Fred R. Coulter—October 1, 2012

pdfIcon - PDF | Audio | [Up]

Track 1 or Download
Track 2 or Download

Acts 10

I first want to cover something in Acts 10. All of the priest laws have been fulfilled and now we have the higher spiritual laws of repentance. Instead of the sprinkling of the blood of animals, we have the sprinkling of the blood of Christ. Instead of circumcision of the flesh, we have circumcision of the heart.

Acts 10 is particularly important to understand. If there is any change to a Law of God, God must change it. No man can change it; remember that! God must change it! When He does, He elevates it to a higher standard, a spiritual standard.

For example, before we get into the account of Cornelius, in the book of Numbers it tells us that on the border of our garments we are to have a blue fringe. What was the fringe for? So that when someone looked upon it they would remember the commandments of God! Why do we not need the blue fringe? Because they are to be written in our heart and in our mind, a higher standard!

Here God did this unilaterally without letting the apostles know. For a Jew following Judaism they were not to keep company with Gentiles. Gentiles were considered unclean.

Acts 10:1: "Now there was in Caesarea a certain man named Cornelius, a certain of a band that is called the Italian band"—uncircumcised in the flesh. Why would Peter never go to Rome? Peter never went to Rome. When he says at the end of 1-Peter 5 that the Church in Babylon greets you, where was he? In Babylon! It wasn't some sort of euphemism for Rome. Who was in Babylon? Great community of Jews! Who was Peter to go to? He was to go to the Jews, the circumcision!

Unless all of the Italians were circumcising themselves and had the law from Moses, Peter would have gone there. Notice what this man was and this is the lesson: It is your heart standing before God that counts, not the flesh! We are under a spiritual standard.

Verse 2: "A devout man... [Where did he get the understanding? Probably from the local synagogue!] ...who also feared God with all his house, both in giving many alms to the people and in beseeching God continually in prayer." Remember the one that the Jews came to Jesus and said, 'This man is worthy because he has built a synagogue for us.' It was one of the occupiers from Rome

Verse 3: "He clearly saw in a vision... [God is dealing direct with him] ...about the ninth hour of the day, an angel of God coming to him and saying to him, 'Cornelius.'" That's rather startling. God is going to do something that only God can do.

Remember, the New Testament Church started when the greatest opponent to the Church was Judaism, that is the religion of the Jews with their laws that were contrary to the laws of God. That's why you need to understand this: Every religion has laws they have invented while rejecting the laws of God. Every religion! Doesn't matter how pagan; doesn't matter how supposedly Christian; doesn't matter how supposedly Jewish. Here God is dealing directly with him, so imagine how he felt.

Verse 4: "But as he fixed his eyes on him, he became afraid and said, 'What is it, Lord?' And he said to him, 'Your prayers and your alms have gone up for a memorial before God." This is rather startling because the only place to really connect with God is supposedly at Jerusalem at the temple—right? Yes! Think of that!

Then he tells him to send to Joppa, get Peter and bring him back. Then at the same time while they were coming Peter had a vision. The vision came down three times. He was very hungry and fell into a trance (v 10)

Verse 11: "And he saw the heaven opened; and a certain vessel descended upon him, like a great sheet, bound by the four corners and let down upon the earth; In which were all the four-footed beasts of the earth, including the wild beasts, and the creeping things and the birds of heaven. Then a voice came to him, saying, 'Arise, Peter, kill and eat'" (vs 11-13). Notice what Peter said, 'Oh, hallelujah, Lord, thank you, we can eat all these unclean meats that you have forbidden.' NO!

"But Peter said, 'In no way, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean'" (v 14). What is common? Common is something that was handled by a Gentile, but supervised by a Jew! You find that in The Code of Jewish Law. They bring out how that in a Jewish household, if there is a Gentile servant and kneads the bread under the supervision of the woman of the house, the bread could be eaten by Jews, but it could not be used as ceremonial bread because it was common because it was kneaded by a Gentile.

However, that same bread, if it was kneaded and put together and baked by a Gentile without the supervision of a Jew, that bread became unclean, because they considered Gentiles unclean. Therefore, following what it said in the Old Testament about strangers that they should be circumcised.

What we're going to see is that there has been a blending of the tradition of the Jews and the practices in the Bible. Here it is right here: common or unclean. This took place three times, and so forth. Peter didn't know what was happening and the soldiers showed up. They got a hold of Peter, told him the story and Cornelius was expecting him.

