(Disclaimer: This transcript is auto-generated and may contain mistakes.)

If you're there in Galatians chapter two, and I'm gonna be preaching a sermon exposing the Hebrew Roots movement. The Hebrew Roots movement. You may say, what in the world are you talking about? But there's this movement out there that basically is trying to promote Christianity in a way of going back to the Old Testament, going back to the Torah, as they say. And I'm just gonna read a little bit as far as what the definition of this movement is. The Hebrew Roots movement is a religious movement that advocates the return and adherence to certain principles of the Torah by seeking a better understanding of the culture, history, and religio-political backdrop of the era which led to the core differences with both the Jewish and later the Christian communities. Okay, so they're basically trying to go back and try to figure out, you know, like go back to these differences and they're basically trying to meld Judaism and Christianity, okay? And I'm gonna be getting to that, but you know, this passage in Galatians chapter two just stands out. When I think of this Hebrew Roots movement, I think of this passage right here where Peter, or I'm sorry, Paul rebukes Peter to the face for trying to Judaize, or basically to, Peter's not Judaizing these people, but basically James and the people in Jerusalem were trying to push this idea of circumcision or to basically be separate from the Gentiles, okay? And look at Galatians chapter two and verse 11 here. Galatians two and verse 11. It says, but when Peter was come to Antioch, I was stood him to the face because he was to be blamed. For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles, but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him in so much that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation. But when I saw that they walk not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, notice this, if thou being a Jew livest after the manner of Gentiles and not as do the Jews, why compelest thou the Gentiles that live as do the Jews? And it's interesting that this same thing is going on today where they're literally trying to get people to live like the Jews. And Peter was stood, I'm sorry, Paul was stood Peter to the face for this. And when he wrote this letter, he's under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. That means Peter was wrong. That means James was wrong. And I know I preached this already going through Acts, and going through Acts 15, and that letter that James put out. And then when Paul came back to Jerusalem, he's basically rebuking, James is rebuking Paul for, you know, teaching that they shouldn't keep, they don't have to keep the law when it comes to circumcision and all these different things. And he's trying to, you know, James is basically trying to Judaize or keep that Jewish tradition, if you will, and making sure people are still getting circumcised, they're still doing these things, and so much that they were going to the temple to do a sacrifice. And now Paul rebukes him to the face and notice that Peter wasn't living as a Jew after this. Okay, now you can't take the fact the way that he was already circumcised, but at the same time, you know, he wasn't living after the manner of Jews. And how do I know that? Because that's what it says, right? Paul says to him, if thou, being a Jew, liveth after the manner of the Gentiles and not as do the Jews, why compelest thou, the Gentiles, to live as do the Jews? And when you run into these Hebrew roots morons, okay, and you say, well, why are you so harsh to them? Because they're idiots. These people completely deny, and I'm gonna be getting into it, they deny the Bible, they, and you say, well, maybe they're just not King of New Jerusalem, they deny the Greek New Testament. They deny it completely. When they say, well, you can't trust that Bible you're holding right there, they're not talking about it being King James. They're talking about it being Greek. They're talking about the underlying text of the English. And they'll say, well, no, it was in Hebrew. Morons. I mean, just willingly ignorant of just history and just what we have before us, okay? And so, now I'm not really getting into the black Hebrew Israelites, but they're a bunch of racists, okay? The black Hebrew Israelites, they believe that, basically, they're the true Israelites. I mean, you can't reason with people like that. And these people literally think that white people should lick their boots. And there's videos of white people doing it, because people are dumb, okay? And so, and here's the thing. This sermon, I haven't preached a whole sermon on this, but I mark my words, this will get the most trolls. I mean, not the most, maybe, but there's three things that'll get you trolls. Preaching against the sodomites. Preaching against flat earth. And preaching against the Hebrew roots movement. I mean, those are the three things. I mean, the trolls just come out of their holes. And they're just like, Hebrew roots, no. And it's just like, that's all they do. It's an internet phenomenon, if you will. And so, all that to say is that I'm sure the trolls will come out and say that I'm a heretic. I'm gonna split hell wide open, because I'm not, you know, Jewish enough for them or something. Now, you know, it's interesting, because in this movement, their whole idea is like, let's get back to the Torah. Let's get back to, but not just like, going back to like, you know, the first five books of Moses, okay? Whereas the first five books of Moses will tell you that Jesus was the prophet to come, and that if you don't listen to him, you're gonna be destroyed and grinded into powder. So why don't you listen to your savior in the New Testament, which is the prophet, which is the come, and he told you that, you know, circumcision's done away with, the Sabbath's done away with, and I'm gonna be getting into that. But it's interesting, because they not only say like, hey, let's go back to the Torah, but they're saying, let's go back into the history of Judaism back when there was this split, if you will. You're talking about the pharisaical, rabbinic Jews of that day. That's what you wanna go back to, right? Well, let's go back to it. Let's see what they say about our savior, and see if you wanna go back and conform to that. Well, in Gittin, in the Talmud, in Gittin 57a, it's talking, this guy is talking about bringing Jesus up from the dead, okay? Because obviously they don't believe that he rose from the dead. It says he went and brought up Jesus, the Nazarene, the sinners of Israel, out of his grave by necromancy, and asked him who is important in the world, okay? So it's calling Jesus a sinner, and he's bringing him back from the dead. And by the way, where they say he is is in hell, okay? And it says he answered, so this is what supposedly Jesus said, okay, in their whole writing here. And he said, Israel. So they asked him, who is important in that world? And he said, Israel. Seek their welfare, seek not their harm. Whoever touches them is as though he touches the apple of God's eye. And it's almost like I'm listening to BBN as I'm, or not BBN, but TBN, you know, like all these TV preachers and like, you know, Israel, bless Israel, don't curse Israel, we need to be for Israel, they're the apple of God's eye, I mean, you hear this over and over again, and that's what the Christ-rejecting Jewish religion teaches in their Talmud. But yeah, we're supposed to get back to that. We're supposed to go back to that, you know, the religio-political era of that time when they hated our Savior and crucified him on a cross. You know, it's just ridiculous. And then in this story, you know, he's brought back up from the dead, right, and he says, who's the most important in the world? Israel, they're the apple of God's eye. And then they asked, you know, what is your punishment? This guy asked, what is Jesus' punishment? And it says, with boiling excrement. So the Jews believe that Jesus is in hell in boiling excrement, and you adults know what I'm talking about, okay? So yeah, that's what they're supposed to be going back to and figuring out how these communities split. I can't imagine why