the word "requirement." Even if the word requirement can be used, the fact is that to say "so that the righteousness or requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us," insinuates that the laws are stored and written within, which is the New Covenant that God spoke through the lips of Jeremiah. If you continue reading, the context implies that the laws are stored within, not dismissed. Is the dietary law still in effect? Do you know that one of the most surprising risks associated with pork, one that’s received remarkably little airtime, is multiple sclerosis (MS), a devastating autoimmune condition involving the central nervous system? Do you know that one of the biggest concerns with eating pork meat is trichinosis, or trichinellosi? Do you know that pork liver is the top food-based transmitter of hepatitis E? God called pork unclean. Christians say it is now clean, but in the health industry without knowing it, they are just making it clear what God said, that pork is unclean. When the possessed person came to Yeshua, two types of unclean were present: the swine and the people. Where did Yeshua send them? Now you can understand Peter's vision. Next time you eat pork, remember hepatitis E, trichinosis, trichinellosi, and multiple sclerosis (MS). Do your own research, then tell me if pork is unclean or clean.

[@luiscajigas5567]

@@TheBiblicalRoots Rob, do you agree with the statement that Sam made( Do you know that one of the most surprising risks associated with pork, one that’s received remarkably little airtime, is multiple sclerosis (MS), a devastating autoimmune condition involving the central nervous system? Do you know that one of the biggest concerns with eating pork meat is trichinosis, or trichinellosi? Do you know that pork liver is the top food-based transmitter of hepatitis E?). Do you agree with the health department view on pig not being healthy for you?

[@rellyrelly1408]

🌹🌹🌹

[@shinryuken5423]

You can say the Law was transposed from the key of (G)ood to follow to the key of (F)ulfilled in Christ. Which is 7 keys higher from where we started. 😃 Ba-dum tis!!!!! 🥁 Dad joke. Ok I'll walk myself out.

[@alexblack6634]

You say that the hole Torah is about love, why then don't you do the hole Torah? 6:00 Mat 22v 37-40 Why don't you keep sabbath? Why don't you eat clean? You do all the rest!

[@ruth4019]

Jesus Christ fulfilled the Torah. Torah is no more relevant. We Christians have to obey the commandments of Jesus Christ which are commandments of God. Don't be in a misunderstanding that by observing sabbath on saturday you Jews are obeying the law.Sabbath is not any day's name.The true meaning of sabbath is rest on seventh day. Saturday is seventh day accordingly Babylonian calendar not Jewish. So, you are boasting of eating clean food cooked on the gas stove which is invention of a British Christian...wow. You must know that every one in the world eat clean.No one eat dirt and filth. Jesus Christ said, "Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man;but what comes out of the mouth,this defiles a man." (Matthew 15:11)

[@alexblack6634]

@@ruth4019 Torah is no more relevant? So I can be gay? I can steal? I don't have to love my neighbor? Those are all Torah commands you know! In Gen you will see that sabbath is the seventh day. Jesus kept the sabbath. All jews know sabbath is the seventh day. It is not Babylonian. Where in the Torah does it say that you not aloud to cook on gas or electricity? Did you thunk that God in all His wisdom did not know we are going to invent electricity? Clean eating you can read in Lev 11. Please read Mat

[@alexblack6634]

@@ruth4019 Torah is no more relevant? So I can be gay? I can steal? I don't have to love my neighbor? Those are all Torah commands you know! In Gen you will see that sabbath is the seventh day. Jesus kept the sabbath. All Jews know sabbath is the seventh day/Saturday. It is not Babylonian. It is God's rest day. Where in the Torah does it say that you not aloud to cook on gas or electricity? Did you think that God in all His wisdom did not know we are going to invent electricity? Clean eating you can read in Lev 11. Please read Mat 15 in context. It's about unclean hands, Mat 15v20, not meat or poop or anything else.

[@charitybrook6279]

@@ruth4019 that verse is talking about ritual hand washing (read the context). And didn't Jesus say that His commandments or teachings were not His own but His Father who sent Him? And if you have seen the Son you have seen the Father, therefore their commandments are the same. Learn the parable of the wicked vine growers, the father sent the son with the same message as the servants (prophets) before him!

[@ruth4019]

@@charitybrook6279 Ritual hand washing was commanded to the priest to wash hands and feet before sacrifices or entering the tabernacle. (Exodus 30:17-20). Ritual hand washing for common Jews was/is man made law.It is not commandement of God.Washing hands before eating is not ritual hand washing.

