“Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness.” (Matthew 4:15)

Why did Jesus get baptized by John?

This is how Jesus responded when he approached John the Baptist for baptism. John had been preaching to thousands of people who came from towns and villages. They traveled miles into the wilderness to hear John's teachings.

John was an acclaimed messenger of God in line with the great Prophets. Thus Jesus' baptism by John also put Jesus within this same lineage of messengers of God.

John's Jordan River baptisms and sermons brought large crowds of people to hear from this extraordinary teacher of wisdom. Though the text records John’s humble statement praising Jesus, it is apparent that John the Baptist was a spiritual teacher renowned throughout Judea.

The texts describe John as a devoted and dedicated preacher. His teachings were critical of the Pharisees and Sadducees. He called them a “brood of vipers!” (Matthew 4:7) In other words, he was not a preacher of the established institutional religion of that time and era.

Yet at the same time, John the Baptist taught the same essential teachings of Moses, Abraham, David, Samuel, Eli, Isaiah and so on. In his sermon to the Pharisees and Sadducees, he comments about Abraham as their father - a term often used to describe one's teacher.

Where did John get his authority?

John the Baptist was also the student of another glorified messenger of God. Luke details John’s father, Zechariah, and how John’s birth came to be. Zechariah was a priest “who belonged to the priestly division of Abijah” (Luke 1:5).

Luke further describes Zechariah and his wife Elizabeth: 

“Both of them were upright in the sight of God, observing all the Lord’s commandments and regulations blamelessly” (Luke 1:6)

As Zechariah and Elizabeth were older and Elizabeth was thus far barren, the birth of John was preceded by the visitation of Angel Gabriel, who identified himself, declaring that,

“I stand in the presence of God,” (Luke 1:19).

In this visitation, Gabriel proclaimed that Zechariah and Elizabeth would have a child. Gabriel spoke of this child, John the Baptist:

“... for he will be great in the sight of the Lord. He is never to take wine or other fermented drink, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit even from birth. Many of the people of Israel will he bring back to the Lord their God. And he will go on before the Lord, in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous—to make ready a people prepared for the Lord” (Luke 1:15-17).

Was John Jesus' teacher?

From this statement, we find that John the Baptist was more than the provider of Jesus’ baptism. He was God's messenger. He brought people back to God. This means he was qualified to teach the same message of love for God that Jesus taught:

“They asked him, “Then who are you? Are you Elijah?” He said, “I am not.” Are you the Prophet?” He answered, “No.” Finally they said “Who are you? Give us an answer to take back to those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?” John replied in the words of Isaiah the prophet, “I am the voice of one calling in the desert, ‘Make straight the way for the Lord.’” (John 1:21-23)

Thus John humbly described himself. Though Gabriel may have proclaimed to John’s father the greatness of John the Baptist, John saw himself humbly, as a simple messenger of God. 

The phrase “make straight” - translated from the Greek term εὐθύνω (euthynō) meaning "to lead or guide straight" as a "helmsman" might - is about one's personal life. John certainly was not involved in governmental affairs or crowd control. “Make straight” is a personal process of preparing oneself.

“The way for the Lord” has been assumed to be some sort of description of Jesus' arrival. This is not consistent with the text. The Greek word ὁδός (hodos) means "a course of conduct" according to Thayer's lexicon. 

This means this verse is describing a person's choice to align one's life with "the Lord" - that is, with the Supreme Being.

In other words: John wanted to encourage people to have a change of heart and decide to return to their relationship with God.

These are the teachings common to all of the prophets. Every prophet, from Abraham to Ezekiel, requested from his students that they turn to the Supreme Being and learn to love and serve Him.

Now when Jesus approached John for baptism, John immediately recognized Jesus, and indicated Jesus' position:

“I need to be baptized by you and do you come to me? (Matt 3:14)

Jesus did not accept such a question born of humility. He understood John's authority and was determined to be baptized by John:

“Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness” was how Jesus responded.

What is the purpose of baptism?

We might stop to consider carefully the meaning and purpose of baptism. While some sectarian institutions might consider baptism to be the process of cleansing the sins away from a person, there is certainly another intention involved in the process.

