F. Kreisler: Liebesleid, Gerald Karni, viola & LGT Young Soloists

2019.08.25 John Haller's Prophecy Update: "Trigger Points"

How deep the Father's love Fernando Ortega

ZION [Official Lyric Video]

New sun-driven cooling period of Earth ‘not far off’

Center of Soviet Aspirations - Fortune Magazine Editors

By 

Fortune Editors

August 1, 1951

 From the August 1951 issue of Fortune magazine.Harrison/Fortune/Time Inc.

Among the secret documents captured in the archives of the German Foreign Office was a report from the German Ambassador to Moscow (Schulenburg), dated November 26, 1940, in the period of the Nazi-Soviet pact. The German Ambassador said that Molotov was prepared to accept the draft of a proposed four-power pact between Germany, Italy, Japan, and the Soviet Union, subject to certain conditions. One of these conditions was simply stated: “Provided that the area south of Batum and Baku in the general direction of the Persian Gulf is recognized as the center of the aspirations of the Soviet Union.”

This is one of the most candid declarations of Soviet Russia’s intentions ever made public. The document in which it appears was published by the U.S. State Department in 1948. There is every indication today that this area remains a center of tremendous Russian expansionist pressure.

Cutting through eastern Turkey and Iraq, and western Iran, this triangle is the heart of the Middle East. It effectively divides the globe, East and West. Thus the aspirations of Soviet Russia in this area are not limited to a bit of territory but fit accurately into its broader aspirations of world conquest. This triangle, coveted by czarist and bolshevist Russia alike, is also the weakest salient in Russia’s historic defense-in-depth strategy. It lies at her back door, only a few hundred miles by air from most of Russian oil and much of its industry. On the other hand it is open to reasonably easy conquest by Russian land armies, U.S. airpower notwithstanding. Perhaps sometime the Red Army will come through the passes of the Caucasus and the Elburz Mountains, and take it. But this no doubt would be generally regarded as the formal opening of World War III, and from Korea and other evidences, it seems probable that Soviet Russia would like to get it cheaper, that is, by subversion, civil war, and conversion to a satellite, and thus continue to throw sand in the eyes of the non-Communist world.

Read more:

The Two Popes & Pietro, The Roman Curia Boss:: By Cynthia Nuara

Published on: July 7, 2019 by RRadmin7 Category:Cynthia Nuara, General Articles

 

Pietro (Peter, in English) Parolin is the head of the Roman Curia in the Vatican as its secretary of state. He has been called “papabile, a candidate to succeed Francis as pope.” An April 2019 article on the Catholic website, Crux, stated that Pietro Parolin has become “more powerful than you can possibly imagine.” And the new constitution for reforming and governing the Roman Curia would make this obvious. The Crux article ends with “…within the Roman Curia, everyone will now know who’s boss: The Cardinal Secretary of State.”

I will be using Catholic websites in this writing to make the point that there are many Catholics dissatisfied with this pope.

What is this New Catholic Constitution About?

Summary from the Catholic News Agency (CNA) website: Analysis: New Vatican constitution to centralize power in state secretariat:
A long-serving curial official said, “…This is just the total centralization of power in the office of the Secretary of State. Nothing can be done without the pope’s approval, and nothing gets to the pope except through [Cardinal Parolin] – it’s the creation of a vice-regency.”

An archbishop, currently serving in a senior curial role, said, “It is an essentially Soviet model. Lots of meetings, lots of discussion, but in the end the Secretary [of State] decides what will happen.”
Several curial staffers from different departments told CNA that their congregations had returned “pages of suggested revisions,” and expressed deep concerns about the document’s proposed centralization of curial operations…. – source

Summary from Crux: New Vatican doc displays simplified, decentralized curia:
In its new mega-department for evangelization, the feminine genius, it says, must be promoted in the church… as well as for the faithful who, in certain cultures, live in polygamous relationships.