[@sundownsam3369]

You said the same song but with new keys. Does playing a song in new keys change the lyrics of the song, yes or no? You probably won't answer this question because you know it won't. You continue to deliberately distort the Scriptures in order to defend your distorted teachings of the Scriptures. You are most likely already eating grass. Many of those who agree with your distorted view either know you or have not thoroughly studied the scriptures, and do not realize that they were engraved with a lie that the Law of God was done away with. This lie has blocked them from understanding the truth of God's law. In Yeshua's own words, "For I have not spoken of myself, but the Father who sent me gave me a commandment, what I should say and what I should speak" (John 12:49), but Rob Solberg's teachings insinuate that Yeshua came to pin down his Father and spoke contrary to the Father. In Rob Solberg's own words, he has a divine assignment. I guess Rob Solberg's divine assignment is to attack the law of God. Anyone who attacks God's laws needs to be pointed out, and with this being said, let me make it clear and point out that Rob Solberg is distorting the Scriptures.

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

Sam, I think you need to slow down and pay attention to my words. The first two sentences I spoke in this video were, "In music, when you transpose a song. It's the same song. It's the same melody, the same chord progression, the same lyrics. It's just in a new key." So, to answer your question, playing a song in a new key does not change the lyrics. P.S. you are still bearing false witness against me when it comes to God and the Scriptures. Have you been exempted from the 9th commandment? Shalom, Rob

[@sundownsam3369]

​@@TheBiblicalRootsI agree. It does not change the lyrics, just a new key. Yeshua did not say, nor alter, nor insinuate anything that would give another meaning to the law. What he did was elaborate on it. For example, in adultery, his emphasis on lusting after a married woman did not change the phrase, "Thou shall not commit adultery." When he said he was the Lord of the Sabbath, he did not dismiss the Sabbath. You should do thorough research on the Sabbath. I send you my email. If you send me your email, I will send you a page I wrote on the Sabbath. Read it, weigh it according to the Scriptures, and determine if God was clear when he first spoke. No one is exempt from any of God's laws. But I'm not bearing false witness; I'm simply calling attention to a false teaching when I see it. Another thing, you attacked God's lost aggressively and those who do study Scriptures are pointing it out to you. They might not be as direct as I am, but they are calling you out. The ones that agree with you most likely were engraved with the lie that the laws of God are done away with.

[@luiscajigas5567]

Is Jesus the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob?

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

Yes.

[@luiscajigas5567]

​@@TheBiblicalRoots So according to you the Godhead has change. So now we should understand the new order of the Godhead this away. 1 Cor 11, Christ is the head of God., 1 Cor 15:28, God is now subjected to the New God Jesus, 2 Corinthians 4:14 knowing that He(Jesus) who raised the Lord God will raise us also with God and will present us with you. The God of the Old Testament has been replaced by the God of the New Testament Jesus. According to you Jesus now sits on the throne of God, and God is standing at His right hand, therefore you now believe in multiple God's like Marcion argued, and YeHoVaH has been dethrone by Jesus. Like Sam said, you are now eating the grass of the field, like the Nebuchadnezzar. I hope the grass taste good. I pray that all may read this and understand that you are false teacher and have deceived many with your ideology. Scriptures says that Yeshua is the Son of God, it does not say He is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. You just contradicted the Shama.

[@sundownsam3369]

@@TheBiblicalRoots - Rob, please read the following carefully... I twice asked you, "Who is your God-the God of Israel or Yeshua?" You could not truthfully answer my question, which is why you responded with just a "yes." Now, Luis asked you if Yeshua is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and you boldly answered with a "yes." Tell me, where in the Scriptures does it address the Son of God (Yeshua) as the God of Abraham? Don't tell me because Yeshua is God, therefore he is the God of Abraham, Isaiah, and Jacob. Throughout the Tanakh, God was addressed as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and to my recollection, no where does the Tanakh address God as the Father of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and this is important because the phrase "the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob reflects to God as the creator, the God who made covenants with his people. With this being said, show me where in the Tanakh and the Brit-Chadashah does it address the Son of God (Yeshua) as the God of Abraham, Isaiah, and Jacob? God addressed Yeshua as his Son, and here you come and address Yeshua as the God of Abraham, Isaiah, and Jacob. There is order in the Godhead; the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and it is safe to say that God put it in that order, so we do not introduce a polytheistic view of the one God. The Jews who do not believe in Yeshua as the Messiah are correct when they say that Christianity believes in two gods, and one reason is your comment addressing Yeshua as the God of Israel. When it comes to addressing the God of Israel, he is to be addressed not as the Father of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, but as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Under no circumstances am I denying Yeshua's deity, but there is order in the Godhead. God addressed Yeshua as the Son of God, "This is my Son," insinuating that he is Yeshua's Father. So to you, the Father is your Father and his Son is the Father, which is what you call Yeshua the God of Israel. Is it correct that Yeshua is also your Father? Is that what you believe? Another question is, do you believe in the oneness doctrine? At least truthfully respond to the last three questions. I guess you have been eating grass.