Today sectarian baptism is conducted by a priest or minister, but during John and Jesus' time it was the process of a spiritual teacher accepting followers, who could then become spiritual teachers. It was not a ceremony to join a sect or cleanse sins. It was to symbolize someone becoming a follower of that spiritual teacher.

This process of accepting a teacher, who has accepted a teacher creates a lineage of teachers who are essentially passing on the same teachings.

Moses, Abraham, Isaiah and so many others who were shown to have authority in the Gospels all themselves were followers then teachers within the same succession or lineage of teachers.

John the Baptist was a teacher and follower of a teacher within the lineage of Abraham.

Jesus had no need to accept the position of John’s follower. But he did so to illustrate the process of accepting a teacher within the lineage of God's messengers.

Did Jesus follow John's example by taking on his own disciples?

Once Jesus received the baptism from John he began taking on his own disciples. If Jesus were to gather his own disciples and baptize them prior to his baptism by John, we would probably not see the importance of accepting a teacher.

However, Jesus did indeed accept not just any teacher—not just any Pharisee from the local synagogue. He did not just walk into any church and take the baptism as a mechanical process. He approached a specific person, a dedicated preacher and the student of an esteemed priest named Zechariah, “who belonged to the priestly division of Abijah” (Luke 1:5).

Thus we can understand that Jesus accepted a bonafide teacher before he became a teacher. This is the example that Jesus set for his own students, who eventually also became teachers.

This is why Peter, James, Thomas, John and other disciples began their own ministries after Jesus departed.

Is this about a family lineage?

From Jesus' life we can see that his disciples were not his family members. Yes, there were a few, such as James, that were part of his physical family. But the bulk of his followers were not part of his physical family.

This and other indications tell us that the lineage of ancient teachers is not about family heritage.

Much of the teachings of the Old Testament were presented and handed down through the generations of the teaching lineage of Abraham. Isaac, Jacob, David, Solomon, Josiah, and other saints and teachers who were all students of Abraham’s teachings. Some were related as in the same family, and some were not.

This is also confirmed by the fact that Jesus chose someone who was not his father to take baptism.

It should be pointed out that Joseph did not take up the priesthood or become a teacher. Yet because both Zechariah and John were students before they were teachers, and Zechariah took his training in the lineage of Abijah, we see that the lineage from teacher to disciple was not necessarily a family thing.

As we look deeper into the Old Testament, we find that many of the descendants of Abraham were kings or leaders of their day, but a priestly lineage was present yet often separate from the family. Though we find Jacob, Lot and Isaac were students of Abraham during the time of Elijah, we find instructions were “in accordance with the word of the Lord spoken by Joshua son of Nun.” (1 Kings 17:1)

We also find many other cases where a descendant of Abraham’s family did not “walk in the ways of the Lord” as did others, while many, such as David and Solomon, certainly did walk with God. This confirms it is not simply a bloodline - but a spiritual family.

Were the teachings of Moses and Abraham lost during these times when Abraham's bloodline did not worship the Supreme Being? Certainly not. The teachings were carefully being passed down through the priestly lineage. And it was such a lineage that Jesus decided to take baptism from.

This bears a discussion regarding the current state of affairs among some sectarian institutions. Though we know that Jesus took on and baptized students, and he instructed them to go out and preach the gospel and take on their own students, the lineage coming from Jesus has been given up by ecclesiastical institutions that appoint and elect their teachers much as politicians are elected. Thus the lineage has been effectively abandoned by these organizations.

Was Jesus indoctrinated?

Jesus chose a teacher who was not part of any organization or “church.” John was considered an outcast, teaching the Truth in the desert, where people had to travel to hear him speak. 

John was also critical of the local organized institution and its teachers:

“You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? Produce fruit in keeping with repentance.” (Matt 4:7-8)

These words obviate that John was his own man - serving the Supreme Being - and not part of the establishment. The fact that he instructed them to “produce fruit in keeping with repentance” is clear. He was obviously requesting that they give up their pride and become devoted to God.

“And do not think you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father,’” (Matt 4:9) John said. He made it obvious that producing fruit is connected to devotion to God and not related to belonging to any particular family, club, or group.