these communities split. But here's the thing, Paul was a Jew. He was a Hebrew of the Hebrews. He was of the tribe of Benjamin, and guess what? He believes on the Lord Jesus Christ, and throughout Acts, he keeps saying, listen, I am obedient to what the prophet said. What I believe is what the prophets has foretold. And so it's not that there's this schism where they veered off from the Old Testament. No, they were already veered off from the Old Testament. They were veered off from salvation that's always been by grace, always been by faith, and Jesus is the true God. Now, so yeah, why would I wanna go back to Judaism who rejects my savior and is an anti-Christ religion Why would I wanna go back to that and try to look at their culture and try to see how we can better understand it? I don't need to better understand that. No, people that are Jewish need to get saved. They need to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. They need to throw a Talmud in the trash where it belongs or burn it, whatever you wanna do with it. But out of all the religions in the world, I would say that Judaism and that blasphemous Talmud is the most blasphemous because they are literally saying our savior is a heretic, the bastard son of Pantera, and that he's in hell burning in hot excrement. That's what Judaism teaches. So why in the world would I wanna go back to my Hebrew roots and go back to that? And especially when Paul rebuked Peter to the face and said, why are you compelling Gentiles to live as do the Jews? And so it's a sharp rebuke. I mean, he did it before everybody because he wanted to be known before everybody that you don't, to not compel them to live as do the Jews. Now, out of this, I'm gonna get into some kind of hobby horses, if you will, because if I had a word or a phrase for the Hebrew roots, it's hobby horse. And the number one hobby horse, and you'd say, well, how do I know who these Hebrew roots guy are? Well, when they start telling you about Yahweh, you're like, well, you need to talk about Yahweh and Yahshua. You guys only know how to pronounce God's name. Well, this is called the sacred name movement, okay? And these people are a bunch of idiots, blasphemous morons, foolish, vile, whatever you wanna put in there. And you say, why are you so hard against them? Because they are blaspheming my Savior's name and they're saying that the name of Jesus is a wrong, and they're saying that it literally means hail Zeus or something like that. I mean, just, I'm talking about people that are just intellectually deficit. I mean, they are just completely gone when it comes to understanding etymology or language structure or anything like that, okay? And you say, why do you get up? Because I've run into these people before. And these people are the most arrogant, prideful people you ever run into, and there's no reasoning with them, okay? I believe a lot of them are reprobate. A lot of them, people that got into that, I mean, they just must have hated God and then they just went off into the Hebrew root stuff. And obviously it ties into Zionism, too. But the Sacred Name movement began within the Church of God, seventh day in Christianity, propagated by Clarence Orville Dodd in the 1930s, okay? So this is where this kinda popped out, if you will, which claims that it seeks to conform Christianity to its Hebrew roots in practice. Practice, belief, and worship. The best known distinction of the SNM, or the Sacred Name movement, is its advocacy of the use of the sacred name Yahweh. And notice this, that even it says the reconstructed proper name of the God of Israel and the use of the original Hebrew name Jesus often transliterated as Yahshua, okay? So if you wanna know who these Hebrew roots guys are, it's the people that keep saying Yahweh. You know, Yahweh, you need to be talking about Yahweh and Yeshua, or Yahshua, or whatever. Now here's the thing, if you speak Hebrew and you're a Hebrew person and you're a Christian and you say Yeshua because that's how you pronounce it in your language, I'm not against you. But what I am against is when you say that that's the way that it was written when the apostles wrote it down, and that that's the only way that you can pronounce it if you wanna pronounce Jesus' name, okay? And that you say that Jesus is wrong to say, okay? You start saying that garbage, then I'm gonna nip that in the bud real quick, okay? Now concerning what you would call the tetragrammaton, okay, and you're like, what in the world, are you speaking in tongues up here? Tetragrammaton, if you think of the word tetra, right? You think of the game Tetris, right? The game Tetris, there was four blocks for every little symbol or little type of thing you had, right? So tetra is just, in many languages, you could see that within the word for, okay? So tetra just means there's four letters, okay? So Yahweh, okay, or Jehovah, right, where we get our name in English, Jehovah, or that all-caps Lord that you see there, is what they would call the tetragrammaton. About the tetragrammaton, it says, while there is no consensus about the structure and etymology of the name, the form Yahweh is now accepted almost universally. Did you get that? Everybody accepts it to be called Yahweh, but there is no, there's no evidence for the structure or etymology of that word, why? Because the Hebrew language, it was a dead language for a long time, okay? Meaning this, and you say, what's a dead language mean? Meaning there was no native speaker, okay? Dead language doesn't necessarily mean that you can't speak it, but here's the thing, if you have a language where there's no native speaker of it for a thousand years, and it's more than that, by the way, because it's 1800s when it was reconstructed, so you're talking like 1700 years of no native speaker of Hebrew, okay? And I don't have the exact number, so don't crucify me if it's off a little bit, but you're over a thousand years of it being a dead language, okay? And in 1800s, the first native speaker, basically that was born learning Hebrew and speaking Hebrew and as their native tongue, okay? So I'm not saying that the people that translated the Bible didn't know how to speak Hebrew, right, or to understand it and write it, but what that means is you don't know if the pronunciation is right. Imagine that a thousand years go by, English, no one's speaking English like as their native tongue, and then you try to figure out how to speak it. It's like Latin, Latin's a dead language, right? No one speaks that as a native tongue, so you can guess how it's pronounced and going off of different languages, how other languages were formed to figure out how it was worked. Well, Hebrew has no vowels, okay? If you were looking up Hebrew, and listen, I've looked at this, and I remember Pastor Anderson's learning Hebrew, and I even told him, I said, I have zero desire to learn Hebrew right now. Maybe one day, when I get done with Greek, and I feel like I'm confidently fluent in Greek, that maybe I'll dive into that, but I'm telling you, right now, I look at it, and I'm like, no, not doing it. I'll learn the alphabet, and how to say hello, goodbye, and all that stuff. But all I have to say is that when you look at it, you're looking at consonants, right? Not continents, consonants, right? And basically, by knowing the language, you know what the vowels should be between the consonants, right? So if you were to pick up a Hebrew Bible now, or just read Hebrew, they have these little symbols with the consonants that will tell you what the vowels should be, okay? Does that make sense? So it's kinda like you're looking at a consonant, there's a little symbol on there that tells you that should have an ah sound, or an I sound, or something like that after it, right? So all I have to say is that they don't know how that was pronounced. And you know, a lot of people said that even the people that were writing the New Testament, you know, like the apostles, didn't know exactly how it was pronounced because they basically wouldn't even say the name of God because it was so sacred, you know? It was so sacred, they wouldn't even say it, so they didn't even know how to pronounce it. And so that's why in the New Testament, when they