Publication of the document was expected in June, but due to the vast response to the text of over 200 pages, publication is now tentatively set for September. – source

The Vatican’s former Prefect of the Congregation for Doctrine, Cardinal Gerhard Müller, has strongly criticized it. He said “the teaching of the Faith is being mentioned as merely one random task of the pope among many others, and most importantly, now to be subordinate to his secular duties.” The Cardinal points out in this new constitution a “wrong and deviant use of fundamental notions of Catholic theology…” He warns against a “secularization of the concept of the Church,” as if she is “to be run like an international company” and as if “it is about a balance of power” between a mother company and subsidiaries.
Fr. Thomas Weinandy, a member of the International Theological Commission who was removed as an adviser to the US Conference of Catholic bishops in 2017 after his criticisms of Pope Francis, said there’s “no problem with making Evangelization as the primary pastoral work of the Church,” but not if it means not telling others of the “Mysteries of the Faith.” Without doctrine and moral teaching, “there is no evangelization,” he continued. –  source

Those “mysteries of the faith” of the Catholic church are indeed mysteries; for you’ll find lots of doctrines of man in that system, but not many of its beliefs in the Bible. More on that shortly.

Secularizing the Catholic Faith

It sounds like this new constitution, besides giving Peter Parolin power over all the workings of the Catholic church, will increase the Vatican’s focus on trying to join different belief systems to the “Mother Church” as it calls itself.
The Vatican deal with China in September 2018 allows the Communist government to recommend bishops of the Catholic church. Why agree to such a blatant secular compromise?

The agreement states that China will recommend bishops before they’re appointed by the pope, and stipulates that the pope can veto bishops that China recommends, within limits. Francis, as part of the deal, lifted the excommunication of seven bishops who had been appointed by China without papal approval. Also, under the deal, two Vatican-aligned Chinese bishops recognized by the pope have been asked to resign in favor of state-sanctioned prelates. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize that the Chinese government is only going to select bishops who are loyal to the Communist Party. Meanwhile, the persecution of Chinese Catholics has continued, and of Protestants.

From America Magazine: Cardinal Parolin defends Vatican-China agreement amid criticism:
At the symposium, “Stand Together to Defend International Religious Freedom,” Parolin defended the Vatican-China agreement, saying, “We signed this agreement to help advance religious freedom, to find normalization for the Catholic community there, and then for all other religions to have space and a role to play…” – source

Francis, Parolin and previous popes have shown they’re Marxist, Socialist, or Communist themselves and/or have bowed to countries with those systems, secularizing in order to keep seminaries open and “fatten up the Catholic church.” You can read about this on the Catholic website Tradition in Action.
Catechism #841 states that Muslims worship the same God as the Catholic church; therefore, both Francis and Parolin call them brothers and sisters. But the Muslim god is not the God of the Bible. And then there are the Vatican prayers alongside Muslims, Buddhists, and Hindus, and reverence for their precepts and teachings, claiming they “reflect a ray of Truth which enlightens all men.”

At the Second Vatican Council in 1965, the Catholic church declared its attitude to other religions in a document called Nostra Aetate (which means ‘in our time’). Here is an excerpt:
“In her tasks of promoting unity and love among men, indeed among nations, [the Church] considers above all what people have in common and what draws them to fellowship. (n.1) Also, The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men. (n.2).”

All this is building towards the one-world religion. No false religion will have a role to play in salvation. Christ is the only way, the truth and the life. No one comes to our Father in heaven except through Him (John 14:6).

The Bible, as we know, tells us in Revelation 17 about “Mystery Babylon, the Mother of Harlots.” (Babylon refers to the root of all false religion.) The woman dressed in purple and scarlet who sits on seven hills is drunk with the blood of the saints (martyrs for Jesus who refuse to bow to false doctrine). This Mother church will be aligned with the Antichrist in the Tribulation until he has finished using her to gain power with his ten-nation confederacy; then he will have her destroyed.

Two Popes at the End of Days?