Jesus chose a particular teacher of the Truth, not an organization to join. Jesus never went around saying he was part of a particular church or organization either, just as John did. Herein lies the “righteousness” of the situation. Jesus was teaching us by example not to join a club or organization, but to carefully choose a teacher who keeps the Truth close, and focuses on devotion to God.

Jesus' purpose was to serve the Supreme Being and serve God with his activities. He didn't make up his own system or just appoint himself. He didn't set up an electoral college or a council of deacons to pick the teacher through politics. Before he began preaching and taking on students, he accepted a teacher, stating:

“Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness.”

“Blessed are you when people insult you...." (Matthew 5:11-12)

“Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because in the same way they persecuted the Prophets who were before you." (Matthew 5:11-12)

Who would 'insult' Jesus' followers?

In this statement, Jesus is discussing with his disciples and students the challenges of their commitment to following his teachings, and the sacrifices that may arise from that commitment.

Should we put God in the center of our lives, we find others will become envious. Why? Because they are alone and afraid. They do not have the comfort of knowing that they have a Best Friend and Companion in God.

A person who is sincerely seeking to achieve love for God and loving service to God will rejoice when they see another person trying to grow spiritually and helping others grow spiritually. But a person who is not sincere will attempt to reduce those who are.

Why are so many people like this in this world? Because most of us are primarily self-centered rather than God-centered. In this physical world, self-centeredness tends to prevail. And self-centeredness naturally leads to enviousness and self-righteousness.

All of these faults in others are to be forgiven, just as we want to be forgiven for our many faults. Most of us can relate to this. How many of us have not criticized another person? For those who criticize us, we should be merciful. We should be understanding. After all, Jesus came to help us grow out of our self-centeredness.

This is precisely why Jesus and many of the Prophets before Jesus have been persecuted for their acts of mercy in trying to save us from our self-centeredness.

Jesus is reminding his students that they are in good company as they receive the insults and persecution of others, "in the same way they persecuted the Prophets who were before you."

Why does Jesus say 'Prophets who were before you'?

Is Jesus comparing his followers to the Prophets?

Certainly he is. Why else would he compare their situation to that of the Prophets?

While some teachers might dismiss the word prophet as a title primarily belonging to people like Moses and Abraham, in reality, Jesus is using the word “prophet” - from the Greek word προφήτης (prophētēs) meaning one who teaches "by the Spirit of God" - to describe one who teaches on behalf of God. He is referring to God's representative.

And Jesus was expecting his students to teach on behalf of God by passing on his teachings:

"Therefore go and make disciples..." (Matt. 28:19)

And he told 72 of his students to go out to every town and:

"Heal the sick who are there and tell them, ‘The kingdom of God has come near to you.’" (Luke 10:9)

Jesus also accepted that his own teacher, John the Baptist, was not just any prophet:

"But what did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet." (Luke 7:26)

While many believe being a “prophet” means to “prophesize” about some future event, we know that the kind of “prophet” Jesus references are those who have been empowered by the Supreme Being to speak on God's behalf - to introduce people to God. To teach people to love and serve God.

Is this about prophecy?

Some interpret being a prophet as having the ability to predict the future. But is predicting the future really an essential part of Jesus' teachings? Jesus himself taught:

“Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?" Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!" (Matthew 7:22-23)

Thus, Jesus taught that even though "many" will predict the future in Jesus' name, they won't necessarily be welcomed by Jesus. Jesus' criteria is quite simple:

“Not everyone who says to me ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.” (Matthew 7:21)

Certainly, some great teachers can have the ability to predict certain future events. But often this is about understanding the realities of this world. 

But our individual future is quite easy to predict. Each of us is wearing a physical body and that body is destined to die. At that time each of us will leave our physical body.

Yes, this is the future that many a prophet has predicted, yet most of us have misunderstood. The fact that the end of the world is coming for each of us - each of our physical bodies will die within a short period. It may be in 40 years. It may be in 20 years. It may be in a year. Or it may be tomorrow. 

We don't know the exact date our body will die -and the world will end for us - but we surely know it will be relatively soon. The question is whether we have adequately prepared for that day, as the Prophets have taught us to do.