Verse 22: "And they said, 'Cornelius, a centurion, a righteous man..." not circumcised. A Jew would not be considered righteous unless he was circumcised. In the synagogue they had the area for the Jews, the area for the Jewish women. Then they had area for the Gentiles. In order for them to come into the synagogue they had to be a proselyte circumcised in the flesh. But they were still called God-fearing, rather than brethren.

All of that disappears with what Christ is doing in the New Testament. He elevates it to a higher level. 'Love one another as I have loved you.' No discrimination, no stratification of people.

"'...a righteous man and one who fears God, and who has a good report by the whole nation of the Jews, was divinely instructed by a Holy angel to send for you to come to his house, and to listen to words from you.'…. [Isn't that something?] (They came there): …And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him and fell at his feet, worshiping him," and saying, 'Hallelujah, the first pope has arrived in my house.' NO! 'Get on your knees and kiss my ring.' Now you see how silly it is for people to do all the stupid things they do and they think that pleases God.

Verse 26: "But Peter raised him up, saying, 'Stand up, for I myself am also a man.' And as he was talking with him, he went in and found many gathered together. And he said to them... [here's a big meeting place] ...'You know that it is unlawful for a man who is a Jew...'" (vs 26-28). There are three kinds of Jews

  • genetic
  • physical
  • spiritual

A Jew was known to be a practicer of Jewish traditions that 'reject the commandments of God' (Mark 7). So, he says its unlawful. Where in the Bible does it say that a circumcised Israelite or Jew cannot keep company with an uncircumcised Gentile? It only talks about if the stranger wants to keep the Passover, he must be circumcised, that's it! Otherwise the same law for all the children of Israel, all twelve tribes including the Jews and the stranger that dwells among you. You shall not oppress them. You will find no place where they are forbidden to keep company with a Gentile.

"' is unlawful for man who is a Jew... [that is a practicer of Judaism] associate with or come near to anyone of another race. But God has shown me that no man should be called common or unclean. For this reason, I also came without objection when I sent for. I ask therefore, for what purpose did you send for me?' And Cornelius said, 'Four days ago I was fasting until this hour, and at the ninth hour I was praying in my house; and suddenly a man stood before me in bright apparel, and said, "Cornelius, your prayer has been heard and your alms have been remembered before God.... [Directly from the throne of God! How about that?] ...Now then, send to Joppa and call for Simon who is surnamed Peter; he is lodging by the sea in the house of Simon, a tanner. When he comes, he will speak to you." Therefore, I sent for you at once; and you did well to come. So then, we are all present before God to hear all things that have been commanded you by God'" (vs 28-33).

Put in Gal. 2, because Peter should have known better, v 34: "Then Peter opened his mouth and said, 'Of a Truth I perceive that God is not a respecter of persons.'… [Do people have respect of persons? Yes!] …but in every nation... [Where were they to preach the Gospel? To the whole world, every nation!] ...the one who fears Him and works righteousness is acceptable to Him. The word that He sent to the children of Israel, preaching the gospel of peace through Jesus Christ (He is Lord of all), You have knowledge of; which declaration came throughout the whole of Judea, beginning from Galilee, after the baptism that John proclaimed'" (vs 34-37).

The presence of Christ and the preaching of the Gospel and the apostles' preaching going all throughout Judea and Galilee, this was well known, and that was, v 38: "Concerning Jesus, Who was from Nazareth: how God anointed Him with the Holy Spirit and with power, and He went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, because God was with Him. And we... [the apostles] ...are witnesses of all the things that He did, both in the country of the Jews and in Jerusalem. They killed Him by hanging Him on a tree.'" (vs 38-39).

How was He hung on a tree? On a cross! The way the Romans normally did it; it's not like in the movies. How many here saw The Passion of the Christ by Mel Gibson? Traditional big cross; not so! They would take a big tree, strip it down, put iron flanges on it so it could hold a cross bar. The cross that Jesus carried and later Simon, was the crossbar to which He was going to have His hands nailed to. Then they took that and hung it on the tree. It's a cross, because it's hung on a tree. So, where you see 'a tree—'staros'—that's correct.

Verse 40: "'But God raised Him up the third day and showed Him openly, Not to all the people, but to witnesses who had been chosen before by God, to those of us who did eat and drink with Him after He had risen from the dead. And He commanded us to preach to the people, and to fully testify that it is He Who has been appointed by God to be Judge of the living and the dead. To Him all the prophets bear witness, that everyone who believes in Him receives remission of sins through His name.'…. [This was an action of God]: …While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came upon all those who were listening to the message." (vs 40-44).