[@joe4369]

Jesus is not God. The Trinity is made up. The two times the "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" is mentioned in the Bible are not in the early manuscripts. They were added much later by unknown scribes. Anyone that says Jesus is God is reading into the Bible their own made up theology, not God's.

[@luiscajigas5567]

@@joe4369 the mystery of the Godhead is beyond comprehension. All we know is that the son(deity) was brought forth, and the Spirit was given. Yeshua is to be address as the Messiah, the anointed one, and the Son of God.

[@Jeffmacaroni1542]

You're clueless on what fulfill means...... Matthew 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to (fulfil-->(Pleroo g4137) . I have (fully preached)-->(Pleroo g4137) the gospel of Christ. Rom. 15:19 . Many claim fulfill in Matt 5:17 means to Abolish, The Greek word Fulfill is Pleroo g4137, If thats true then these verses must also be Abolished right ? . Matt 3:15 (Pleroo g4137) (Abolished) all righteousness. Rom. 15:19 (Pleroo g4137) (Abolished) the gospel of Christ. PHILI 2:2 (Pleroo g4137) (Abolish) my joy, Colossians 1:25 (Pleroo g4137) (Abolish) the word of God;

[@tbishop4961]

If you have time, you should check out some of the shows on the channel tanakh talk. Only a week or 2 ago rabbi Stuart federow covered jesus teaching on matthew 5 (adultery and eye for eye). He works very hard to misunderstand what Jesus is saying and I just find it so baffling. The only conclusion I can come to is that he hates Jesus because of how he has been treated by Christians throughout his life (similar to what I've heard from tovia)

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

I met that fellow from Tanakh Talk (Will'iam) at the debate with Tovia. I've not heard of Rabbi Federow. I'll have to check him out. ~Rob

[@tbishop4961]

@@TheBiblicalRoots You can skip to the 29 minute mark kzbin.info/www/bejne/epiuY3WuacRmrJI

[@sundownsam3369]

You say that Yeshua did not come to abolish the law or the prophets, but to fulfill them. I see you added "them" to make it appear that he came to fulfill the law. Where in that verse does he say that he came to fulfill the law? Let me show you a scriptural truth: the conversation that Yeshua had with the teacher of the law. The teacher of the law understood that two laws fulfilled the law of God, which is why Yeshua told him, Thou readest right, do this and you shall live. How much clearer can the statement made by Yeshua be? (Luke 10:25-28). If you cross reference Luke 10:25-28 with Matthew 22:34-40, you will fully understand that the laws of God are not changed, neither in expression as you stated. It just makes a statement that all the laws and prophets hang on two commandments: love God with all and thine neighbor as thyself, which is what Yeshua told the teacher of the law: thou readest right, do this and thou shall live. Again, how clear can the word of God be, and Yeshua confirms this? As previously mentioned, you want nothing to do with the God of Israel, and you will continue to aggressively attack the law of God as a mad man because you want nothing to do with God's law. Your "not required, but permissible" statement is designed to deceive and mislead. Remember what happened to Nebuchadnezzar? At the end, he acknowledged the God of Israel. I'd rather see you eat grass so that at the end you would acknowledge the God of Israel and his laws than have God drive you deeper into your delight, which is aggressively attacking God's law. You need to read Romans 1 and focus on verse 28,"Even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, meaning being rejected by God, which implies no hope of salvation and predestined to damnation." You want nothing to do with the God of Israel and want nothing to do with God's law. which is why you continue to aggressively attack God's laws as a mad man.

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

Hi, Sam. I said "them" because Jesus said, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them" (Matt 5:17). Best, Rob

[@sundownsam3369]

​@@TheBiblicalRoots Rob, Matt 5:17, Yeshua made an absolute statement prior to what he followed with, and Luke 24:44 tells us what he was talking about when he followed with "but to fulfill." He came to fulfill that which was written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning him. It is sad that you are deliberately blinding yourself to scriptural truth. Do you know that some theologians trashed their biblical diplomas or degrees because they realized that Christianity had not been taught correctly? It is preferable to abandon a distorted doctrine than to stick with it.