penned down, when it would say Jehovah, they would like, write Lord. The same that you would write Lord everywhere else in the New Testament, okay? So that being said, you know, everybody accepts it as being Yahweh, right? If you were to hear someone say, how do you say the Tetragrammaton? How do you say God's name in Hebrew? They'd be like Yahweh. In Hebrew, people probably speak it that way, but no one really knows that that's exactly how it was pronounced. Does that make sense? Like, we don't know for sure. Here's the thing, I don't think it matters, okay? If you're worried, I'm not, okay? So I don't think it matters. If it did matter, then it wouldn't have been lost, okay? Pronunciation is not something that we should be trivial over, okay? Meaning this is that you can pronounce the name of Jesus in any language you want, and it's still the name of Jesus, okay? So, but what they're attacking here is the name of Jesus, okay? Go to Acts chapter four, Acts chapter four. If I have a disdain for any movement, it's this one right here. Because it is just unbelievably foolish and blasphemous on my Savior's name. I mean, he's given the name above every name. That is the name of Jesus every knee should bow and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father. So in Acts chapter four and verse eight here, because this is a big issue, right? If you're gonna say that, hey, we've been mispronouncing the name of Jesus, we've been using the wrong name this whole time, that means that millions, yay, billions of people have died and gone to hell because they didn't believe on the right name, okay? And so in verse eight here, so Acts chapter four and verse eight, it says, Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said unto them, Ye rulers of the people and elders of Israel, if we this day be examined of the good deed done to the impotent man, by what means he is made whole, be it known unto you all and to all the people of Israel that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him that this man stand here before you whole. This is the stone which was set at naught of you builders, which has become the head of the corner neither is there salvation in any other, for there is none other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved. This is a big issue if you're gonna start saying that this name is wrong, okay? Now, listen, Jesus is an English rendition of his name, okay? So obviously if you were to go back in a time machine and go back to Jesus' day, you're not gonna hear Jesus pronounced like that because English didn't come until way later, okay? But I'll say this, the whole New Testament was written in Greek, okay? And it was the lingua franca of the day, meaning that it was the universal language, if you will, like English is today, you know, everybody's learning it as the second language, that's what it was with Greek, right? And so that being said, the interesting thing about it, if you were to say it in Greek, okay, if you were to say a modern Greek pronunciation of Jesus, it's not as easy as just saying, well, here it is, right? And in English, how do you say Jesus? Jesus, that's the only way you say it, right? Well, in Greek, depending on the position of the name in the sentence, whether it's a subject or whether it's an object or whether it's in a possessive form, meaning that if you said like Jesus' disciples, right? Or the disciples of Jesus, right? There's actually three different ways to say his name, Izu, Izous, or Izun, with an N on the end of it. And in Greek, you not only would pronounce that differently, but there's a definite article to the name. And even in modern Greek today, if you were to say my name you have to say the definite article in front of it. And a definite article can change depending on if it's a subject or if it's an object, okay? So you'll be like, oh, Izous, or you'll say, to Izu, or to Izu. And all that you're saying, what are you talking about up here? What I'm saying is the fact that it's not like it's just one name and one pronunciation and you can grab onto that and say that's the way it should be said no matter what language you speak in. Because even in the Greek language, there's different forms of the word based off of the sentence structure, okay? And so that being said, the name of Jesus, like Izu, Izous, Izun, is used 983 times in the New Testament. And what the Hebrew Roots Movement people want you to believe is that in every single one of those cases, it's false, it's corrupted, it should actually say Yahshua. News flash, in Greek you don't have the SH sound, okay? So good luck trying to find that pronunciation in Greek. I don't care if you're using the Arasmian pronunciation, which is the bastardized pronunciation of Greek that the Bible scholars want you to think that's how it's pronounced back then. Talk to a Greek speaker and see if they think that's the way it was pronounced back then, okay? But either way, do you see how foolish that is? Because even in the original language they were writing it down in, like there was a variance on how it was pronounced based off where it was even at in the sentence, okay? So when you have it in English, what happened was is they took it from English, or they took it from Greek, put it into Latin, okay? Which means you pretty much have Jesus, instead of a J you have an I at the beginning of it, okay? To be like Jesus in Latin, okay? I don't speak Latin, so I don't know exactly how you pronounce that. But all it did from Latin to English is you changed the I to a J, okay? Well, in Spanish it's Jesus. That's actually pretty close to Jesus, right? In other languages it's gonna be pronounced a different way. Listen, it's not about pronunciation, it's about the name, okay? Listen, like I said, if you were a Hebrew-speaking person, and you're like, well, the transliteration of the name Jesus into Hebrew is this, then okay, fine. Or you say, well, in the Old Testament, Joshua or Jeshua was the equivalent to Jesus in the New Testament, and I'll give you that, and this is how it's pronounced. But again, you're using a reconstructed pronunciation of the Hebrew, so you don't know if that's exactly how they said it in the Old Testament anyway. But okay, if you speak Hebrew, then fine. Pronounce it that way. But you know what? If you really wanted to pronounce it exactly like the apostles said, then you would say Jesus, not Joshua, okay? But here's the thing, it doesn't matter. It's not like you need to figure that out, okay? Jesus, you know, I believe millions of people have been getting saved by the English transliteration of his name Jesus, okay? I mean, think about the King James Bible being translated back in 1611 and how many people have gotten saved. The world's population has only been increasing exponentially, okay? That means that as you go down in history, the amount of people getting saved every year should be increasing every year. Like if everybody's getting, you know, if you're doing what you should be doing and all that stuff, because if there was 100 million people back in Jesus' day, and then there's eight billion people today, okay, and you use the same percentage of people being saved, then there should be a lot more now. Right? So I personally believe that there's more people that have called upon the name of the English transliteration of Jesus than probably even in Greek. And not to mention that Greek was being, you know, going into Latin, right, back then, because it's not like they were speaking Greek up to, you know, the translation of the King James Bible, right? Because it was translated into Latin, it was translated into German, it was translated into other languages, and into English, and you know, here we are today, right? So, but that being said, I believe that Greek was the lingua franca of that day. And here's the thing, go to John chapter 19. You say, well, how do you know they knew Greek? Well, let me ask you this. Why was that one of the languages they put on Jesus' superscription? Now, if you have a Bible trivia card, it may say Hebrew, Aramaic, and Latin, but that's not, you know? Because if you look up history as far as, if you just looked up what was the lingua franca, they'll probably say Aramaic or