  • Why was that important?
  • Because God made the decision to give the Holy Spirit, and it didn't depend upon an interpretation of a man!
  • Why was it necessary that God did this?
  • Because God was the One Who said, 'A stranger shall be circumcised if he wants to take the Passover!'

The Jews later said that a Gentile who wanted to attend synagogue had to be circumcised and become a proselyte. That becomes important in the battle between Jewish disciples and disciples of Christ. The Jews were still going around evangelizing to have Gentiles circumcised according to the Law of Moses. But outside of the Sabbath and Holy Days everything else went around their traditions. So here God is making a division Himself from the works of men.

Verse 45: "And the believers from the circumcision were astonished... [Why? Because they thought that the Messiah was only sent to them! They were astonished. They knew that all of these Gentiles were uncircumcised.] many as had come with Peter..." You have to have witnesses. God always has witnesses. Peter couldn't come back and say, 'I was there alone with Cornelius and thus and such happened.' You can't take it on the word of one man. We don't know how many were there, but there was a good number of them.

"...that upon the Gentiles... [uncircumcised] ...the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out… [God had to do this] …for they heard them speak in other languages and magnify God.…" (vs 45-46).

  • Why was that necessary?
  • What happened when they received the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost at the temple?
  • They spoke in other languages!
  • What is God doing?
  • God is showing there is equality of conversion, no respecter of persons concerning the physical circumcision!

"...Then Peter responded by saying, 'Can anyone forbid water...'" (vs 46-47). Here's the mistake the Protestants use. This is why most don't baptize today because they say they received the Holy Spirit without baptism. But they don't understand the circumstances as to why they received the Holy Spirit before they were baptized. They were baptized afterwards to confirm that they had received it so they could be in covenant. You cannot be in covenant with God unless you are baptized because a covenant requires each party in the covenant to have a symbolic death to demonstrate that they will fulfill the words of the covenant. If not, the symbolic sacrifice would be applied to them.

On the part of God it was literal. Christ was a sacrifice, the Creator of all mankind. Only His death could cover the sins of all mankind—past, present and future. Now what do we bring to that covenant, because we must enter into covenant? Baptism! Baptism is a symbolic death. God gave us the easy way. But you are buried in baptism, that is your symbolic death, and your symbolic death is joined to the death of Jesus Christ. No physical circumcision involved. So, they were baptized.

Verse 47: "'Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized, who have also received the Holy Spirit as we did?' And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then they besought him to remain for a number of days'" (vs 47-48).

Just think of how God rejected the Code of Jewish Law that a Jew should not keep company with a Gentile. Now Peter got in trouble. In Jerusalem they were developing the circumcision exclusive club within the Church, which was not right. Some of them in Jerusalem had not separated themselves from the Jewish traditions.

Acts 11:1: "Now the apostles and the brethren who were in Judea heard that the Gentiles had also received the Word of God; and when Peter went up to Jerusalem, those of the circumcision... [that is the circumcision party] ...disputed with him, saying… [What did you do, Peter?] …You went in to men who were uncircumcised and did eat with them.... [how disgusting] ...But Peter related the event from the beginning and expounded everything in order to them" (vs 1-4). He explained it.

Verse 16: "Then I remembered the Word of the Lord, how He had said, 'John indeed baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.' Therefore, if God... [God has changed it] ...also gave them the same gift that was given to us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to dissent? Do I have the power to forbid God?" (vs 16-17). You can take that question and apply it to anything—right? Yes!

Verse 18: "And after hearing these things, they were silent; and they glorified God, saying, 'Then to the Gentiles also has God indeed granted repentance unto life.'"

Acts 15

A number of years later, Acts 15:1: "Now, certain men who had come down from Judea... [that is to Antioch where there was the greatest number of Gentiles] ...were teaching the brethren, saying, 'Unless you are circumcised after the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.'" The Greek there is the impossibility—'ouk.'

After all the ministry of Paul working with the Jews and the Gentiles through Acts 13-14 and the number of years that took place. Later in Gal. 2 we find that '…certain ones from James…' Even James, who was the half-brother of Jesus, was still holding to that remnant of separation and the problem that it caused.

  • Were the apostles perfect? No!
  • Did they have some troubles between them? Yes, even Paul and Barnabas argued!
  • What happens when you get cloistered and isolated in Pasadena, I mean Jerusalem?
  • You get the point? 'We are better than you.'