Speaking of that destruction, Francis’ namesake prophesied centuries ago about the time of the end when two popes are alive, one having stolen the throne from the other – a time when the church of Rome will be destroyed.
We’re not to give extra-biblical prophecy the same credence as the God-inspired Bible. But this prophecy and another that applies here, which will also be discussed, only bear mentioning since they appear as though they’re coming to pass…but only in part! Satan knows Bible prophecy too. What better way to keep people deceived by mixing truth with lies?!

The first prophecy I’m referring to is the one by Francis of Assisi. Some claim this prophecy was made up by dissenting members of the 13^th century Franciscan order and attributed to Francis of Assisi. No matter, for it doesn’t deflect from what we see happening today. Keep this in mind, though: when revealing this prophecy, Francis of Assisi still held to the false belief in what he called the true pope and the true church, including Mary worship.

Not long before he died in 1226, Francis of Assisi gathered the members of his order and warned them of great tribulations that would befall the Catholic church in the end of days just before Christ’s return. Here is an excerpt:
“The devils will have unusual power; the immaculate purity of our Order, and of others, will be so much obscured that there will be very few Christians who will obey the true Sovereign Pontiff and the Roman Church with loyal hearts and perfect charity. At the time of this tribulation, a man, not canonically elected, will be raised to the Pontificate, who, by his cunning, will endeavour to draw many into error and death. [Two popes alive at the end of days.]
“Then scandals will be multiplied, our Order will be divided, and many others will be entirely destroyed, because they will consent to error instead of opposing it. 

There will be such diversity of opinions and schisms among the people, the religious and the clergy, that, except those days were shortened, according to the words of the Gospel, even the elect would be led into error, were they not specially guided, amid such great confusion, by the immense mercy of God…
“Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it under foot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor, but a destroyer.” – from Works of the Seraphic Father St. Francis Of Assisi [London: R. Washbourne, 1882], pp. 248-250.
You can read the entire prophecy here, along with the article on the Catholic website that discusses the two popes in the prophecy and speaks against this pope.

Is Francis a Valid Pope?

Interestingly, rumor has it that the papal throne was usurped from Benedict with help from elitists including Obama and others that wanted the Marxist Bergoglio (Francis) to be pope, who would be in line with their leftist values.
From Gloria.TV: Wikileaks: Clinton, Obama, Soros, Overthrew Pope Benedict in Vatican Coup:
George Soros, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton orchestrated a coup in the Vatican to overthrow the conservative Pope Benedict and replace him with radical leftist Pope Francis, according to a group of Catholic leaders citing evidence from various sources, including WikiLeaks emails. – source

This would make Francis not canonically elected. The canon law of the Catholic church says a pope’s resignation is valid only if he makes the decision in full freedom and without pressure from others.

Supernatural Signs in the Conclave?

I still remember the words of Cardinal Schönborn in speaking about how Francis unexpectedly became pope.
From The Telegraph: Pope Francis elected after supernatural ‘signs’ in the Conclave, says Cardinal:
Schönborn, Archbishop of Vienna, said the surprise election of Pope Francis came about because of a series of supernatural “signs” in the conclave, including one which he could not speak about. He said he felt two strong signs that Bergoglio (Francis) was “the chosen one.” Cardinal Schönborn went on to say that he’s sure many cardinals “received similar signs during the Conclave.” He said that without such signs, “It wouldn’t have been possible to have this election so soon and so rapidly… It is as if he would say to the world ‘come home, I wait for you.’” – source

The Schism in the Catholic Church Today

Even cardinals are calling for Francis to step down. Is he grooming his cohort in case he steps down OR just wants to focus on other things and allow Parolin to lead the sheep? Or something else. Did Francis usurp the throne from Benedict? Will Pietro, the Roman Curia boss, usurp the throne from Francis? Oh well, let’s move on.
A March 2019 article by Julia Meloni on the Catholic website OnePeterFive, provided some interesting insight. Here is a summary of that article titled,

Cardinal Parolin: The Next Pope?