something. But yet, when you look at, you know, just documentation as far as what the Bible was written in you're not gonna find that, okay? Now, and I'm gonna show you here that it makes more sense that Greek was the lingua franca, not Aramaic, okay? Actually, you'll never see Aramaic ever said. You'll see some Aramaic terms, right? Where you can tell that was an Aramaic name that they used there or that. I'm not saying they didn't speak Aramaic, okay? Which is a derivative of Hebrew, okay? So Aramaic, part of the Old Testament was written in Aramaic. So some of Daniel was written in Aramaic, and I believe some of Ezra, I think. So, but you kinda see that Syriac tongue type thing that's going on there with Aramaic. So I'm not saying people didn't speak it, but I don't believe it was the lingua franca, okay? Because that means that the Romans were all speaking Aramaic at that time, right? The Roman Empire, everybody speaking Aramaic, that doesn't make sense. So in John chapter 19 and verse 19, it says, and Pilate wrote a title and put it on the cross, and the writing was Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews. This title then read many of the Jews for the place where Jesus was crucified, was knifed in the city, and it was written in Hebrew and Greek and Latin, okay? So you can imagine why it's written in that, okay? You're in Jerusalem. Who's over top of Jerusalem? Who's ruling over Jerusalem? The Romans. So what was the language of the Romans as far as what they were, what was their main language they were pushing? Latin, okay? And then you have Hebrew, which would be the Jews' language, if you will, and why would Greek be in there? Oh, maybe because it's like the English of the day, right? Meaning that that was kind of like the bridge between the two, okay? Because people spoke Greek because the Greek empire was the empire before the Roman empire, and everybody was basically forced to speak Greek. Why was everybody speaking Latin after the Roman empire? Right? Now go to Acts chapter 21. I just want you to think about this as far as the idea of why you would get the logic that Greek was the all-encompassing language where it's kind of the bridge between languages, right? So in Acts chapter 21 and verse 37, Acts chapter 21 and verse 37, notice what it says here. It says, and as Paul was to be led into the castle, he said unto the chief captain, may I speak unto thee, who said, canst thou speak Greek? Now this is a Roman, okay? He didn't say, canst thou speak Latin, okay? And why, because Greek was the lingua franca of that. It'd be kind of like you pulled someone out that was like a foreigner, and let's say you were a foreigner too, but English is kind of like the second language that everybody knows, and so he knows that that would be the bridge between it and then he speaks to the people in Hebrew tongue, right, in verse 40 there, it says he spake unto them in the Hebrew tongue saying. So when he talked to his people, he's speaking in Hebrew, and then when he was talking to the centurion or the chief captain, he was talking to them in Greek, okay? And so, yeah, it's not that they didn't speak Greek, okay? This idea that they didn't speak Greek or they had to learn Greek to write it down, that's ridiculous. Are you telling me that all the apostles that wrote the New Testament studied up on Greek and learned Greek so that they could write it down in Greek, no, because most, if you look at a lot of letters, who do they write them to? To the Greeks, right? The Corinthians, the Thessalonians, right, and all these different Greek-speaking places, and even in Asia, what do they speak? Greek, and so, yeah, I mean, it was a modern language at that time that everybody was speaking. Now, let's get to some facts here. When it comes to manuscripts of the New Testament, there are over 5,800 complete and fragmented Greek manuscripts of the New Testament in the world today. There's 10,000 Latin manuscripts of the New Testament, which makes sense, right, because obviously the Greek manuscripts are older and they're gonna, you know, basically fall apart. There's 9,300 manuscripts of New Testaments and various other ancient languages, such as Syriac, Slavic, Gothic, Ethiopic, Coptic, and Armenian. You know how many there are in Hebrew? Zero, zero. There are no manuscripts of the New Testament back in that, you know, like, anywhere even close to that time. You say, well, I have a Hebrew New Testament now. Okay, but what was that translated from? They translated it into Hebrew, right? If you picked up a Hebrew New Testament, it was translated either from the Greek or from the Latin or maybe even from the English, okay? There is no evidence that the New Testament was ever written in Hebrew, okay? And you can play the argument whether there was an Old Testament in Greek. That's a whole nother argument that had nothing to do with the sermon, you know what I mean? But, you know, like the Septuagint or something like that or they had a Greek Old Testament back before Christ's time or something like that, you know? But the other way around as far as there was a Hebrew New Testament, nowhere. There's no evidence of that, okay? And so people that say that, when they say that, that there's a Hebrew New Testament, just reject them out of hand. Be like, you're either ignorant or you're a liar, okay? Because there's no evidence of that. Now, let's get into some teachings that they have. Now, go to 1 Corinthians chapter seven. Obviously, they're gonna be about circumcision, okay? Now, in America, in our culture, probably most everybody my age was circumcised, right? When they were a child. So, I mean, I'm not gonna ask for a raise of hands here, but I'd say most of us are circumcised, right? And so, but that's a cultural thing that is not a New Testament thing, okay? And why is that? Because we've been Judaized, okay? Meaning that this Hebrew root stuff happened, what, in the 1930s? And then you have the Zionism stuff that was happening in the 1800s. And this stuff reflects into our society where people are like, well, we're Judeo-Christians. See the melding? I'm not a Judeo-Christian, I'm a Christian, okay? And so, because what they mean by that is Judaism and Christian kinda combine, right? But see, the Judaism of Jesus' day was a false religion. Okay, it wasn't what the Bible actually taught back in the Old Testament, but people like Nathaniel or Apollos, those were the true people of Judea, or people that were Jews that were actually saved, but they didn't believe what the Pharisees and the scribes and all that taught. So, in 1 Corinthians 7, I wanted to show you that in the New Testament, circumcision is nothing, and it's telling you that if you're not circumcised, not to get circumcised, okay? This is blatant, okay? Meaning that if anybody's saying, you need to be circumcised, and even if they're not saying it's for salvation, if they're just saying, listen, you know, you should still get circumcised is what God wants you to do, that's an outright lie, that's not what the Bible teaches. If I, you know, Lord willing, I have boys, I'm not gonna circumcise them, okay? I'm not like bitter against my parents or anything like that, because they did what society was telling them or whatever, and I don't believe they were looking at this in a biblical aspect either, you know what I mean? And, but I don't plan on circumcising my boys if I have boys, okay? And 1 Corinthians 7, verse 18, it says this, it says, is any man called being circumcised? Let him not be uncircumcised. I don't know how you do that anyway, okay? So that's just a thought right there. Is any called an uncircumcision? Let him not be circumcised. Is there any, can it be any clearer there? If you are, if you get saved and you're uncircumcised, then don't get circumcised, okay? And it says, circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing but the keeping of the commandments of God. Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called. So it's basically saying, you know, if you're circumcised, you know, don't get uncircumcised, right? I don't know how you do that, but it's basically just saying it's nothing. It's basically just going back and forth saying, you know, don't worry about it, it's nothing now, okay? You don't wanna try to go back and somehow get uncircumcised, and you don't, if you're uncircumcised, then don't go to try to get circumcised, okay? Go to Galatians chapter five. Galatians chapter five. This was a false doctrine, and it's interesting how these false religions, these false movements are outright rebuked so harshly in the Bible, and it's just like a blatant rebuke, and you almost look at this and be like, how in the world did this, you know, come out to be some kind of movement when it's so harshly rebuked? It's kinda like when you look at the passages about not calling any man father and, you know, not putting anything on, not putting ashes on your face, you know, basically says to anoint your face, wash your face, and then you have the Catholics putting ash on their face and giving us sad countenance, and it's like, you're literally doing the opposite, right? What are you reading? Oh yeah, you're not reading, you know, what it actually says. So in Galatians chapter five and verse one, it says this. It says, stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free to be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul say unto you that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing, for I testify again to every man that is circumcised that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ has become of no effect unto you, whosoever you are justified by the law, ye are fallen from grace. So this is very clear. Basically, if you're saying I need to be circumcised to be saved, then Christ profits you nothing. Because if you try to keep any part of the law for salvation, then, you know, you're not saved, okay? And if by grace then isn't no more of works, otherwise grace is no more grace. That's why they're fallen from grace, okay? Meaning that it's not of grace then. Does that make sense? It's not of grace if you think circumcision, and let's say that was the only thing you thought was a part of salvation besides faith that was circumcision, then you're not saved, okay? Now let's read on there. It says, for we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith, for in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth anything nor uncircumcision but faith which worketh by love. Notice that neither circumcision availeth anything nor uncircumcision. So what did it say? If you're uncircumcised, don't be circumcised. Circumcision is nothing. Circumcision availeth, nothing, nothing. Not anything physically, and definitely nothing spiritually, okay? So in verse seven there, it says ye did run well. Who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth? This persuasion cometh not of him that calls you. You know this persuasion of saying you need to get back to the Hebrew roots, you need to get back to circumcision, that didn't come from him that calleth you. That didn't come from God. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump. I have confidence in you that, or through the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded, but he that troubles you shall bear his judgment whosoever ye be. So this, Paul doesn't know who's doing this, who's teaching this damnable heresy, but he's saying whoever he is, I hope he bears his judgment, right? Notice in verse 11 it says, My brethren, if I yet preach circumcision, why do I yet suffer persecution? Then is the offense of the cross ceased. This is profound to me, because you know what it is? This Hebrew root stuff is a way to lick the boots of the Jews. It's like they wanna get in the club, they wanna be on their good graces, and you know what Paul's saying here? If I preach circumcision, basically I wouldn't be suffering persecution right now, right? Why would the Jews be after me if I said keep the law and do all this stuff that they're saying to do? And so, and then it says, I would they were even cut off which trouble you. So he's basically saying, I hope they're just cut off completely from you. You know, whether that means be accursed, like he says in chapter one, or that just means being cut off from the church and not being around you, okay? Galatians chapter six, he says it again. Galatians chapter six in verse 15. It says, For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature, and as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy and upon the Israel of God. He just said, peace be on those that are uncircumcised and that they're the Israel of God, okay? Because in Christ, there's neither circumcision nor uncircumcision, and it baffles me that anybody that would call themselves a Christian would, could get past those verses and say, no, I still think you need to be circumcised, and if you're not circumcised, you're not saved. I mean, these people literally think you're not saved. I'm not even talking about people that think that you should be and that you're not really following God all the way. These people are heretics that believe in work salvation. They reject eternal security. They reject salvation by grace through faith. They reject the name of Jesus. They are a wicked, abominable movement of a bunch of morons, by the way. I mean, these people can't even reason with just the facts that are laid before them, let alone the scriptural illiteracy that they have. Now, let's look at another one in Colossians chapter two. So I've run into people like this, and not everybody's hopeless, okay? We were actually, we were at the apartment over here in Whitehall, and I think brother Chris was with me and another gentleman, I think one of the Kroskys, one of the twins that were here, but basically, we ran into this door, and it was three black gentlemen, and they were really kind of adversarial at the beginning, meaning they were just kind of wanting to put it to me, if you will, and it was all about the Sabbath, right? So it was either one of the two. They were either Hebrew roots or they were Seventh-day Adventists, right? Because Seventh-day Adventists, that's their hobby horse is the Sabbath, obviously. It's all about the Sabbath day, right? And so anyway, I was trying to diffuse the situation because they were all hot and heavy, like, oh, you guys don't keep the Sabbath, you don't do this or that, and I said, well, if I could show you a verse where it says that we don't need to keep the Sabbath, would you believe it? And they're like, well, yeah, yeah, but it's not there, you know? And so I took them to the Colossians, too. Let's look there real quick, and I'm gonna back up a few verses because I want you to see that circumcision is a physical representation of the spiritual, okay? So the New Testament is really kind of relaying the fact that, hey, all this physical stuff you did back in the Old Testament and these ordinances and stuff like that, they were done to picture the spiritual. But in verse 11, it says, in whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, okay? That's evident, we're talking about spiritual, right? In putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ, buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God who hath raised him from the dead, and you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses, blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross. And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it, okay? Now in verse 16 is really, if you want a heavy hitter for just destroying the Sabbath-holding movement, okay, whether it's Seventh-day Adventist or whether it's just Hebrew roots, it's this right here. And verse 16, let no man therefore judge you in meat or in drink or in respect of an holiday or holy day or of the new moon or of the Sabbath days, which are a shadow of the things to come, but the body is of Christ. And it just got done saying that he nailed all those ordinances to the cross and he triumphed over it, okay? And so it's basically saying let no man judge you on any Sabbath day. Why does it say Sabbaths or Sabbath days? Because there's multiple Sabbaths. You have a Sabbath at the end of the week Sabbath, and then you had Sabbaths which were holidays or holy convocations that were done for the Feast of the Lord. And these Hebrew roots guys literally claim that they keep the Feast of the Lord, okay? I'm gonna debunk that real quick, okay? But