They came down to the Church and now they were going contrary to what God had specifically changed Himself. The circumcision of the heart is accomplished by baptism and receipt of the Holy Spirit (Col. 2).

Notice what this did in the congregation down there at Antioch, v 2: "Therefore, after a great deal of strife and arguing with them by Paul and Barnabas..." That's something. Can you imagine what it was? Can you imagine all the Gentiles over here being told, 'Look, you've got to be circumcised and by the way we brought our knives with us.' I'm just kidding, although that's possible.

So after that: "...the brethren appointed Paul and Barnabas, and certain others from among them, to go up to the apostles and elders in Jerusalem about this question. So then, after being sent on their way by the church, they passed through Phoenicia and Samaria, where they reported the conversion of the Gentiles…" (vs 2-3)—etc., etc.

Pay strict attention to the next verses: Verse 4: "And when they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the Church and the apostles and the elders, and they declared all the things that God had done with them." All these Gentiles converted without circumcision. Remember, Jesus' command was what to the apostles? 'Therefore, you go into all the world and preach the Gospel, making disciples in all nations teaching them to observe all things I have commanded you.'

Concerning the Passover, which day did Jesus and the apostles keep Jesus' last Passover? On the 14th! The Jews in the Diaspora knew that they had to be in the land in order to keep the Passover. Therefore, they could not keep the Passover being in the Diaspora, so they made the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread the Passover with a Seder meal instead of the meal for the Night to be Much Observed to the Lord. That's basically how they got to a 15th Passover. Other justifications of the 15th Passover were later re-interpretations of Scriptures to justify the 15th. This is why to this day the Jews in the Diaspora cannot keep the 14th Passover. When they hear that we keep the 14th Passover, I've known some of them to become very angry and almost unglued.

What about the Jews living in Israel today? Could they keep a 14th Passover? Since they are in the land they should but most of them believe that it should be a temple-sacrificed lamb rather than a domestic-sacrificed lamb, so they don't. In The Christian Passover book I've got a confession by a rabbi from British Columbia who says that now that the Jews are back in Israel that there may be some things they can do on the 14th. The reason we do is because Jesus kept it on the 14th. He said, 'This do in the remembrance of Me.' He said to teach the nations. So that's another conflict between Judaism.

Verse 5: "But there stood up certain of those who believed, who were of the sect of the Pharisees..." This is the last you read of the Pharisaical connection with the Church because they couldn't tolerate it after the decision by the conference.

"...saying, 'It is obligatory to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses'" (v 5). I've got a footnote there for you to understand there are two versions of the Law of Moses—the traditional view and the Scriptural view. They wanted them to be circumcised but keep their traditions. You can read Matt. 23 about what they would do with the proselytes.

When Jesus said, 'The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the seat of Moses, whatever they bid you to do, do.' That meant that they were rendering a Scriptural decision. Scribes were mostly Levites, some of whom belonged to the Pharisaic political party. The priests belonged to the Sadduccaic political party. Look what happens when you get political parties within a church, within an organization. All they did was fight and kill each other. You go back and read the book of Josephus about the Sadducees and Pharisees and the slaughtering that they had against each other. No loving brethren there.

The Pharisees did not participate in this discussion. So, when it says to command them to keep the Law of Moses, that is after the Pharisaic interpretation of the Law of Moses, not the Scriptural interpretation.

Verse 6: "Then the apostles and the elders gathered together to see about this matter. And after much discussion had taken place, Peter stood up and said to them, 'Men, brethren, you know that from the early days... [This shows how far apart that this particular instance was from the time when Peter went to Cornelius.] ...God made the choice among us that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, Who knows the heart...'" (vs 6-8).

We're judged by the heart not by the flesh. It's rather humorous when you read Gal. 2 about false brethren came in 'to spy out our liberty.' I'll let you use your imagination what they were looking for.

"'...bore witness to them by giving them the Holy Spirit, even as He did to us, And made no difference between us and them, and has purified their hearts through the faith. Now therefore, why do you tempt God by putting a yoke upon the necks of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?'" (vs 8-10). That's not the Law of God. The Law of God is not the yoke; their traditions were the yoke.

In the book Judaism: A Revelation of Moses or a Religion of Men? by Phil Neal, our editor, he shows exactly how Judaism worked. If you think there was a dictatorship in whatever church you were in, you haven't lived under a rabbinic dictatorship. He is God to the disciple, no difference. So, the yoke was not that of the laws of God.