Last year, Archbishop Viganò alleged that Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Francis’s handpicked secretary of state, was complicit with him in covering up the allegations of decades of sexual abuse of minors, seminarians and young priests by Cardinal McCarrick. Despite this, Antonio Socci, a leading conservative Vatican-watcher, says meetings of cardinals about a possible conclave have been taking place, with Parolin as the clear frontrunner.

A year ago, Parolin was named as likely successor to Francis in reports about a “plot against the pope.”
Socci says cardinals once loyal to Francis are so concerned about a schism that they’re planning to appeal to him to step down. Their favored candidate for replacement is understood to be Cardinal Pietro Parolin.
Why Parolin?  According to Marco Tosatti, Parolin is a progressive diplomat with ties to what is referred to as the Vatican’s St. Gallen mafia, which wields a lot of power. Other Vatican-watchers call him a clear “reformer” — a “pastor open to dialogue,” in line with Francis’s “winds of change.”

Parolin is said to be a revolutionary without the wild liability of Francis. To stay papabile, he’s been distancing himself from some of the questionable aspects of Francis’s reign. He’s been likened to a fireman, carefully controlling the blazes of this pontificate with his diplomatic prowess.

Parolin supposedly was shipped off to Venezuela after a falling out with Cardinal Bertone, Benedict’s secretary of state. Francis, who spoke positively about Parolin before becoming pope, soon replaced Bertone with Parolin — who began loyally implementing Francis’s will. The pope, in turn, lavished Parolin with power. Francis indulges him, and power has drained from other Vatican departments toward this secretary of state.

It was Parolin who moved to suspend an external audit of the Vatican’s finances.
Cardinal Zen says it’s Parolin who pushed Francis towards the deal with Communist China to allow that government to recommend Catholic bishops, which critics say betrays Chinese Catholics. He calls for Parolin’s resignation over this betrayal. He says Parolin “got rid” of him, and calls Parolin “arrogant and despotic, interested more in diplomatic (worldly) success than in the triumph of the Faith.” In Wikipedia’s article on Parolin, a quote from Cardinal Zen said Parolin “is dangerous.”

Parolin seems alarmingly friendly with cultural Marxists and other worldly elites. In 2018, he was the first Vatican official to ever attend the secretive Bilderberg Meeting, the summit of globalists with an agenda of open borders and a one-world government. Parolin also joined Francis in promoting the U.N.’s menacing globalist agenda. Although Parolin says the agenda must respect life in “all its stages,” pro-life leaders warn that the Vatican’s collaboration with the UN will extend abortion, smuggled into the agenda via coded language on “reproductive health.”

In 2017, Parolin further cemented his revolutionary credentials, asserting that Vatican II initiated an “irreversible” process. He quoted a theologian who boasted: “Absolutely nothing will be as it was before!” Parolin praised the new “seeds” of “synodality” — a term that, under Francis, has become synonymous with permanent revolution.

Parolin is the only whispered-about candidate for pope with any real chance of being elected; he is the smooth revolutionary, the master collaborator with worldly powers.
“I don’t think he has faith. He is just a good diplomat in a very secular, mundane meaning,” Cardinal Zen says of Parolin. – source

Another interesting article from the Catholic website Lifesite News, speaks of Francis’ and Parolin’s promotion of Bishop Robert McElroy in San Diego. “Although McElroy says no clerical “gay subculture” exists in his diocese, he is pro-homosexual, having defended a diocesan employee in a same-sex “marriage,” told priests to embrace “LGBT families,” and has been accused, along with Francis and Parolin, in knowing about ex-Cardinal McCarrick’s serial sexual abuse of seminarians and ignoring the matter.”

Peter, the Roman

Now to the one you may be wondering about since reading the title of this article. I’m sure many of you have heard about Malachy’s prophecy of the popes. He gave the prophecy in Latin, and the name he gave of the last leader of the Catholic church was Petrus Romanus, which translates Peter (Pietro, in Italian) the Roman.
There is also what may contain truth in Malachy’s prophecy, but deception as well. Satan knows about the Mother of Harlots church in Rome described in Revelation, yet this prophecy appears to draw one in with its uncanny accuracy in the descriptions of the popes, including the last pope or one who leads the Catholic church in the Tribulation. There is no mention of the false religious system that it has been and will continue to be.