I'm really just gonna show you the Sabbath day and how they don't actually keep that. Now, the Sabbath, and I don't know if I wanna really get into this because I preached a whole sermon on the Sabbath and how Jesus fulfilled that, but Hebrews chapter four really gets into the fact of what the Sabbath represents, right? So the Sabbath has a lot of representation. So it basically, one, it represented that God created the earth in six days and rested on the seventh day. So that's where you get that seventh day Sabbath, if you will, right? To represent what God did when he created the world. But then you have the Sabbath which represented them going into the Promised Land, okay? But then you have the Sabbath which represents heaven or eternity, okay? And in all of these, you have the idea of salvation, meaning that we don't work for salvation, okay? We don't work for it, we're resting, meaning that it's all God that does it, okay? And so in Hebrew chapter four and verse one, it says, let us therefore fear, lest the promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it. For unto us was the gospel preached as well as unto them but the word preached did not profit them not being mixed with faith in them that heard it, for we which have believed do enter into rest. As he said, as I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest, although the works were finished from the foundation of the world. For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise and God did rest the seventh day from all his works. So it's basically stating here that we that believe do enter into rest, what rest? Well, it's not the promised land because that has already come and gone, right? Because even Hebrew is talking about how they didn't enter into their rest because they didn't believe. But it's talking about we that do believe, we that have believed do enter into rest, meaning that we're going to rest in eternity, right? And even in verse nine there, it goes on to say, there remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God, for he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works as God did from his, let us labor therefore to enter into that rest lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief. And what is it talking about here? Basically at the very beginning it says that these people are gonna slip. You know, we don't want people to slip because meaning that we don't want you to not enter into rest because you didn't mix faith with the gospel, right? And so the idea is that we're laboring to enter into the rest, not that we get into the rest, but that no man fall after the same example of unbelief, right? So we're laboring, why? How are we laboring? We're entered into his labors, right? We're entered into the laboring, the harvest is plenty, but the labors are few when it comes to soul winning. So, you know, the rest is the Sabbath, okay? So in the New Testament, what's our Sabbath? Death, you know, when we die and go to heaven, okay? So we're working until the night comes, right? Not to mention, the Bible teaches that Jesus didn't keep the Sabbath, right? It said, you know, and the narrator speaking said he not only broke the Sabbath, right, because he healed a man on the Sabbath day, but he called God his Father, making himself equal with God. So that being said, in the New Testament, you know, we don't need to keep the Sabbath. Now if you wanna have a day of rest, then more power to you. You wanna celebrate a holiday, more power to you. If you wanna look at all the feasts of the Lord and say, I'm gonna have a holiday on all those feasts, then more power to you. But as soon as you start teaching that as being a commandment from God, then that's where you're breaking what he said as far as it being fulfilled, it being a shadow of things to come, and that not to judge any man on the new moons or the Sabbaths, okay, meaning the feast of the Lord, or even the end of the day Sabbath. Now go to, I'm gonna show you, go to Numbers chapter eight, that none of these Hebrew roots guys actually keep the Sabbath. It's actually impossible for any Jew to keep the Sabbath right now. Well, it's not impossible, they just don't do it, okay? Their excuse is, well, the temple's been destroyed, okay? Because I'm gonna show you that on the Sabbath day, they need to do an offering every Sabbath day, and none of them do that, okay? And so they'll be like, well, you know, we're doing it as much as we can. Well, partially is not enough, my friend. You don't just partially keep the law. You either keep it or you don't. And so if you don't have a priest to do offerings for you, then good luck keeping the Sabbath day. And they're not keeping the Sabbath. Good luck keeping all these feasts when you're supposed to be doing all these sacrifices for the feast. They can't keep any of them, okay? And in Numbers chapter 28 and verse nine, Numbers chapter 28 and verse nine, it says, and on the Sabbath day, two lambs of the first year without spot, and two tenth deals of flour for a meat offering mingled with oil, and the drink offering thereof. This is the burnt offering of every Sabbath beside the continual burnt offering and his drink offering. So you wanna get back to your Hebrew roots, you better start slaying some animals then. And until you start doing that, you need to shut your mouth about getting back to the Torah and getting back to your Hebrew roots, because that's not what the Bible teaches on that. And so, you know, they're all, we're gonna keep the Sabbath. Good luck, you can't do it. And say, well, maybe we get some priests. Oh, blaspheme God a little more now, when Jesus is the high priest forever after you've ordered Melchizedek. Okay, go to Hebrews chapter seven. Hebrews chapter seven. This movement is blasphemous on so many levels, because they're saying that, you know, because if they were to take it as far as like, okay, we're gonna do everything that it says there, then you're saying that he didn't take away the first and he may establish the second. You're gonna say that there still needs to be more sacrifices for sins and that Jesus didn't do it once for all, okay? So in Hebrews chapter seven, verse 12, notice what it says here. Now, like I said, when I talked to the three black gentlemen, when I showed them that Colossians two, two of the guys were like, whoa. What did I just, you know, like they were just like, oh. But then they were like, well, but you know, then the law would have to change. I'm like, yeah, it would, wouldn't it? And so I took them here. I said, can I, what if I showed you? And they were still kind of a little adversarial about it. They're like, but I said, what if I could show you that the Bible says that the law was changed? Okay, and I took them to Hebrews chapter seven and Hebrews chapter seven, verse 12 here, it says, for the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. And at that point, those two guys were there, meaning that they were like, all right, show us what you got, right? And those two guys got saved. The other guy was like trying to find his book somewhere. Like he was literally in his apartment the whole time, like trying to find this book. He's like, I wish I could find my book. I want to show you this. And I think God was honestly making it to where he couldn't find that stupid book. I don't know what book it was he was looking for. But all I'd say is that the other two guys were like, because the guy was trying, their other friend was trying to kind of like try to rebut what I was saying. And these guys were like, no, he knows what he's talking about. Like they were basically on board. After I showed him Colossians two and I showed him Hebrews chapter seven, they're like, no, this guy's not what he's talking about and they literally switched like that on that and they ended up getting saved. The other guy didn't. Okay, the other guy's like, I wish I could find my book. You're like, good luck finding your book, man. But all I have to say is that, I'm not saying that there's no hope, but see those two guys, I think were kind of reeled into it, but they weren't like hardcore in it. You know, they were hardcore thinking that they were right on it, but as soon as they saw the Bible, they