Why did God give the laws of God to the children of Israel? What did He say? 'I'm putting this on you to weigh you down and make your life miserable and terrible and horrible.' No, He said, 'I'm giving this to you that you may live, that you may prolong your days in the land. That the Lord may bless you.' Deut. 28—blessings and cursings.

Are there cursings for keeping the law? or blessings? Cursings come from breaking the law—correct? Yes! When we get it clear in our heads, which the Protestants never have, that the problem in the New Testament is not the Law of God vs. no Law of God. It is the Pharisaic and Judaism interpretation and practice of the law and their traditions vs the Scriptures and the New Testament. That is the conflict.

That's what Paul was writing about. Verse 11: "'But by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we believe we shall be saved in the same manner as they also.' Then all the multitude kept silence and heard Barnabas and Paul relate what signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them" (vs 11-12).

(go to the next track)

I had a question sent to me on an e-mail concerning this so I thought I would take the time to go ahead and cover it here.

Verse 13: "And after they were silent, James answered and said, 'Men, brethren, listen to me. Simeon has related how God first visited the Gentiles to take out a people for His name. And with this the words of the prophets agree, as it is written, "After these things, I will return and will build again the tabernacle of David which has fallen..."'" (vs 13-16).

Why is it referred to as the tabernacle of David? Because that's when David had the Ark in his house in a special tent and had that close personal relationship with God!

"'"...and its ruins I will build again, and will set it up; so that the residue of men may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles upon whom My name is called, says the Lord, Who does all these things," Known to God are all His works from the beginning of the world'" (vs 17-18). That includes everything that was there in Genesis.

Verse 19: "'Therefore, my judgment is that we do not trouble those of the Gentiles who have turned to God.... [Trouble them with what? Physical circumcision.] ...But that we write to them to abstain from pollutions of idols... [because that was very common] ...and from sexual immorality... [today we have the same thing] ...and from what has been strangled and from blood'" (vs 19-20). These are a combination of the Ten Commandments, idolatry, and sexual immorality and the clean and unclean food laws, strangled and from blood.
Verse 21: "For from the generations of old, Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him in the synagogues, being read every Sabbath Day." Here is the Scriptural version of the Law of Moses not the traditional version. In the synagogue they read first from the Law, then the Prophets, then the Psalms—Scripture. Then if there is any discussion about it, then the rabbis discuss with their traditional interpretation of it. So there's the difference.

Verse 22: "Then it pleased the apostles and the elders, together with the whole church, to send chosen men from among them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; and they chose leading men from among the brethren: Judas, who was surnamed Barsabas, and Silas. And they wrote letters by their hand, as follows: 'The apostles and the elders and the brethren, to those brethren who are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilcicia: Greetings! Inasmuch as we have heard that certain ones among us who went to you have troubled your souls with words, saying, "You are obligated to be circumcised and to keep the law..."'" (vs 22-24).

Remember, that is the traditional law. Obviously, we are to keep the laws of God. In the Holy Bible in Its Original Order, a Faithful Version, in Appendix Z we have almost all of Paul's difficult Scriptures to understand. Study those and that will help you through it.

"...(to whom we gave no such command)... ['We're from Jerusalem. Have you heard the latest?'] ...It seemed good to us, being assembled with one accord, to send to you chosen men with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, Men who have dedicated their lives to proclaim the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, we have sent Judas and Silas, who shall themselves also tell you by word of mouth the same things that we have written. For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us, to lay no further burden upon you than these necessary things: To abstain from things sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality; if you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell'" (vs 24-29).

You can read that it says nothing about the Sabbath. Where were these people meeting to begin with? In the synagogue! What was read every Sabbath? Moses! So, you see the difference there.

To them, when they wrote this, it was very clear because they were experiencing these things. For us today, with the universal Protestant interpretation of doing away with the Law, superficially it looks like it could be true, but it isn't. So when they came and read it everyone rejoiced, etc.

Now let's answer some other questions—Job 1:6 and Job 2. Who are the sons of God? Job 1:6: "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD. And Satan also came among them." Who are the sons of God? These had to be the obedient angels.

  • Is Satan the devil a spirit being?
  • Do they come before God? Yes!
  • Is God a Spirit being? Yes!

Therefore, the sons of God could not be persons in the flesh, but they had to be angels. Same way with Job 2:1.

Seventh Year Land Rest

Explain the 7th year land rest, fruit trees. Can you store the fruit? Yes! All the fruit is for food for you. So whatever the fruit trees produce, of course you can keep it for yourself, but you can't sell it. That's the thing, it's food for you and your family.