Terry James said in his book review of Petrus Romanus by Tom Horn and Chris Putnam, “Neither Tom Horn nor Cris Putnam–nor I, as your reviewer of this book—claim that St. Malachy was a God-inspired prophet in the sense of an Old Testament or New Testament prophet. He was not. However, I will tell you without reservation that the little-known and sometimes previously undiscovered facts these researchers have uncovered and constructed into an enthralling picture of the one who will likely be the last pontiff are absolutely spellbinding.”

Hal Lindsey reported on Malachy’s prophecy before Francis became pope. He said, “I’m not saying that this man’s prophecy rises to the same level of detail and accuracy as those in the Bible. However, it does contain some remarkable predictions that seem to have been fulfilled across the centuries and may bear relevance for today.” Hal mentioned that some claim it’s a forgery, but he pointed out that – if it were made up by an anti-Catholic Protestant, how does one explain away the fact that it has been kept under guard in the Vatican archives since it was discovered in 1590? [Some claim the author was Cardinal Girolamo Simoncelli who lived from 1522 to 1605]. Regardless, it can’t be dated any later than 1590 no matter who would have written it.

Malachy, a 12th-century bishop of Armagh in what is now Northern Ireland, purportedly had a vision in which he foresaw all of the popes from the death of Pope Innocent II until the destruction of the church and the return of Christ. It is said that he gave an account of his visions to Pope Innocent II, but the document remained unknown in the secret Vatican Archives until its discovery in 1590.
Malachy was obviously held in high esteem as he was canonized as a saint by Pope Clement III on July 6, 1199, 50 years after his death.

Here is his prophecy of the last leader of the Catholic church:
“In extreme persecution will sit Peter the Roman (Petrus Romanus), who will pasture his sheep in tribulations; and when these things are finished, the city of seven hills [i.e. Rome] will be destroyed, and the dreadful judge will judge his people. The End.”

In Conclusion:

“And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues” (Revelation 18:4).
This new Catholic constitution is called Praedicate Evangelium (Proclaim the Gospel). Yet Francis criticizes Protestants for evangelizing, or proselytizing, as he put it. But that’s because he doesn’t like the competition. And we don’t accept the man-made doctrines of the Catholic church – at least not those of us who are Bible-believers – and we haven’t joined the broad-way, emergent-divergent so-called “ecumenical” bandwagon that promotes global unity among all religions under the guise of tolerance and cooperation. Many Protestant pastors are guilty of the same thing in these days of apostasy.

The most crucial error among many that the Catholic church teaches is the following:
According to the RCC’s Canon 12, Council of Trent, “If any one shall say that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in the divine mercy pardoning sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is that confidence alone by which we are justified… let him be accursed.”

Yet, God’s Word tells us that justification/salvation is by faith:
“But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness” (Romans 4:5).
“Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ” (Romans 5:1).

“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast” (Ephesians 2:8-9).

From Dave Hunt: “For the Catholic, salvation does not come through personally 
receiving Christ as Savior but is a lengthy process that begins with baptism and thereafter depends upon one’s continued relationship to the [Catholic] Church. Salvation comes through participation in the sacraments, penance, good works, suffering for one’s sins and the sins of others here and/or in purgatory, indulgences to reduce time in purgatory, and almost endless masses and Rosaries said on one’s behalf even after one’s death. Catholic evangelism is by works, the very antithesis of “the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts:20:24). – excerpt from A Woman Rides the Beast, 1994

This reminds us of what Christ said to the Pharisees and Scribes in Matthew 15:6-9: “…So for the sake of your tradition you have made void the word of God… ‘teaching as doctrines the commandments of men’”
Though the extra-biblical prophecies may contain partial truth concerning certain events we see unfolding before us, there is only one source – the Bible – that has proven to be 100% true. And it tells us of a coming one-world false church and one-world Antichrist government. It speaks of rampant wickedness, wars and rumor of wars, alignment of end-time nations against the Jews who are back in their land of Israel, etc. The wildly insane weather we’re seeing is not climate change; it’s God’s warning to turn back to Him and accept His free pardon.