[@rc-vd8vm]

This teachings are rebellious to God's law and insinuate that Yeshua is the leader of such rebellion. These are the kind of teachers that covet the Levitical tithes. Btw, the new covenant clearly says "The days are coming" therefore this delusion will bring may astray. Can you say now that you no longer need to tell others about the Lord as the condition of the future new covenant? But in fact we are in a time when our allegiance is tested as being in the wilderness after the Passover lamb in Yeshua has been sacrifice.

[@johnvanmanen3149]

Always so funny to see people explaining God's word from a human point of view and claiming to understand it truthfully, but the problem is that they have to be understood from God's point of view.. and then we humans come out alot worse then we want to, thinking you are better then others is evil by itself.

[@charitybrook6279]

True! As we see in our world today, if you define love by human standards you wind up with all kinds of wacky ideas... God gave us the standards that He defines love by, why don't we listen? If you just say, "love God and love neighbor", but you are defining love on your own terms... How can you expect God to be pleased at that? Our works mean nothing for salvation... But as we work for our Master because we love Him don't we want to define love the same way He does, so that we can stay in right relationship? If you are married and both spouses define love in different ways, it is going to lead to a rocky marriage for sure... I also find it interesting that the first law given to Adam and Eve that they broke was a food law. And it was covetousness, idolatry and questioning God's authority that led to the fall in the first place. Food for thought...

[@johnvanmanen3149]

@@charitybrook6279 Well said, let me point out that God had to give free will before breaking the law was even possible, this tells that God wanted it to happen. and in the end will there be Judgement.. no Judgement possible without sinning..

[@charitybrook6279]

@@johnvanmanen3149 did God want us to sin? I don't think that's biblical. I think He allowed it because without free will then we are just robots. God wants a family who chooses Him over their own selfish desires because of their genuine love for Him, not just puppets on strings. It would be easy to make subservient slaves, but that's not love. Because of love, sin is possible. Because when we define love in any way apart from the Creators definition it leads to sin. Because we are not God.

[@johnvanmanen3149]

@@charitybrook6279 God knew what would happen when giving free will, so it was His wish for it to happen, even if it was a side effect for the main goal, wich is Judgement. But the blame of the sins is in our choices, not in the temptations.

[@charitybrook6279]

@@johnvanmanen3149 I agree. I think He would have preferred if we had chose righteousness over our sins though. God's Will can be multiple things at once. He can desire for us to do good, but acknowledge that because of our free will, we will often choose to do evil. And this is accepted for a time as part of our refining. But it will not be accepted forever.

[@edgarzarco9821]

Jeremiah 31:33 that hasn't happened yet , as I mentioned I'm Catholic so basically what your saying that Paul's Church"Catholism" has a New covenant. Meaning we have a new heart under Jesus... Please Catholic's worship idolos,images...when did YAHWEH anointed Paul? God never changes his mind, for he is not human... Jesus cannot be God! I image Jesus was running around saying; no one goes to the Father unless is by me. Or that he was born of a Virgin.. or that he ran away to Egypt in oder for a fullfilment to be done.. none of the law's in the Torah speak about a Virgin birth

[@ruth4019]

Jesus Christ rose again from the dead on the third day from his crucifixion. Can a man rise again from the dead? To keep the world pure and in order God does change his mind and sometimes out of love and mercy for humankind. Eg;the flood of Noah.In Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus,God commanded Jews to offer animal sacrifice but in later books God said that He doesn't need animal sacrifice. Jeremiah 31:33 is fulfilled in Jesus Christ. God himself prohesied for the Virgin Birth of Jesus Christ in Genesis 3:15..."And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed;It shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel." Here,the seed of the woman means that the woman will be sole natural parent of the one who will destroy Satan. This was the first Good News of Salvation in the Bible. There are not 2/3 but hundreds of prophecies for Jesus Christ in the Old Testament.

[@edgarzarco9821]

@@ruth4019 so God will change his mind ,many times is that's what your saying . You mean , even if is for the sake of the earth... Meaning he will do it again in the future.... Because honestly the whole planet worships idols, yeah he should right? Maybe in the future he'll change his mind and delete Jesus and bring about another religion?

