This audio is provided without charge by Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia, which reserves all rights. Please visit www.githwts.com to learn how you can support Westminster or contact communications at www.wts.edu for more information. We come to the verses 21 to 48. And what is unhelpfully called the antithesis, you have heard it the same, but I say to you, and it's not really a great term, but that's what people call them. What is Jesus talking about? And how is he saying this in a way that doesn't undercut the authority of the Old Testament? Let's start with verse 38. Let's take one example, and let's see what he's doing here. Let's start with verse 38 of chapter 5. You have heard it the same, and I for nine, a tooth for a tooth, but I say to you, do not resist the one who is evil, but if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if anyone forces you to go one mile with him, or go with them two miles, give to the one who begs from you and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you. So what is Jesus saying here? What is he contrasting? What is the second time that's happened? I was too loud. He's like a hobbit. He can get in very quiet. That's true about hobbits. He's a burular, thank you. First time he was lifting up my book, and I thought it was a hobbit, and the second time it was a hobbit. I mean there's a compliment, Sam. What does it mean? How did you just say, I'm not under the old testament authority, and yet what he says, if you've heard it said, but I say to you. First thing you want to do is figure out what does it mean with somebody slaps you on the right cheek? If we would draw a person here, I can draw a person. So right left. We get so far. Somebody slaps you on the right cheek that are either getting you with left hand or more likely, the back of the hand. An insult. So what we're probably looking at here is not somebody getting beat up, but somebody being disrespected. Back of the hand. And this is an honor of shame culture. Meaning that if you lost your honor, you're losing a lot. And so whenever somebody disrespects you in an honor and shame culture, what does Jesus say? Don't worry about it, basically. Turn it into the other cheek also. The point is even if you have been wronged, the principal I for an I and a tooth for a tooth is not to be your guiding ethic. Now, what was I for an I and a tooth for a tooth? Well, comfort real testament, doesn't it? And what it says is if somebody steals a piece of gum, I don't think they had gum, which is you said, steals a piece of gum from you, you can't take all their children. There's a law of just revolutions. You might see, here's some more Latin. But you might see this sometimes, let's talionus. Sounds like a villain from Superman, but it means law of the talon, law of just revolutions. So I only mention this because if you ever hear the lex talionus, this is what it's talking about, I for an I and a tooth for a tooth. What it says is that it's the law of just proportions. And so if you lose an ox, if somebody kills an ox, you get their ox. If somebody takes an I, you take an I, if somebody takes a tooth, you take a tooth. But this was actually for civil disputes. This is the way that their court system was set up. It was never intended for somebody to say, hey, man, give me my ox. It was designed to go through the right channels, the proper channels. And what Jesus says, they're not supposed to use this principle as a way for you to respond if you've been wrong. And so it's not that he's abrogating the Old Testament. And he's saying, this is not the way you use it in the first place. But he is making sure that we understand that he's teaching something different. He's saying that you don't resist at all. It's more than just about non-violence. It's just about honor and shame and standing on your rights whenever you think that you have something to stand on. Because as the point is, don't resist. And if somebody would sue you and take your tune, you can get the other one as well. The point is it's a whole flipping on its head, the ethics of the world. Now there is a law beyond limits in one sense here. Where we don't just look to what can we get for ourselves but what can we do for the other person. And as I've mentioned, there's also a crystallological connection here. Because Christ was wrongfully accused, wrongfully spitt upon, wrongfully slapped. But he bore with it because of the greater good. He bore with it because he knew that he was enduring it for the benefit of others. So it's not always been just about, this is not just about what somebody hits you with the back of their hand on the right cheek. Here's what you do. How many times will we face that in our lifetime? Probably not very many, is it? Probably. But the principles of the encounter all the time. So you see what Bobbi says. This is not just about, okay. Now here's what you do with somebody slacking the right cheek with the back of their hand. Here's what you do when somebody wrongs you. Here's what it looks like to follow Christ whenever you've been dishonored. Whenever you won't retaliation, says leave room for the action of God. Don't seek your own vengeance. Don't retaliate violently or in any way. There's a point that is let God be the judge. And as I have 50, for example, we see the example of Jesus. And so the fact that Jesus did not come to abrogate