We brethren can rest in “our Blessed Hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ” (Titus 2:13).

We who put our faith in Christ alone for our salvation (John 14:6; Acts 4:12) will be caught up in the twinkling of an eye (1 Corinthians 15:52) to meet Jesus in the clouds (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18) and escape the coming wrath (1 Thessalonians 5:9; Revelation 3:10).

As the late Jack Kelley would say, “We can almost hear the footsteps of the Messiah.”

Share this:

2001 - 2015 Earthquakes Animated Map

The Battle belongs to the Lord - Maranatha! music

The Five Witnesses to the Truth of Jesus the Messiah

May 18, 2018 dr_woodhead 

Introduction

At the time of Jesus, the ruling Jews did not believe who He was. Even though He proved to them by many facts and fulfilled prophecies, they nevertheless accused Him of blasphemy as they said He was making Himself out to equal with God (John 5:18). They had a validating procedure in place within the Mosaic Law to determine truth, but unfortunately did not rely on it to certify that He is the Messiah:

Jesus Enters Jerusalem by Benjamin Robert Haydon Cir 1814-1820

John 5:31–47

³¹ If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true. ³² There is another that beareth witness of me; and I know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is true. ³³ Ye sent unto John, and he bare witness unto the truth. ³⁴ But I receive not testimony from man: but these things I say, that ye might be saved. ³⁵ He was a burning and a shining light: and ye were willing for a season to rejoice in his light. ³⁶ But I have greater witness than that of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me. ³⁷ And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape. ³⁸ And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not. 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 (KJV)?

The Jews were given certain methodologies within the Mosaic Law to validate truth. Our legal system is based in a large part on the Mosaic Law.

Pediment on the United States Supreme Court with Moses in the center

There are two basic rules of evidence for which a particular event can be validated. If it can be recreated, such as a scientific experiment we use the results of the experiment. For historical events that cannot be recreated credibleeyewitnessesare used. This is also stated in the Mosaic Law:
Numbers 35:30
³⁰Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be put to death by the mouth of witnesses: but one witness shall not testify against any person to cause him to die (KJV).

In any case of homicide there needed to be witnesses to the act in order for guilt to be established, and one witness alone was not enough^:
Deuteronomy 17:6-7
⁶At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.⁷The hands of the witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterward the hands of all the people. So, thou shalt put the evil away from among you (KJV).

Deuteronomy 19:15 
¹⁵One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established (KJV).

Moses laid down the principle that more than one witness was necessary to convict a man of a crime. This principle was to act as a safeguard against a false witness who might bring an untruthful charge against a fellow Israelite because of a quarrel, or out of some other impure motive. To insure against a capricious execution, two or three independent witnesses were required. One witness was inadequate because if he lied no one would be able to prove or disprove it. The witnesses were to be the first in the execution of justice. So, if their testimony was later proved false, they in effect would have committed murder and would be liable to execution.

The Lord Jesus using the same concept of validating truth through multiple witnesses as the method for eliminating unrepentant sinners from the Church:

Matthew 18: 15-17
¹⁵Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. ¹⁶But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.¹⁷And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican (KJV).

The Lord had just spoken about offenses in Matthew 18:7-14, and starting in verse 15 He talked about what should be done when known sin occurs. When a brother sins against another, the two of them should discuss the matter. If the matter can be settled at that level, there is no need for it to go any further. But if the sinning brother refuses to listen … two or three witnesses should be taken along for a clear testimony. This was in keeping with Old Testament precedents, as in Deuteronomy 19:15. If the sinning brother still failed to recognize his error, the situation should be told before the entire church. The disciples probably would have understood Jesus to mean the matter should be brought before the Jewish assembly.