[@ruth4019]

@@edgarzarco9821 I am not saying it,the Bible tells it so.God will not change his mind regarding Jesus Christ because Jesus Christ is part of God. Jesus Christ is the Word of God that was spoken by God in the beginning of the creation ,ie; "And God said, Let there be light..."(Genesis 1:3) This word was incarnated 2000yrs ago and sent into the world through Virgin Mary for the salvation of mankind.

[@edgarzarco9821]

@@ruth4019 Numbers 23-19 God does not change his mind. For God is not human. All his promises are eternal...

[@charitybrook6279]

@@edgarzarco9821 who *walked* with Adam and Eve in the garden?

[@justinbutcher44]

Rob. C'mon brother. Some of us have been nothing but kind to others in this group and we have been all but spit on by some of your follower base. If you don't have the willingness to police your own, don't make broad comments about how we like to argue. I am not claiming everyone who affirms Torah is respectful, but as one who has a follower base and teaches, shouldn't you at least try to clean up your own house first rather than broadly slandering an entire group of people? Stop being divisive. The whole world can see us. This bickering is not what one should expect from followers of Christ/Yeshua. We are all called to be a light to the nations regardless of our theological position... this is especially important now more than ever.

[@savvycavvy7859]

Mr. Butcher, I believe you are leveling a charge that you cannot defend. I think that you are gaslighting. Mr. Solberg did not in any way “broadly slander an entire group of people“. Ever heard the phrase “if you throw a rock into a pack of dogs, the one that yelps is the one that got hit?“ I personally know that what he is saying is truthful. I do have a group of Torah observant friends that I fellowship with frequently. Although I myself do not believe I am under the law of Moses because the law of Christ is written in my heart, I still enjoy breaking bread with my friends. I can tell you that the comment Mr. Solberg was making at the very end of his video is a truthful saying. I’ve been there. I’ve witnessed attitudes, and it is pretty accurate the way he framed it in his video. It’s really pretty clear if you stand back and objectively look at the word of God in its entirety. You see, mosaic law had its purpose and it was not an end in and of itself. It was the shadow that eventually let us to the Messiah. Once you have the Messiah, why would you still want to cling to the shadows? You’ve got the substance! At least I know I have! I am complete in Christ. I really have to ask you to think about this one fact, Mr. Solberg mentions the scribes and the Pharisees keeping the law impeccably. Our own Messiah told these religious people to their faces that they are just like a white washed tomb. They’re all beautiful and clean on the outside, they’re eating clean, they’re washing themselves clean, they’re putting on clean garments, but the inside of them was rotten to the core like dead man’s bones according to Jesus. Torah capers, in many cases do feel a little bit above others. It gives them something physical they can “practice“ that other people are not practicing. I’ve heard many quoting from Matthew chapter 5 that because of their Torah keeping they will be called greatest in the kingdom of God. It really does sort of sound like the attitude of the Pharisees and scribes. Recall the verse that teaches us that the gospel will be preached to the ends of the earth to all creation before the end shall come, the gospel is to be preached not Torah. Besides the truth is, Torah observant people don’t really keep it anyway. They try to do a certain handful of laws, but the majority of them they do not keep. And remember that if you fail at any one of them you were guilty of them all! Don’t you understand that the whole idea of the Messiah and the new covenant was because the old one could not make you righteous?? The old covenant under the law, was put there knowing all along that there was no man on earth that could keep it except the Messiah. That’s the point! He kept it to the letter! And transferred his righteousness to us! For there is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For what the law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did sending his own son in the likeness of human flesh. Hallelujah! Our Messiah fulfilled the law! And those who try to return to the law, need to talk to the apostle Paul, reference Galatians three please! “Oh foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you??

[@justinbutcher44]

@@savvycavvy7859 Around 40 seconds or so: "there is an amazing pattern in His teachings that our Torah keeping Hebrews Roots friends are continuing to argue with us about." I will admit that in my charge I stated that he made the broad comment that "we like to argue." I was not exact in my language but the general idea is there considering his final message. Around 17:40 or so: "I am going to be honest with you, This is an attitude that is not uncommon with our Torah keeping friends today. If you don't believe me spend a few minutes reading my comments." Brother, this is not healthy. And it is my belief that the messaging is inappropriate and is just going to lead to more divide. I stand by this even if you believe that I am wrong. You can think that I am the dog that got hit, that's fine. But I am one of the dogs here that tries my best to have reasonable discussion, which I have had both good and bad here. As for the general spirit of the rest of your message. I get it and recognize that their can be a certain level of pride and arrogance among some Torah observant Christians. This is wrong . I do not believe that I am any better than you. We should all be working out our faith with fear and trembling, knowing that ultimately, regardless of what we do or don't do. It is through our faith in Christ/Yeshua alone that we will be granted Salvation. So while yes, I persuant the Torah. I do so in love and in the belief that this is what the Father asks of us. In the same way, you observe what you believe to be the Torah according to your understanding. That's fine with me brother. As long as we don't cut each other down and we build each other up. That is what matters to me. I have zero desire to fight this out. I just want to be clear, that I believe that you and others, though we are in disagreement have a responsibility towards one another as fellow members of the body. Peace brother