While we can certainly accept Moses, David, Abraham, Solomon, and others as Prophets, we must also accept that there have been many others who have represented God and His Teachings through the ages who have not been mentioned in the Bible. The lineages of these Prophets all originate ultimately from God Himself, yet we can know and understand a true lineage of Prophets by seeing that each taught a consistent message of love for God.

The fact that many of the Prophets were persecuted for their dedication to their teachings is being confirmed by Jesus. Not only did Jesus and Peter and other students get persecuted for their dedication to the Supreme Being, but Jesus' own teacher John the Baptist was persecuted for his loving service and commitment to God.

And we know that Jesus also passed on the core teachings taught by Moses through John as Jesus quoted Moses' message word-for-word in his most important teaching:

"‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment." (Matt. 22:37-38 and Deut. 6:5)

"‘Do not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to ...'" (Matthew 5:21-22)

“You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother without cause will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, ‘Raca,’ is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, ‘You fool! Will be in danger of the fire of hell." (Matthew 5:21-22)

What does 'Raca' mean?

“Raca” is a Hebrew word indicating contempt for someone. Jesus condemns this as something the Sanhedrin—referring to the institutional temple council—can address.

Jesus is clarifying that lashing out at someone with a statement of ridicule - such as "you fool" - reflects an issue we have deep within. This indicates a level of jealousy and hatred that rots within us. This is why Jesus said:

"But anyone who says, ‘You fool! Will be in danger of the fire of hell."

This bears witness to the rotten state of our own consciousness. "the fire of hell" is thought of as a physical place - like a cave with lots of fire and people chained to the walls.

The issue is anger - the opposite of mercy.

Why is anger a problem?

This statement by Jesus to his students refers to the law of love. If we love our fellow children of God, there is no question of being angry and not forgiving them, let alone hurting or murdering them.

That is to become angry with someone without sufficient cause. What cause would be sufficient? Their offending God or His representative, which is essentially breaking the ‘first and foremost commandment,’ to love God and His children with all our heart and soul.

Now sometimes we might become angry with a fellow child of God if they do something that hurts themselves spiritually. This is also “with cause.” 

Becoming angry in this way, out of love, is not the same as saying “you fool” to them. It is like saying, "please come home" - which is what God keeps asking us to do.

What does Jesus mean by 'the fire of hell'?

A more appropriate translation* of the Greek word γέεννα (geenna) in Jesus' statement would refer to "wickedness" rather than "hell" because wickedness relates to consciousness, rather than a physical location.

The fire of wickedness occurs within our consciousness, but burns for everyone around us. Having a consciousness of hatred and envy is in itself wickedness. And this consciousness itself causes a burning of self-centeredness.

What is that burning of self-centeredness? We are speaking of lust and anger. These two sensations are compared to burning because if we have ever watched a fire, we know that fire consumes everything around it.

Next time you watch a fire, look closely at how it consumes its fuel. The flames lap up around the fuel and slowly work in and torch the fuel. But it is not as if the flames are satisfied with what they consume. They remain unsatisfied. They always need more fuel to consume.

This is the nature of lust and anger. Lust, when unsatisfied, can lead to anger. When we want something (lust) and we do not get what we want, we can become angry.

Note that Jesus says:

"But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother without cause will be subject to judgment."

Becoming angry "without cause" relates directly to anger and envy. Being envious means being jealous of someone else because they have what we want.

Becoming envious is our worst conscious development. It is at the root of much of the violence and harm that are done against others. Envy is one of the key reasons for our being here in the physical world, away from the Supreme Being.

Why are we away from God now?

We are here, away from God, because we became envious of Him. Yes, we wanted to have what He has. He has the power, the beauty, the authority, the fame. And we want those things. So we were sent away, tossed out of the spiritual realm - symbolized by Adam and Eve being tossed out of the "Garden."

It is the same with heaven: Yes, there is a spiritual world, but heaven is a state of consciousness.

Consider this verse in Genesis:

The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them. (Genesis 3:21)

The "garments of skin" symbolize these physical bodies we temporarily occupy. We are not these physical bodies. We are the spirit-person within them. We are the drivers of these physical bodies.