After the establishment of the church, on the day of Pentecost, these words would have had greater meaning for them. One who refuses to acknowledge his sin is then to be treated as an outsider, such as a pagan or a tax collector. So, the Jews were well aware of the method using witnesses to verify truth. Jesus begins this next session of Scripture with five (5) independent validations of Himself as God the Messiah.

The First One is confirming the Work of God the Father in Himself
For Jesus seeks to do God’s will during His earthly ministry and does not testify of Himself by Himself. This of course would be circular reasoning, and from a logic standpoint it would be an invalid argument.
John 5:30-47
 ³⁰I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.
 ³¹If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true. There is another that beareth witness of me; and I know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is true (KJV).

Some would have us believe that you cannot logically use the Bible to validate the Bible. For example, under this line of reasoning one could not logically use one section such as the Old Testament to validate the New Testament. The distinction is that the Bible is not one book. It is a collection of 66 individual books written by 40+ authors over a 1600-year period. It is sewn together in one binding. He asserts that the quality of His judgment on mankind is just because He does it based upon God’s will. God’s will, the Jews knew, was holy and just. So He is attesting to the validation of what He says as believable since He is saying what God has said all along to them through the Old Testament and the Mosaic Law.

The Second One is the Witness of John the Baptist

Baptism of Christ by Guido Reni, Cir. 1622-23

John was prophesied as the forerunner of The Christ (Isaiah 40:3; Malachi 3:1). The Jews knew that a person was coming who would introduce the Messiah when He appeared. They asked John if he was the Christ. John said that he was not the Christ, but that he was the one who was the forerunner. (John 1:15, 23):
John 5:33–35
 ³³Ye sent unto John, and he bare witness unto the truth. ³⁴But I receive not testimony from man: but these things I say, that ye might be saved. ³⁵He was a burning and a shining light: and ye were willing for a season to rejoice in his light (KJV).

The Third One is the Testimony of His Miracles

Feeding of the Five Thousand by Ambrosius Fracken the Elder

Jesus then goes on to present a third witness to validate His testimony of being The Christ. He asked them to see the works that He does (John 10:38; Hebrews 2:4):
John 5:36
³⁶But I have greater witness than that of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me (KJV).

He performed the miracles of healing; and of raising the dead which he alludes to here. He was also the greatest teacher that has ever been on the planet. The Jews did not understand how He knew so much as they considered Him as being “uneducated”.

The Fourth One is Jesus declaring that God’s Doctrine is independent of Man.

Artist Unknown from David + Jonathan, inc. http://ubdavid.org/bible/bible.html

In John 7:16-17 Jesus states that God’s doctrine that He teaches is not His alone as a human. If He were simply a man, He would seek His own glory, not God’s. This validation is enhanced in John 5:37-38 where Jesus says that God’s doctrine does not abide in the Jews:
John 5:37–38
 ³⁷And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.³⁸And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not (KJV).
They do not know Him personally. If they knew God, they would have realized that God sent Jesus to preach the doctrine of God, and not the doctrine of man. They did not understand this, nor did they want to understand. They did not believe the prophets before Him and they would not believe Him as God. (Matthew 23:31; Luke 11:47; I Thessalonians 2:15).

The Fifth One is Jesus asking them to Confirm His claims from Scripture.


 
He says that Scriptures tell of Him coming and giving them eternal life. He states that they will not turn to Him to get eternal life. He tells them that they will listen to others but not Him. This is because they do not love God and do not know God’s voice. They were claiming to trust in Moses and the Mosaic Law, but Jesus countered that with an admonition that Moses accuses them through the Mosaic Law. Finally, Jesus tells them that Moses spoke of Him in the first five books of the Bible. Here Jesus affirms the validity of those books and who the author is.

The Pharisees had devoted their life to studying the Scriptures. Not so much as to what the fundamental plain message was but looking for the minutia and esoteric. Early Church theologian Origen taught that there were three levels of Scripture elucidation:

1. • The plain message from the text.
   • The application.
   • The hidden message between the lines.