[@justinbutcher44]

@@savvycavvy7859 side note. I know you have also dealt with some negative interactions here. It was not with me, but still I am sorry that they occurred. They never should have.

[@savvycavvy7859]

@@justinbutcher44 We definitely agree on having peace and I speak peace to you as well and if you are a brother then I want you to be lifted up. This thing about being divisive, well, there are times as we all know that Christ did come to bring a sword, and certain “divisions,“ do have to be made at times. There were a lot of very strong words coming from not just the Messiah himself but many of the apostles. They corrected and even rebuked at times false teachings. To summit up and make it short, the ministry that I see here Mr. Solberg is because he believes he is seeing something that is being taught and that it is quite simply put false! I’ve seen him debate, and I’ve watched his comments back at people who are different and he seems to be kind in my personal observation. But when it comes to teachings in the body of Christ, I believe that we are called to speak out against teachings that emerge might have a possibility of being considered a false teaching or even a heresy. I don’t have any problems with you desiring to live under the law, and I have friends here in my own hometown who do so, and as long as they are happy within themselves I’m happy for them as well. The dangerous ground comes when they begin to speak and teach that all Christians are required to do so or else they are in disobedience. Although they don’t actually come right out and say it that way. They say it’s not salvation, but keeping the Torah is a matter of obedience. Well? If that’s true then that means they also believe not keeping it is living in willful disobedience. To this day I have not found any Torah observant Christians actually preaching in the streets about keeping the Torah. I’ve seen plenty of ministries online, and on KZbin that use that platform to preach it. I’ve never really quite heard anyone though answer the big question, what happens to the vast majority of Christian believers in the world that don’t keep Torah? Seriously what happens? Because I have not heard any Torah keepers tell me exactly what will happen to the disobedient. If indeed it is disobedience! You see I don’t agree that it is being disobedient. I do not want to build my faith and then make scripture support what I believe, I want it the other way around we all should want it the other way around. I can listen to videos all day long, but it all boils down to me opening up my Bible and reading it for what it says and not trying to twist it to what I want it to say. I’ve read comments, some of them seeming to be as long as a whole book trying to wrangle about just one verse in the Bible. When I read everything in context brother, I can’t see how it’s possible to believe that Torah keeping is required and mandated for all believers. I can’t see how anyone can read large portions of the book of Hebrews, or read all the way through the entire chapter 5 of Matthew, or Colossians chapter to actually read the whole book. May as well throw away or rip out the pages of Galatians altogether. Everything I read tells me that Christ has fulfilled it and that being perfect, he is our sacrifice lamb. The resurrection of Messiah immediately changed some of the biggest laws of Moses. Obviously we don’t need to sacrifice animals anymore. We don’t go to a temple anymore, we are the temple. We don’t follow Levitical priest anymore, we are all priests under God in Jesus and he is our high priest. Big time changes! It’s meaningful man! Well, once again, we come to that word that so many people don’t like, the word “divisive“. Maybe “polarizing“ might be a better choice, because there is a big difference between those who want to preach that Mosaic law is obligatory and mandated, and those who believe that it was just a shadow to point us to the Messiah and that we no longer follow the shadow because we have the substance of Christ. Big difference, you can’t have it both ways. We do have to accept the fact that we cannot have it both ways! If keeping Torah is absolutely a must and is mandated, then it must be preached very strongly, and the ones who keep it must call the other Christians to account in a very stern way! It’s not a game if you believe that you must follow it! But if the truth is that the Torah has been fulfilled and no longer mandatory, then it is wrong to preach it as mandatory! I have to stand up for what I believe the truth is and so do you, and these two opinions are like oil and water. We’re all brothers if we believe that the blood of Christ saves us. It’s just that we have a group of us that believes that Jesus truly does complete us, and others that believe he saves us but we’re required to keep all of the laws. It’s my personal belief that he was sent specifically because it’s not possible to keep the laws, not even the scribes and Pharisees were able to keep them perfectly, and they were very far ahead of us in Torah observance. It’s really what got them so angry at Jesus anyways, because he said as wonderful as you guys look on the outside, you’re rotten to the core on the inside! Believe me, they kept the law way more than modern-day Torah observant churches do! Guaranteed! Still wasn’t good enough! That’s what I think the whole point is, if there was saving power or significance to keeping all of those commands, we would’ve never needed a savior. I don’t believe Torah was written as the end of all things, I believe it was a shadow because Christ was always there, and once he came into full view we’re in the light and not in the shadow, if that makes sense. Those who are in the light don’t walk in the darkness of shadows