the law but to fulfill it means that he is showing us that what they had heard was not really what it was about. So how does Jesus not undercut the authority of the Old Testament law when he says you've heard but I say to you? Well, notice that he says you have heard, not it is written. There's actually a distinction there. You have heard. You have heard this law means thus and such. You have heard people apply the law in this or that way. You have heard it said perhaps that's not even in the Old Testament. Hate your enemy. Jesus is correcting misinterpretations. He's not saying it is written but I'm going to fix that. Jesus never disagrees with the Old Testament. He never said the Old Testament is wrong. He says you have heard it said you have heard this was about this. You have heard it to do this without the others. He says no that's not quite right. In fact sometimes he defends it to show us that what that was really about and what I'm telling you that's about is something deeper than he thought it was. The law is good because it reflects God's character. The problem is never what the law per se. The problems with our sin that brings about death in the face of God's law. And the problem in Jesus' discussion here is also misinterpretations of the law. Misappropriations of the law. So he doesn't just repeat the old. He doesn't contradict the old but he doesn't just repeat the old. He says now the goal is to treat others the way that we want to be treated. Which he says you can actually get from the Old Testament but it's not the way that people often interpret the Old Testament. So the point I think is fairly clear. Paul picks up on the same point in Romans 12. We are not to be the judge but we are to leave room for the wrath of God. Our job is to live at peace with all people. And that is the principle. Any self-defense or self retaliation is not our job. We are to leave room for God's wrath, God's judgment, God's action. And so to understand the other cheek is to understand what it meant in that day. And understand how that's one example of what it might look like to not retaliate when wrong. Don't resist or claim your rights as what Jesus is saying. But do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Now what's interesting is this one is a rather tame one. I guess you could say you can understand that some of them are a little more extreme. Look for example at the first part of it here in verse 27 verse 29. If your right eye calls you to sin tear it out and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than your whole body be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin cut it off and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than your whole body go into hell. And what do you do without? Are we down playing the words of Jesus if we don't lock off hands or poke our eyes? This is a principle, right? And so it's not every situation means that you're going to be hit with the back of the hand on the right cheek. But what about this other one? It says cut it off, poke it out. How do we take that seriously? And how does that relate to physical mutilation? That's the question. Should we be reverting or going to that linked to physical mutilation if it means greater holiness? Well, if it means greater holiness, right? But does it? What's the use of this point? Does he really want us to amputate hands? This is a very visceral question. Does he want you to amputate your hand literally? I'm seeing both answers. He says yes. Or who wants to just say yes just for sake of argument? Or who wants to say no for sake of argument? What about Susan? I want to say yes. Okay. In the point, it's not important that you think of anything else. And what basis do you think he's not meaning it? Physically. I think I put it that way. I'm not sure it's back in the first place. 29. I believe, am I right? Because we don't want to not take Jesus seriously. Correct? We want to take him seriously. Okay. Sure else. All right. Mark. From what I'm thinking about, we know that the hand and the eyes are not a part of the issue. And so, first of all, just doing that, not going to remove this thing. I'm going to change your heart to this condition. And then we'll just mant that itself in a new way. And you're going to end up with just the force. And I think the heart's still going to be wrong. And so, I think it's clearly knowing that who that's not worse than he comes from. So he can't be saying that that's the source of the sin, the higher the hand. And everybody's saying wherever there's easier form of anticipation, these are like you want to avoid any situations for attention to these. And that might mean giving up certain things that are good for the sake of avoiding the condition. Like a modern day example would be like, you know, the beach is a good thing, but for people who might struggle with blood, you know, they might want to give up the beach, which is a good thing for the sake of not wanting the condition to be so completely different. All right. And so, those are both on the same perspective. Those are about different perspectives. And they have a different form. Not a dissidentity to go at this. Ferguson said that he sort of had a dialogue, but someone would say to God at that point. And he said it's like somebody saying anything but my eye, Lord, anything. And then that's what God might be calling you to be sort