24 Elders

Who are the 24 elders mentioned in Revelation who sit around the throne of God? We don't know! I'm sure that each one has a name. What are they then? They are apparently created spirit beings by God, created with special wisdom and ability that help run the universe! That's the best we can understand it. The universe is a lot more vast than we figured.

Let me give you just a little something here. Whenever you get into a Bible discussion and you start quoting verses and it starts getting a little astray, always open a Bible. That will help keep you out of trouble.

Genealogy of Luke 3

Genesis 5:12: "And Cainan lived seventy years and begat Mahalaleel. And after he begat Mahalaleel, Cainan lived eight hundred and forty years. And he begat sons and daughters" (vs 12-13). That is compared with Luke 3:37. Is Mahalaleel and Mahalelel the same person or different spelling? Both, it is the same person with a little different spelling, that's all.

The genealogy in Luke 3 runs from Mary's father back. This is the correct translation. Luke 3:23: "And Jesus Himself began to be about thirty years old, being, as was supposed, the son of Joseph, the son-in-law of Eli." Eli was Mary's father. Joseph did not begat Jesus. Jesus got His human nature through Mary so Joseph was the son-in-law of Mary's father Eli. Then the rest of it is the line from Eli all the way down. This line goes all the way back to Adam.

Verse 31: "The son of Meleas, the son of Menna, the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan, the son of David." The genealogy of the physical inheritance of Christ did not come down through Solomon because of Solomon's sin. It came down through Nathan, the brother of Solomon.

Women speaking in church

Huckabee, Saturday night, had that woman preacher on there, cropped hair and all. 1-Corinthians 14:34: "Let your women be silent in the churches..." That has to do with public speaking. It has nothing to do with conversation. It has nothing to do if you raise your hand and you have a question, because notice what it's talking about here:

Verse 31: "For your prophets can all prophesy one by one, so that everyone may learn and may be encouraged. And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints. Let your women be silent in the churches… [that is in public speaking] ...for they are not allowed to speak; but they are to be in subjection, exactly as the law says. And if they wish to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home. For it is a shame for a woman to speak in church" (vs 31-35).

There's also the part of it where the women would sit in one section, the men in another section, and so forth. However, when we come to 1-Timothy 2:11: "Let a woman learn in quietness... [It must have been different than it is today from the point of view they must have been wanting to talk all the time. I have no idea.] ...and be submissive in every respect."

We are all under authority, every one of us. It's not that women are to be submissive to men and men can do anything they want to. No! They better be submissive to Christ—right? Yes, indeed! We are all under authority.

Verse 12: "For I do not permit a woman to teach, nor to exercise authority over man... [Scripturally] ...but to be in quietness. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived; but the woman came to be in transgression by being deceived" (vs 12-14).

A lot of men like to turn there and say, 'See, it's the woman's fault.' Then they get out the heavy thumb, Romans 5:12: "Therefore, as by one... [woman. No!] sin entered into the world... [Adam, you did it!] ...and by means of sin came death; and in this way, death passed into all mankind; and it is for this reason that all have sinned." We have a nature of death. We have a nature that is temporary and therefore, we are a nature that sins.

Scriptural References:

  • Acts 10:1-4, 11-14, 22-48
  • Acts 11:1-4, 16-18
  • Acts 15:1-29
  • Job 1:6
  • Genesis 5:12
  • Luke 3:23, 31
  • 1-Corinthians 14:34, 31-35
  • 1-Timothy 2:11-14
  • Romans 5:12

Scriptures referenced, not quoted:

  • 1 Peter 5
  • Acts 10:10
  • Mark 7
  • Galatians 2
  • Acts 13-14
  • Colossians 2
  • Matthew 23
  • Deuteronomy 28
  • Job 2:1
  • Luke 3:37

Also referenced:


  • Code of Jewish Law by Ganzfried and Goldin
  • The Christian Passover by Fred R. Coulter
  • Josephus
  • Judaism: A Revelation of Moses or Religion of Men? by Philip Neal

Appendix Z: Understanding Paul's Difficult Scriptures Concerning the Law and the Commandments of God(The Holy Bible in Its Original Order, A Faithful Version by Fred R. Coulter)

Transcribed: 10-22-12
Formatted: bo—10/23/12

Copyright 2012—All rights reserved. Except for brief excerpts for review purposes, no part of this publication may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means without the written permission of the copyright owner. This includes electronic and mechanical photocopying or recording, as well as the use of information storage and retrieval systems.