were willing to say, you know what? The Bible trumps it. They trumps what I believe. And you know, there it says it, black and white. The law was changed, that we're not to judge anybody on keeping the Sabbath and that that was a shadow of things to come. And then they ended up getting saved after I went through the gospel. And obviously I went through the gospel with them. I showed them, you know, that they're sinners and that they need to believe on Christ for eternal salvation and all that. But going on from that in verse 18, it says, it says, for there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness in a prophet was thereof. So not only is it saying that the law was changed and the priesthood was changed. Listen, if the priest has changed, for you to say that they are, let's do some sacrifices, then you're gonna have to say that it needs to change back to the Levitical priesthood. What are you saying? Are you saying that Jesus isn't the priest forever after he ordered Melchizedek? Are you saying that he's not the high priest right now? And then go on in verse 19, it says, for the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did, by the which we draw nigh unto God. And in so much as now, or not without an oath, he was made priest, for those priests were made without an oath. So it's basically saying the Levitical priests, they weren't made with an oath. But this, with an oath by him that said unto him, the Lord swear and will not repent, thou art a priest forever after you order Melchizedek. Good night, try changing that. God the Father says, I will not repent, thou art a priest forever after you order Melchizedek. And if you read through the book of Hebrews, how many times have you heard that? Hebrews chapter five, Hebrews chapter six, Hebrews chapter seven, just over and over again, and you're like, all right, we get it. He's the high priest after you order Melchizedek forever. But then it goes on, it says this, by so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament. A better testament, a better covenant, that's what the New Testament is called, and I'm sick and tired of these people trying to drag us back into the worst covenant. You know, if this is better, then that was worse. Why, because it had unprofitableness. Why, because of the men, right? Because it was based off men that had infirmities. The New Testament is based off the blood of Jesus Christ and it's based off him being the high priest of that testament. And it says this, it says in verse 23, and they truly were many priests because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death. But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. So put that in your pipe and smoke it. You know, when Jesus became the high priest after you order Melchizedek forever, that's unchangeable. You know what that means? Is that even in the thousand year reign, guess what? He's the high priest forever after you order Melchizedek. I'm sick and tired of this dispensational garbage of the Old Testament being different, or even after the New Testament. There's no after the New Testament. This is the testament. This is the everlasting covenant, as it says in Hebrew chapter 13. You know what, Hebrew roots, maybe you should read Hebrews, which was written in Greek, by the way. Amen. So go to Hebrew chapter eight and verse seven. And I know this isn't exactly a pleasant sermon, you know, as far as this goes, but you know what, people need to be rebuked sharply. And people need to know how dumb this stupid movement is of this Yahweh, Yahshua stuff, okay. And again, if you speak Hebrew and that's how you pronounce Jehovah and that's how you pronounce Jesus, then that's fine. But these people that are propagating it don't speak Hebrew, okay. And also, if you speak Hebrew and you're saying that's the only way that you can pronounce it, now you're false too, okay. Because I'm not going around saying English is the only way you can say it. Someone's saying, hey Zeus over here is a heretic. Or someone over here is saying, Jesus in Greek is a heretic. You know what I'm saying, whatever language you speak, how it's pronounced in that language, that's fine, okay. Now in Hebrew chapter eight and verse seven, it says, for if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. So that means that the first testament had fault, why? Because by reason of them, right. And it goes into that, I don't want to read that for the sake of time, but it basically talks about how it's because they didn't keep the covenant, they broke the covenant, therefore God broke his covenant with them. Hebrew chapter eight and verse 13, in that he saith a new covenant, he hath made the first old, now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away. They want you to think that it's still there. Man, that's waxing old for a long time. And obviously I've taught on this too that we're talking about the fact that the temple was still up, people were still practicing it, okay. Doesn't mean God recognized it, okay. The minute that Jesus died on the cross and the veil was rent from the top to the bottom, God did not recognize the Old Testament at all, okay. Now I think he had grace with people that were figuring out the truth and all that stuff. At the same time, 70 AD, there was no more waxing old because they weren't doing it after that, okay. It was taken away, all that stuff was taken away, and so it's old. Does anyone call it the waxing Old Testament, or do you call it the Old Testament, okay. And so in Hebrew chapter nine, Hebrew chapter nine, you say, why are you in Hebrews? Well, you know, if it's Hebrew roots movement, maybe that movement should be in the book of Hebrews. That's who it was written to, right. It was written to the Hebrews and all I can see is New Testament doctrine on the fact that, hey, it has changed, we don't do sacrifices, Jesus is a sacrifice once for all, and so if I'm supposed to be finding this Hebrew roots stuff where we're supposed to be getting back to our roots, why can't I find it in Hebrews? And you know what, if it's so important that it's written in Hebrews, if he's writing to the Hebrews, why wasn't it written in Hebrew? Or Aramaic at least, but no, it was written in Greek. So again, you can't find any transcript where it's gonna actually find one, some manuscript that was in Hebrew. I wonder why, why they weren't copying it off in Hebrew, because they're the most turned off to the gospel, they were the enemies of the gospel. I mean, if you were gonna translate it into another language, what would you do? I think you're gonna probably pick another language where people are more receptive. So in Hebrew chapter nine and verse seven, it says, but into the second went the high priest alone once every year, talking about the holiest of all, past the veil, not without blood, which he offered for himself and for the heirs of the people. The Holy Ghost is signifying that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest while as the first tabernacle was yet standing. Notice this verse nine, which was a figure for the time then present in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices that could not make him that did the service perfect as pertaining to the conscience, which stood only in meats and drinks and divers washings and cardinal ordinances imposed on them until the reformation. So unless you wanna say the reformation hasn't happened yet, and no, I'm not talking about the reformation of the Catholic Church here. I'm talking about the reformation, which is the New Testament. Unless you wanna say that reformation hasn't happened yet, then how do you say that that hasn't been done away? It was imposed until the reformation, time of reformation, but Christ being come and high priest of good things to come by a greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is to say not of this building, neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood, and he entered once into that holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. Crystal clear. Again, I've been going through Hebrews here. I didn't go through every chapter, but I could if you wanted me to. But how many chapters do you need me to go through? Hebrews seven, eight, nine, 10. Oh, we'll