of the same thing. But anyway, I like the way Ferguson worded it. So everybody's taking the easy way out. Nobody thinks it's literal. Yeah. Don't we think that we didn't have a part of your body, even if you didn't have it. You don't have a problem with childhood. Maybe we'll never cross your mind to it. So I don't know to like what extent you say it is. I don't disagree with other people. I think that a tendency is not for a lot of people, maybe not people in this room, but a lot of people, is to not laugh it off, but just kind of like, oh, that was strange, without really resting with the force of it. Because the force of this is very strong. The force of this is supposed to make a thing. Whoa. Really? What are you saying? The force of this is to get us to stop and kind of go, ugh, you know, like that's pretty extreme. And so it doesn't mean that if we don't cut off our hands, we're not taking Jesus literally. That means that to take him according to the sense that he intends is to do what he intends us to do with that statement, which means what extreme do you have to go to to fight off sin because it's that important? Because if we look at the alternative, there's no contest. And so, I mean, look at the disciples. They didn't go around with, you know, tongues cut off and hands broken off or whatever because of sin. But what we see is that they model for us what it looks like to follow Christ in this age and it's a matter of the heart. And the point is though, what did it in life that would cause us to be distracted from the goal of following Christ? And whatever that is, if it's in danger of leading us astray, causing us to stumble definitively and let's cut it out and get rid of it. And so there's a balance there that we don't just kind of say, that was odd. I mean, his point is not that you take out a saw. But his point is that should make us stop. He really means this. And this is a prophetic hyperbole that you find Jesus giving, which means that you better take this seriously because I'm giving you a serious morning. Whatever it is that's causing you to hold back and following me, cut it out and get rid of it because the goal is that's held out before you is eternal life and the other option is eternal separation from God. Another thing to remember as well is there's no dichotomy in the Bible between the body and soul. We were people, we were whole people. And so our spiritual life and our physical life are intertwined. So what we do with our hands, what we do with our bodies, that's part of who we are, spiritual beings. And so one of the presuppositions may be your body is an indication of the soul. Take care of your body, make sure your body is serving Christ and not serving sin. I mean, while speaking similar ways as well, don't offer the members of your body as instruments of unrighteousness or instruments of sin, those instruments of righteousness. Well, this means to another question. And let's look here at verse 27. It's the same context. You have heard of the sad, you shall not commit adultery. But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart. You want to know the passage? Here's the question. Does Jesus teach in the Sermon on the Mount that no sin is any worse than any other sin? Probably get a mixture of opinion on that one. Does Jesus teach that no sin is any better or worse than that better or not the right word? Is any worse than any other sin? I would say no. Well, okay. Any sin itself has fallen short of righteousness, fallen short of righteousness and like way to go to the death. But there are sins like how he talks about to teachers that they need to be careful with they teach because they might, like there are sins where when you act and actually do that it causes other people to sin or it. I don't know. Like doing something in your heart only affects you versus doing something else also hurts other people. So it kind of is, I don't know. Well, he says here that if you lust it after a woman you've already committed adultery with her in your heart. Just to follow up with your response. Have you addressed that? Yeah, I agree. I agree with what he says, so that's what it is. But I think that that's true. That the sins like looking lustfully is the same as having committed it into your own heart and your own sickness. Those sins are the same. But in terms of the consequences that that might lead to rent revenge from her husband, that's probably not going to happen in both of those situations. All right. I was just going to say that she's the same perspective or different perspective. Same and different. So I think she's telling me. I'm trying to say that the sins are the same. They're the all sins and it leads to death. But it's kind of different. Because I wanted to say that I wanted to point out the reason why it's different is that you do not talk about each sin using the same sort of severity or in language. So with lust, you know, after he talks about adultery, he talks about cutting off your life through a limb or your right hand. It's because you don't want your whole body to go into hell. He does not mention, you know, like going into hell in every under-edgy thing to one of them. For example, the turning of the other cheek. He doesn't say that. I guess. You guys. Does he have to? I'm just interested in that. Who does a different perspective? Well, different. I think in perspective of the