This is what the Jews were doing. They were looking for the obscure, which is called letterism. They paid so much attention to the details, they missed the central message of the text:
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 (KJV)?

It is interesting that Jesus was declaring to them that in their adherence to group acceptance (v.37), they missed Him and His message. Instead of seeking God and what would bring Glory to Him, they continued to seek acceptance from their peers. This is the same as “group think.” Moses wrote of Christ in Genesis 3:15; Numbers 21:9; 24:17; Deuteronomy 18:15-18. Since they did not believe in Him, they could not possibly believe in Moses either, and their claim to follow the Law was unsubstantiated.

Conclusion

We too have these five proofs, and we also have Christ’s validation of the Old Testament as truth.

1. Jesus pointed to “the scriptures.” The only sacred writings that the Jews possessed that foretold the coming of the Messiah were the books of the Old Testament. Here, Jesus validates them as Scripture. He also cited the Old Testament as a true and reliable source of history.
2. Jesus cites the very first sentence in the Old Testament (Mark 13:19; Revelation 3:14). Jesus confirmed that He created all things (Colossians 1:15-16). The word“beginning” in Revelation 3:14 refers to the active cause or prime source of the creation.
3. He acknowledged that Adam and Eve were created (Matthew 19:4; Genesis 1:27; 5:2)
4. Jesus mentioned Adam and Eve’s son Abel in Matthew 23:35. Jesus not only confirmed Abel’s existence, but He referred to his righteousness as well. Also discussed in this verse is the murder of Zechariah, son of Barachias (or Berechiah, as the New King James Version renders it). Undoubtedly, this refers to the prophet of the Old Testament, whose father was Berechiah (Zechariah 1:1).
5. Jesus cited Noah’s ark and the Flood in Matthew 24:37-39. He also mentioned the account of Sodom and Gomorrah in Luke 17:28-29, 32. Jesus gave personal testimony of the Flood! He corroborated its history, alluded to its causes and reiterated the universal death—except for Noah and his family—that occurred. He also validated the veracity of the Old Testament’s account of Sodom and Gomorrah as recorded in Genesis 19.
6. Jesus attested to Abraham’s existence. John 8:37. He also recognized Abraham’s son and grandson—Isaac and Jacob in Matthew 8:11.
7. He referenced the Prophet Moses in John 5:46-47. Jesus was speaking to Jews who wanted to kill Him (verses 16, 18), and He rebuked them because they did not believe what Moses prophesied about Him in the Old Testament Scriptures.
8. Jesus verified that King David lived in Matthew 12:3. He identified King Solomon Matthew 12: 42. These scriptures prove that Jesus Christ believed and accepted the testimony of the Old Testament as absolutely authoritative! He is the God of the Old Testament and saw all the events chronicled in its writings (1 Corinthians 10:1-4; John 8:58; Exodus 3:14).
9. The Apostle Paul tells us about the Scriptures in 2 Timothy 3:15-16. Writings are considered Scripture if they are inspired by God or, more correctly, “God-breathed.” When Paul wrote, the only “scriptures” in existence were the books of the Old Testament. The New Testament was not completed. Paul taught that all Scripture is to be used to establish doctrine, correct false beliefs or errant behavior, and instruct and train in righteousness!
10. Isaiah did prophesy concerning God’s Word in Isaiah 40:8. This was repeated in the New Testa­ment in 1 Peter 1:25. Jesus prophesied regarding His words in Matthew 24:35; Mark 13:31; and Luke 21:33.

The New Testament refers to the Old Testament about 250 times. We cannot accept the New Testament without recognizing the authority of the Old. The two do not contradict, rather they complete each other. The Bible is one complete book. Remember that Jesus Christ—God in the flesh—was also the God and Spokesman of the Old Testament, although it was the Father who directed what Jesus spoke (John 14:10). And God promised in both the Old and New Testaments that His words would be preserved. That is a divine, unbreakable promise of a God who cannot fail.

Daniel E. Woodhead