go to 10. All right, go to 10. Chapter 10, verse nine. Chapter 10, verse nine. I love the book of Hebrews. I memorize the book of Hebrews. And guess what? There's not any Hebrew root stuff in there. Actually, I find quite the opposite in the book of Hebrews. I see in the book of Hebrews where they're teaching them hey, we're in a better testament. Hey, he's taken away the first, that the old is gone. It's ready to vanish away. And so in Hebrews chapter 10 and verse nine, it says, then said he, lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first that he may establish the second. And people get on our belief for replacement theology, if you will. We'll call it take away theology then. Because he taketh away the first, which is what? The Old Testament. That he may establish the second. You know what that means? That he can't establish the second unless the first is taken away. And what they want you to think is like, oh no, the Old Testament's still in place and that we can just kind of hold on to the Old Testament too. You can have both. No, he taketh away the first that he may establish the second. So that means that the first can't be there unless, I mean the second can't be there unless the first is taken away. Pretty simple. Verse 10 there it says, by the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest stand daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifice which can never take away sins. But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right hand of God from henceforth expecting till his enemies be made, his footstool, for by one offering he hath perfected forever them that are sanctified, whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us, for after that he had said before, this is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts and in their minds while I write them and their sins and iniquities while I remember no more. Now where a remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin. You want me to keep reading? Because I can keep going. I can just read the whole book of Hebrews on how this is just crystal clear that the Old Testament is done away. Those cardinal ordinances, diverse washings, meats, drinks, all that stuff has been done away. That's why I'm gonna be eating bacon. That's why I'm not gonna circumcise my children if I have boys. Now if you say, hey, I think it's more cleanly to circumcise, that's fine. I'm not against you. You know, you have liberty to do what you wanna do. And I'm not saying that you're not right with God if you do that. But the Bible definitely doesn't command it, okay? And when it comes to the Sabbath day, if you say, well, I wanna keep a Sabbath day. I wanna rest on a day. Well, more power to you. I think it's a good principle, you know? I think it's a good principle to have a rest day. But once you start saying that you're not right with God unless you keep that Sabbath day, that's where we have problems, okay? Because then you're negating the word of God when he says don't judge anybody according to the Sabbath days or the new moons or any holiday for that matter. So if you say I'm not doing any holidays or I'm doing all the holidays, then more power to you, right? As long as it's not a wicked holiday that's like celebrating something wicked, okay? But at the same time, this Hebrew Roots movement, it's just, I don't know how prevalent it is here in West Virginia, but I did run into a guy down this street where our church is at, and he was walking, and the first thing that comes out of his mouth is Yahweh, you know? And I'm just like, ah, here we go. And then he's like, you can't trust that Bible right there. I'm like, well, he's like, no, you can't trust that Bible. I'm like, yeah, because you believe that it's written in Hebrew originally. And he started huffing and puffing away, you know? He was not happy about my responses. But all I have to say is that I know they exist out here, they may be more prevalent in other areas, but listen, it needs to be nipped in the bud. You will not be hearing me talking about Yahweh or Yahshua. You're gonna be talking about the God Almighty, God the Father, the Lord Jesus Christ, you know? We're gonna be talking about what the English Bible says, and listen, if you speak another language, then, you know, say it the way that you say it in that language, okay? So I'm not against different pronunciations, but what I am against is when you take one pronunciation and you say that it has to fit, and that's the only one that can be said, and no matter what language you speak, it has to be pronounced that way, that is a load of garbage. And I've already proved to you that even in the Greek language, there's different ways to say his name depending on how it's used in a sentence. So you can't just use that and be like, well, it's gotta have the S at the end of it, no? Because a lot of cases it doesn't. Or it can't have an N, no, it has an N and sometimes at the end of it. And I'm sure other languages probably have those same kind of things. I mean, I'm not like, I can speak some Greek and I can speak English, you know, and I've spoke some Spanish and I know it's Jesus, right? But all I have to say is that, you know, that's what you gotta get into. So don't go out here and be like if you, because there is a straw man where you say that, well, you know, to say Yahshua is always bad, okay? What I'm saying with that is if a Hebrew speaking person, that's how they pronounce it, that's fine, okay? But that's not who we're talking about, okay? And I don't think they even say Yahshua, I think they say Yeshu, right? So I don't think they even say it like that. Again, don't quote me on that, but I've heard them say it. I've like listened to people that speak Hebrew and you see the subtitles and you hear them say it and it doesn't sound like what these Hebrew roots guys are saying, okay? So that being said, you know, the Hebrew roots movement, just know that it's false and, you know, Paul, he was, well, here's the thing, the Bible is always up to date. It's always relevant and it's interesting how Galatians chapter two is like looking at today's false doctrine, right? As far as him rebuking someone to the face, saying that you should not be compelling people to live as do the Jews, right? And that is exactly what these Hebrew roots guys are doing, that's exactly what the seventh day Adventists are doing with the seventh day, you know, Sabbath and all that stuff, is they're trying to get them to live as do the Jews. And what happened with Peter, he was rebuked to the face for it. And rightfully so. And so I hope all that makes sense and, you know, if you ever run into one of these guys, I suggest this, you know, feel them out, but ultimately don't waste your time a lot of times with these guys. I mean, you could try, but like I said, those gentlemen that I talked to, you know, I don't know if they were Hebrew roots, they could have been seventh day Adventists for all I know. But a lot of these guys, they have an agenda, they have a hobby horse, they don't give a rip of what you have to say, they're just trying to push down their doctrine down your throat and you just need to walk away from those type of people because, you know, it's just not profitable, so. But anyway, that's the end of the Word of the Heavenly Father, we thank you for today. And thank you for your word. Thank you for the book of Hebrews. And Lord, just a powerful book to, you know, just teach us about who you are, how you perform salvation, the difference between the Old Testament and New Testament, and ultimately, you know, even in this sermon, just debunking some false religion when it comes to this Hebrew roots stuff. And Lord, just pray that you'd help us to know our Bibles and Lord, to win the lost. And thank you for the soul-winning opportunities today. I pray you should be with those that we talked to that didn't get saved but maybe heard some verses and heard some preaching to where maybe if they weren't saved already, then maybe they'd get saved later. And Lord, just pray that you work on the hearts and be with our church members throughout this week. And Lord, just keep us safe. And Lord, help us to bring glory to your name. In Jesus Christ's name, amen.