kingdom. Have I agreed? Have I agreed on everything? Absolutely. It is. In perspective of the kingdom and the king. God looks at lust or adultery. It's still a great offense against God. So if you're looking at it from a human perspective, God sees sin as sin. There's no such thing as the same that God's eyes, that the lust for a great sin is sin. It's another offense. No matter what it is against God. So in that way, you know, there's no. But we hear, you know, there's different consequences to it. All right? I want to still get it from a king of perspective. Yeah. Okay. Fair enough. Let me add another element to the conversation. You're a counselor. You may think about doing that. There is, there is, I'm a man. I'm going to use a man example. There's a man who says he struggles with lust. Then there's a man who says he is cheating on his wife. Those are the same things. All right. Let's do any. No. I mean, they're the same part issue. But there are different levels of sin. Because we're impacted by different levels of sin. So guys, we're like this creation. So I think we know if somebody, you know, abuses me physically, that's going to be different than somebody God could be about. So there's, there's, it's just, I think it's possible for it. There's definitely different levels of sin. And I think God is more rewarding. Because if you take one required commitment, and I know that's the, you know, the stage of work, too, but I think if we're put by this spirit, you can do God's work. So it's not in our own, you know, in our own. Inatibility? Yeah. In our ability, now we do this. It's because we're talking about, but there's accountability, and there's a lot to it. All right. Nice. All right. Talked with two different women. And one type of achievement in our term, and the other one in terms of how to problem with synology. And the very actions are the same. The trade-all, they feel like they're unworthy, and that's good enough. You know, so, but on the flip side then, when you think your husband is cheating on you, and then when you find out he is, there are two different things also. I mean, I'm not saying the sin, I think sin is sin. I don't know if I agree with you, but there are different ways to make this happen. So those are my experiences. And it hurts. And I think that the two things in here, you talk about judgment. They talk to you about anger. Jesus does it. And then when you talk about love, you talk about hell. So what strikes me about that is that when you do those two things, you're really in the community around you. And I think God really cares about people and how they relate to each other and how they relate to you. So that's what I think about. Right? What's interesting is how are to ask that, Connie? I kind of take the opposite. Okay. This is like a very perfect way of going about it. But there is a verse in John, I think, where Jesus says, he has delivered me over, I've actually committed the greater sin, which is an interesting thing, if there isn't a law. And the other thing I was thinking, am I content about this woman in the name? There's kind of a compression sin where you have a desire that it can see, if it's fully grown, brings forth the death. And I think that progression might be an indication that there's a difference between, there's always any sensation that I'm going to have to desire. And that desire actually progresses, and she's thin, and then she's dead. So I think that can be a stronger case for saying there are these varying degrees. Right? There he is. Actually the way, I'm sorry, they had a name wrong. Very answering. I'm sorry. I think the way the church responds to different sins, if a man just struggles with pornography, and I think it was really, if he was unwritten to the Catholic, that would be one thing, but if he was really struggling with it, he would probably walk with him and get his health, like it helped that good thing. The man committed adultery, he had the X-V-N-K, and if a woman said, he might have said, you know, he's the dying woman too long. He wouldn't say, yeah, it's okay to resolve that marriage, he's working with marriage about. But if he were committing adultery, it's not going to turn his eyes straight. He might say, yeah. So I think the way the church responds with things and... What's interesting is, if I asked the question, if we talk about this one, then we get a lot of different answers. This may be, not get the same answer, but I say, is hating someone in your heart at the same time is murdering somebody? Ransom. It's a question of, well, same in what, in what respect. So yes, they're both the same in that they're single for God and they're deserving of the wrath and condemnation of God, no matter how big or small you're sent. There's that issue of justice that is deserved. And both, both sins are deserving of health. The separation of the results in, oh my God, the media is broken. We can't, you know, little sin big sin, we can't bridge that gap to God once it's there on our own. But, yeah, I think there are, I don't want to, I don't want to just flat out say everything is exactly the same and probably mention the passage of James is also the passage of the first Corinthians that, where this time, it turns from the sixth, it talks about the sexual sin, all of those sins are outside of the man's body, sexual sin. There's something, there's some kind