[@justinbutcher44]

@@savvycavvy7859 you have written a lot. And I am unable to address all of the points at this time. I will say this in hopes that we can agree. God's grace and mercy through His precious Son surpasses our understanding and obedience. In knowing that, I accept all Christians (I do still consider myself a Christian) as brothers and sisters in Christ/Yeshua. If I encounter a brother or sister and they disagree with me. That is okay. My encouragement to anyone is to walk in the best way they know/understand how. Unless they are in serious sin or are intentionally hostile, I see no reason to divide. I am also not in the business of ramming my theological position down someone's throat. Ultimately, we will stand before God and know His truth! I am 100% certain that *we will all be humbled* before the Throne of Heaven when Christ/Yeshua returns! Thank you for the conversation and charity. I will be sure to jump in and discuss some finer points with you in the future.

[@folkeholtz6351]

It is still too simple to say this. because the outer and the inner was already in the teaching of the Rabbis. So Jesus did not say anything new, he adjusted his teaching to the rabbis, such as Hillel the older who did just the same as Jesus. The difference between the so called old Covenant and the New is just an illusion. side by side the forgivness was also given by prayer alone . And the damage towards the fellow man was first compensation in money + 20% extra , before sacrifice. Last the offering will return in the messianic era. The inner does not replace the outer in any way. What Solberg does is to promote a sort of replacement Theology. This si what the churches has done in almost 2000 years. So what Solberg teach is not anything new at all.

[@Pverb623]

Rabbi Federow doesn’t hate Jesus nor does Rabbi Tovia, they follow Tanakh, and the Jewish scripture proves that Jesus was not the Messiah, nor a man of any importance. The NT is the book of Esau, if you cannot see the contradictions, it is because you wish to ignore them. One will se what they want to see, if you want to see the truth in the Jewish scripture, you will…..if you want to prove something is there when it is not, you will see what you want to see. Watch the professors debate with Rabbi Singer……let’s say the professors arguments were lacking, even in his reading a verses or chapter before or after the verse the professor used to make an argument, which proved that the professor didn’t actually read for scriptures sake. This is pride, that Christians either think they know more than God, and don’t trust what HaShem says over and over. Proverbs 7:2 keep my commandments and live; keep my teaching as the apple of your eye; Mazel Tov

[@billyhw5492]

Federow and Singer are scary filled with h8.

[@Pverb623]

@@billyhw5492 That’s your reply….. Sorry there is a difference between correcting Christians on their scriptural mistakes and hating another.

[@billyhw5492]

@@Pverb623 Yes, there's a big difference.

[@Pverb623]

@@billyhw5492 Than you must be reflecting a biased opinion on to another. Correcting one, is not hating one, if that is how you take it, check self.

[@sundownsam3369]

One can play a song on different chords, but that does not change the melody or the lyrics. If someone changes the lyrics, it becomes a different song. Yeshua did not change God's law. As a matter of fact, he elaborated on the law of God. You continue to aggressively attack God's laws like a made man. Remember what happened to Nebuchadnezzar? At the end, he acknowledged the God of Israel. I'd rather see you eat grass so that at the end you would acknowledge the God of Israel and his laws than have God drive you deeper into your delight, which is aggressively attacking God's law. Read Romans 1.

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

That's exactly what I said, Sam. When you transpose a song it's the same melody, and chords, and lyrics. Its just in a new key. Blessings, Rob

[@sundownsam3369]

@@TheBiblicalRoots Rob, the words and what it means is still the same, does not change. Yeshua said, you have heard that it was said (by God), ‘Do not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. From physical contact to lust, both are still adultery.