of, there's some kind of thing there that's, it's, it's P.K. there's something different, you know, we're going to talk about, well, it defines the more that it has done, it's not a good more, it's not a good, it's not a good more, they would have repented exactly all the ashes, as a result, your punishment's going to be worse. Which, there's some kind of language of creation or differential. I'm uncomfortable with the idea of drawing a list, here's the, you know, 10 levels of hell, nothing of that sort of thing. But I think there is a sense in which, you know, there are some things that are more serious, but I'm not sure that I'm comfortable, I'm not sure there's a really good way, to quantify that, or, you know, really get my handle. So it's not really much of a clear answer. Both in. Yeah. Yeah. But let me, let me mention why I'm mentioning this, because I think, for a couple of reasons, I think it's an important question, not just one that's just fun or interesting to discuss. But I think that, we, we can fall before someone in two sides here, one to say, well, you know, whatever, we can't do any of it. And one that, that says, well, what was the other side of the horse again? So one that says, we can't do any of it, and one that says, well, Jesus is just kind of speaking too strongly here. You just, but we got to hold a couple of things together. One Jesus is showing us that sin is deeper than we thought it was. That sin is a matter of the heart, and that, you might think you can get away with not just, maybe committing adultery. He says, it's actually deeper than that. You've got a problem with that, if you, if you just had the wrong thought, because our hearts are completely pure and set apart to God. We might think that we're okay if we're not murdering somebody. I mean, we really think we're better than other people. But then, I'm not murdering anybody. He says, actually, if you've had the murderous thought in your heart, you had the same problem. And so, Jesus is showing us that the, the issue goes deeper into the heart than we thought it might. And that it is, in fact, an internal thing, not just an external thing. But you also have, you also have the statement that, some of the mentioned, Jesus gets on to the Pharisees for neglecting the way to your matters of the law, and there are, John 19 talks about some sins or worse than others, and that there is, there is a difference, and this is, maybe this is a more obvious example, between killing somebody and just thinking about thought about that person. Like an evil thought. That's, they're both sins, and they're all in God's sight-required punishment. But it is different if the marriage bond is broken through, and a physical act of adultery rather than just, I say, just, that's not Jesus' point. Rather than, it's been a, a lustful thought. Those are our different things in terms of, of what it does, for example, to the marriage covenant. And so, the, the, this is where I'm coming from, the Westminster Standards do recognize a difference. And let me show you what they say. And it's actually a rather long, it doesn't give you a list. And I think that's, it's a helpful comment that we don't have a list. But we do know that there are, at least not, I'm convinced that we know that there are differences. And let me just show you what, what some of the thoughts are here. And so, I don't know if you can see this or not, if you want to see it. Or starting with the question, 150, this is larger catechism. Are all transgressions of the law of God equally heinous and themselves in the sight of God? The answer is no. Some sins in themselves, and by reason of several aggravations, are more heinous in the sight of God than others. It says, well, how do you figure that out? Well, since, we see their aggravations, one from the person defending. If somebody is more mature, has greater experience of grace, is imminent for profession, gets place, office guide to others, somebody is famous, somebody is a teacher, a leader, then it's worse if they stumble. From the parties offended, if it's immediately against God, that's as bad as you can get. It gets pricing, it says attributes, it's the Holy Spirit, it has witnesses in working, so if you're blaspheming God, that's incredibly, it gives us some examples here. And then number three, from the nature of the quality of the offense, if it's against the express letter of the law, break many commandments, contain many sins, not only conceived in the heart, but breaks forth in order to actions, if it scandalizes others, causes them to stumble, admit them, no reparation, if it gets means, mercy, judgment, lie of nature, convention, public, so it goes on and on here, about some of the things that, according to scripture, seems to indicate there are different levels. That's what's most allergic to catechism, 151 if you're interested in looking at it. But the point is, is that there are all sins, one thing that Jesus is saying is that all sins are worthy of judgment. But also think that we may not think or a big deal, even those are a big deal. Those are worthy of judgment. But he's not, he's not just saying, let me go to an extreme here. Let me just be, saying, well, if you had the lustful thought, go ahead and act on it. I mean, the course of Jesus would never say that, but it's not, continue to give us that impression. Or if you have an evil thought, just go ahead and, you know, do something, because it doesn't matter anyway. That's not his point. It's not that it doesn't matter anyway. I think that it can be a lack of motivation sometimes in Christian living. If you think, well, nothing I do matters anyway. But that's not really the way that Jesus is talking about it here. Because, you know, I've mentioned the point earlier about filthy rags. Well, everything we do is just filthy rags. Well, no, that's actually not true. That's about fake worship in the Old Testament. That's not about spirit-wrought obedience in the New Testament. That's about hypocrites, basically. But our deeds are good works that God prepared in advance that we should walk in them in Ephesians 2.10. And although we are not saved, what's interesting is to read Ephesians 2.10 in light of Ephesians 2.8 and 9, where he says, we are saved by grace, who take not by works, less anyone should boast, because we were created for good works. So if you read it very quickly, you think, look at the distinction there, is that we are not saved by good works, but we are saved in order that we should walk in good works, that we should do them, that we should bear fruit. And so there is growth and holiness, and there is the power of the spirit to help us to walk in the way that Christ commands. And therefore, we should not be so discouraged in the Christian life that we think, well, a murderous thought just as bad as murdering somebody. What can I do right? But there is, Jesus' point is, everything, everything is a problem with the heart. And even those little things, so called, are not really that little, you got to deal with them. But he's not just wiping out every distinction, because I do think we still see those distinctions between waiter matters of the law, deeper sins, more heinous sins, as the confession puts it, than others. And so the whole point is that murder is, both murder and the hateful thought, both adultery and the lustful thought, all of these are simple, because they get at the heart. And he wants us to look at the deeper point of the law, which is not just the external, but it's to understand that it goes right to the heart. And that is, I think, a large part of the key to understanding how we take these antithesis. And you, as part of the said, it's not really what it's about, you just say, here's what it's about. Here's how we should understand it, in light of the kingdom. All right, we've got a few minutes here. What I want to do is practice this. Practice what? No, not practice this ends, but practice the reflection on how we look through the external to get at the heart of the issue. And so we look at 538 to 42 for a few minutes. There's five more of them. So I would like for you, now this may be the hard part, is to figure out how to get in the five groups. And then the passive had more than five. So five groups, I think we should be that six, maybe seven for a group, you can. And we'll, what I want to, I'll break these up. 521 to 26, 527 to 35, 31 to 32, and I'll, I'll come by and drop one on your group and tell you which one it is. But I'm going to put some questions up here. And this is a way for us to discuss these. One of the things I want to ask is, what are the old tests that back? You have heard of the said. Where does that come from? Where did they hear it was said from? Where does that come from? And are there examples of this in the Old Testament? Secondly, what is the real issue Jesus wants to focus on? You know, the swearing of the, oh, what is it about the oath? What's he trying to get at? Why is this a big deal? And what is the positive thing we are to see and to do from this? And thirdly, how does Jesus, Jesus is teaching, Jesus is a role that's prophet, priest, and king, Jesus has Messiah? How does this affect our understanding of this? Of this command? And then fourthly, what does that mean? What are some ways we applied? It's given that they're general. Not specific, perhaps. How are we, apply this where we are. Is that clear? Yes. We are. Yes. Where to do it? So, not just don't hate somebody, but what are we supposed to do? All right. So let's divide in the five groups, and I will go in order on these, and assign each group a text. All right. Let's discuss these for a few minutes. I'll try to look at the main issue that Jesus would have to focus on is basically what we're trying to do, and figure out what that looks like and why. The first one was murder. And the group up here in the front had that one. Can you say it? A little bit about the old test at that ground. And all those questions that we have there. Who's a spokesman for the front group? The help?