[@rickbailey1069]

I love you Rob, but you’re losing it a bit. I think you’ve realized you’ve lost this argument and you’re just reaching now. I know you’ve built your platform on this argument and to retract is to submit yourself to public embarrassment and losing that, but who cares. Your arguments are slipping into nonsensical, repetitive new twists at the same thing. And I think within you know it’s a lot more complicated than you think or let on, or even that your position is wrong. You’re in my prayers. I pray you let Him work on you.

[@TheBiblicalRoots]

That's a very kind rebuke, Rick. Thanks! Would you be willing to share any examples of where I'm "just reaching" or adding "nonsensical" new twists or where my position is wrong? Shalom, Rob

[@rickbailey1069]

Rob, respectfully, we’ve done this before and every time I’ve brought up something that warranted a response, got into something deeper, or began to examine the Greek and other “not so simple” aspects, you haven’t responded. I can’t imagine anything would be different? As you know, this entire topic of the Law is dense and every word we mention invites a thesis of background information, but you never seem too interested in that unless it serves your immediate purpose. So I’d love to have a dialogue about this and other things, but when I have it’s been one-way. But I know you’re a busy man and get 100 comments just like mine, or similar.

[@waitstill7091]

The Torah teaches us the law is close to the hearts of those who obey it. Contrary to Paul's false teachings, Torah observant Jews do fulfill it. The Jews rejected Paul because they knew their Torah! "For this commandment which I command you this day, is not concealed from you, nor is it far away. It is not in heaven, that you should say, "Who will go up to heaven for us and fetch it for us, to tell [it] to us, so that we can fulfill it?" Nor is it beyond the sea, that you should say, "Who will cross to the other side of the sea for us and fetch it for us, to tell [it] to us, so that we can fulfill it?" Rather, [this] thing is very close to you; it is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can fulfill it. Deuteronomy 30:11-14

[@billyhw5492]

So what's your excuse for not keeping it then?

[@waitstill7091]

@@billyhw5492 I'm not particularly religious, however, I do keep the 7 laws given before Moses at Mt. Sinai. The Jews follow the additional Torah commandments because of the everlasting covenants with our Creator.

[@t.scottmajor1316]

@Waitstill You must be talking about a different Paul than the Acts 21 Paul.

[@waitstill7091]

@@t.scottmajor1316 I am talking about the Acts 13 Paul. 46 Paul and Barnabas spoke out boldly and said, “It was necessary that the word of God be spoken to you first. Since you repudiate it and consider yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles. Acts 13

[@t.scottmajor1316]

@@waitstill7091 “It is too trifling a thing that You should be My servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob and restore the preserved ones of Israel. So I will give You as a light for the nations, that You should be My salvation to the end of the earth.” - Isaiah 49:6

[@Jeffmacaroni1542]

You promote "Another" Jesus christ. that isn't found in Scripture. See 2 Thess 2. The falling away from the Torah.

[@BibliayFe]

Are you kidding me

[@sundownsam3369]

You say it is the same song, the same melody, the same chords, the same lyrics, but it's just in a new key, and that it occurred to you that is what Yeshua did with the Torah. Let's assume his voice was the new key. The truth is that the melody and lyrics (what God said) remain the same. Your so-called analogy is built on sand. I think you just entered the grass field. Remember what happen to Nebuchadnezzar?

[@333wollie]

LoL... one of the most dishonest videos I have seen in a while...

[@ruth4019]

Jesus Christ fulfilled the Jewish law (Torah ).Jewish law is no more relevant. We Christians have to obey the commandments of Jesus Christ that are commandments of God.

[@joe4369]

There is no "Jewish Law", there is only God's Law.

[@ruth4019]

@@joe4369 It was God's law that's why God changed it when wanted to like the flood of Noah. It was God's law that's why God sent His Only Begotton Son Jesus Christ to complete it before establishing the New Covenant with the world beginning at Israel. By saying 'Jewish law ' means that it was given and practically done only by Jews.

[@joe4369]

@@ruth4019 I’m glad we can agree that they were Gods laws he revealed to the Nation of Israel. However, nothing Has changed as all the prophets (including Jesus) came to reveal God’s nature. Jesus is the living image of God and he was killed because of it. Jesus came to takeaway the sins of the world and by his death we now have his spirit to help us to live like him. Jesus message was love God and love others. If you want to define what love is on your terms then you are free to do so. But I implore you to please love God and love others as Jesus did. Peace and blessings to you.

[@ruth4019]

@@joe4369 If you say that nothing has changed then you are not well informed about Christianity.

[@joe4369]

@@ruth4019 Hebrews13:8 *Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.* God does not change, only people do. You can either follow man or follow God, take your pick.