The spokesman. John is anger. And, of course, the basic command as well, which is a value of the 10 commandments. That one comes from the 10 commandments as well. Yes. That's all right. Here you say it. Good. All right. And what is the issue that Jesus is trying to get us to see? So, plenty of people could say I haven't murdered. Right? Most people could say that. So what was the real issue he's trying to get us to see? And how did you all make that connection between the English word God? It puts yourself in the judge position, which I think you know. We're taking the vengeance. Yeah. Yeah. You know what I didn't like what God said. What about the second part of that second question? What are we supposed to do? Then they may have been awkwardly to phrase it. The question, what's positive thing are we supposed to do? And not just don't murder. Okay. Put down the sword. But what are we supposed to do? Where do we see the reconciliation? You see it in the text, I guess. Pretty obviously. And you say, and love people, which is a very, which is a very easy thing to say. Isn't it? To love. We can also, we all know that Jesus has to love. But sometimes you feel like murdering somebody. I mean, not to overstate it. But sometimes there's very real. I mean, Jesus is going to say even love your enemies. And they're your enemies, which is a shocking thing to say. So don't just love those who do good for you. So you can be very hard to love somebody you're angry at. And that's what he says to do. About practical ways. Or we're going to have to get the number three in happy. How does Jesus show us this? Or how does this come in effect or understanding of it? Incarnation, death, and death. We model the length of which we should go to achieve reconciliation. Good. Right? Good. Thank you. Thank you. You're welcome. Good. Right? Even those that were. I didn't deserve to hear that said. And most actually, was that number four as well, which you were just mentioning, some of those things? Some practical ways. We had the word supper, like, think about this. The reason you speak in the word supper. And also, feeling angry right away and not letting it develop into the food that are going to change the level. Good. The next group, who had 527-30, the one we talked about a little bit. I guess we talked a little bit about murder as well. The one on adultery. And last. Is that right? 27-30. The next group. What was the background for the command of the issue? We have a spokesperson. When we talked about David, and just how she, how was planning to such a thing? And then, the death of his son, and just the confidence of his son, is interesting how two of us have put off the right hand and David's son, the right hand, would cut off. It would have been better for David to have locked it in. And the real issue, and we kind of know that I would like to attend it. And not, and the first is adultery, but on idolatry, it starts with the desire of adultery, the real issue, and that satisfaction is right. And in God, and in a positive way, we feel that it would be worshiping God and doing something bad, which is desiring, while saying we're desiring things too much. And then, the real issue, the fact that you are understanding, or we talked about how he fulfills the same model of it, and that he was ultimately cut off. How does he model it? I think we first talked about how he was content, walking with you on earth, even though he knew what he was going to do, even though, I mean, when he asked me the garden, you know, because the pastor died, you know, he was still content to fulfill, you know, the king come and do what he was going to do, so I think I was quite right to model that. I think also when he was tempted to do something with them, or in the wilderness, when he was something, the wilderness, he was given an opportunity, right, to come to him, to offer him all of these things. And then it's very interesting, however, you know, he knows that he has a very specific role, he has a very big theme for it, for which he came in. So, you know, he thinks I sit on that incident, he's not swayed by, you know, the causes of that, the role of her. And the other thing that I want to add, though, is another way that he fulfilled it, which I need to mention, how David Sam was cut off as a consequence, though, this mustful desire to fulfill it, is that he was ultimately cut off, so that we never have to wait for people to fulfill it in that way. And that practically, well, what are some practical ways, have you mentioned it already? That's a good point, too. First, with the, you know, worship, if you worship, it's those who important to me. It really helps us to re-orient our hearts on God, on to you, but rather than, and so easily being, you know, of the content of everything. And another thing is community. So, when David fell into this thing, he was like, I'm so, but you should have been, on the battlefield, as much as you really, towards our works. So, I think just the need for community to help keep us accountable. And also, just for God's will, like, in our trust community, it should be rational, and fight against them, and take, like, activists' death, and then, take it seriously, and smash them into one another, and accountability. Good. Thank you. Thank you. Next group. 531-32. So, the first one, we looked at Deuteronomy 21-24-1, the mission for... So, the cause of invicency, right? So, what does that mean, as far as the debate around that passage, and Deuteronomy 24? The real issue, we talked about, is the idea of, like, abusing the law so that you can do it every once. It's kind of what they were doing, or divorcing for whatever reason they wanted to, because they had permission to. And, I'm deeply fulfilled. Yeah, what are we to do? I mean, that's... What are we to do? We were saying, you know, if you're in a relationship, be reconciled, stay married, even when adultery happened, be seeking reconciliation, putting the other person first, kind of, basically, that he's saying, like, do as much as you can, stay. Like, don't be looking for reasons out. Be looking for, as many reasons as they can to stay. And how to do this, fulfill this, we set the key, Christ kept pursuing us, even when we were adulterous as a nation, and we turned against him, and we broke our covenant, and we continue to break our covenant, over and over again, while we were centered, he came inside for us, and so he... That's sort of like their thing, he was cut off for us, he gave everything for us, so how can we not give everything for our spouses? And... Oh, practical ways to apply it. We had to... This was tricky. This was tricky, right? Because we had some practical examples that people brought up that were tricky. So, we were talking about, well, the simple answer is, stay married, if you're married. And then I think we said, if you're not married, just don't get married. But... But no, we were saying... Do you want to say something like that? There's the cases that we... that we brought up. I don't know if we should talk about that. One is... Well, we don't have to be really specific or detailed, but just in general, bullet points. The one is when, you're not married, there were both nine questions, but after they got married, one, he came up with a question, and you know, the other one just was, you know, it's not a lot of labor, and the... how did the divorce, the wives, and so we, you know, we were saying that how do we apply this to, you know, basically, the husband is saying that she's in a labor... She's not, you know, beneficial to my Christian law. And therefore, I suppose so. So, how do we apply this to that? And so this is one example. And the other one is... Well, which, by the way, 1st, 217 addresses explicitly. Yes. It says, don't do that. Go ahead. You're right. That's sort of what we've got to do. And the second example is, how do we encourage someone in an marriage relationship when one, one, you know, one of them, does not want to work on the relationship. Like, you know, there's some conflict, and one person is not willing to work on it. How do we encourage those other persons to stay married and keep the relationship in a relationship? Yes. Yeah. There's all sorts of various interventions, probably taken to what it looks like. And there's all sorts of ways for all of these that you apply these, given the context. And the last group on oaths, taken oaths, maybe you have your favorite verse, you know, do not sway at all, you know, above your. It's not the one that maybe gets the most attention, but what did you all find from it? We have a, you've just about three or four minutes. So, what does it come from? Okay? Well, what's the second question? Well, why would we just jump to, to the second question, in all seriousness, what is the issue that's being focused on in this one? Changing your story, you know, crossing your fingers, and well, that's not really what I meant. Right? Right. How do we see the point in which things are better when they have your control? Right. And what is it? What's the point? What are we supposed to do? I mean, what's the point of it all? Right. And what truth be characteristic of all that we do as we serve the truth? What about Jesus' coming? What did Jesus do that shows us this? Yeah, there you go. Is that what you all had? Something like that? Yeah. I mean, Jesus, everything he said is truth. He got, he didn't even say it before. He could tell you just something. Amen. I say to you, he is a fulfillment of God's word, Mark. It talks about not throwing by God's name. We'll do that for the name. But then here it is. But then it says, like if you do take a vow, be sure to move forward. And so the question is, is that like an allowance or a man and there's things, don't throw it all, but he never says don't throw it by God's name. It's all the other things that aren't. So we're just confused about all that swears. What is he to you? Well, it's confused. I don't know the time to answer it right now, but it's a confusing thing. And that's why some people say, we don't swear at all. But what he means is in your, there aren't commands to swear oaths. And oaths can be lawful oaths in the Old Testament. So as not as old he's saying, all oaths are now unlawful. But he's saying, you know, in your day-to-day business, don't go around swearing at all. And that's kind of, and I'm not trying, some people say, that's dodging what he's saying. But there are actually lawful oaths in the Bible. And you see Jesus basically abiding by that, and Paul basically abiding by that as well. And so there are places for it, but the point is not to be untruthful in the way of living so that you're swearing oaths to try to make yourself look better or something that you're not. They guess it's a confusing one. Absolutely. So practical takeaways here. We have one minute negative to go. Five, thirty-one. What about practice? How do you do this? Yeah. Be truthful. Be reliable. Be most dependable. That's hard, isn't it? And one of the things that that past management gurus will tell you is when you say yes to everybody, you're saying no to something else. So be sure you say yes to the right things. And that's a different issue, I guess. All right. We are out of time. Thank you all. And see you next week. Good discussion. Thank you for listening. For more information about how you can help listeners for continued to provide content like this without charge, please visit givews.com or email us at communications at WTA.