This physical world is like a rehabilitation center. Here we deal with the consequences of our envy, lust and anger. One of the reasons we are here in this world is to learn to transcend enviousness. 

As we look around us we have so many opportunities to become envious of others. Others who have become more wealthy, famous or otherwise successful in the material world can become the subject of our envy.

But we are also provided the ability to combat envy. First, the world combats our envy with consequences. When we act out of envy, we typically are met with the consequences of those actions. This can help us learn that envy does us no good.

Ultimately, envy is treated spiritually. By becoming closer to the Supreme Being and developing a relationship with Him.

Why is there so much suffering?

Often people ask if God is so good, how come there is so much suffering in the world?

The suffering of the world is not the result of God’s actions or decisions. The design of the world is set up to teach us and guide us, as well as offer us the freedom to make our own decisions.

As a result of that design, we are also met with the consequences of our actions. We“reap what we sow.” This means that the actions we take now will lead to particular results either here and now, or in the future.

We must ask ourselves logically, why a person would be born into a suffering situation like Darfur? Why are these kids suffering from birth? Did God just decide to punish these people for no reason?

Certainly not. As we will see later, Jesus also addresses this issue. These souls are being punished for the acts they committed in previous lifetimes. Today we experience the hell we caused to others in the past. It is a perfect system. It is a teaching system.

Depending upon the act and the situation, sometimes we receive our consequences in this lifetime, immediately. Prison or war are good examples of punishment for decisions made during the same lifetime. For those who are angry and hostile toward others, that anger and hostility may lead to a backlash of a fight or even escalate into a war. This is the immediate “hell” for these activities.

The world is also designed for love. Caring for others leads to a completely different result as well. When we care for others, this will result in being cared for - if not by others then by God. This too is the design of this world: A perfect world designed by God to teach each and every one of us our own set of lessons, simultaneously.

We might wonder why love is such an important part of Jesus’ teachings and such an integral part of the commandments that Moses revealed. What is it about love that is so important to God?

Is God love?

We often hear vague sayings such as “God is love.” Does this have any meaning?

Yes, God is the embodiment of Love. Love emanates from Him. God is also the most loved, the move loveable, and the most loving.

The real point is that God is a Person, and He unconditionally loves each of us personally. His whole Personality is tied to His love and care for each of us. The spiritual dimension is thus the place where this unconditional love governs all activity. Every one of His actions is founded upon love and compassion.

Therefore, actions of hatred, anger, and spite are simply out of context with His world. They run contrary to His Personality and nature. Self-centered activities of lust, envy, and anger oppose love. Where true love is, envy, hatred, and anger do not have a place. It is for this reason that actions against love have such negative consequences.

We were all created with an innate propensity for love. But each of us also has the innate ability to make choices. This is because freedom is inseparable from love. If God forced us to love Him that would hardly be considered real love.

Those of us floundering among the temporary physical dimension, dwelling within these temporary "garments of skin” made a choice at one point or another not to love and trust God. This decision point is the symbolic story of Adam and Eve.

So now we find ourselves here trying to enjoy as He might enjoy. Here we try to play god by trying to control and dominate others, and gather up as much money, possessions and attention as we possibly can. As the expression goes: "He who dies with the most toys wins." This aptly summarizes our attempts to "win" over our environment by trying to enjoy as a ruler - the expression of our desire to be in God's position.

God did not want to lose us, though. So He also designed a facility to allow us to learn to love. A facility that allows us to grow spiritually and understand that true happiness is having a loving relationship with Him. This is confirmed by Jesus' most important teaching:

“ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind" (Luke 10:27)

*Here is the translation of Matthew 5:21-22 from the Lost Gospels of Jesus:

"You have what it was taught in ancient times, ‘You shall not kill, and whoever kills shall face the consequences. Yet I say to you that anyone who becomes angry with his brother shall be subject to consequences, and whoever calls his brother ‘stupid’ shall be subject to judgment, and whoever speaks godlessness shall be subject to the fires of wickedness." (Matt. 5:21-22)

“Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing ..." (Matthew 7:15-20)

“Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thorn bushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them." (Matthew 7:15-20)

Who are the 'false prophets' Jesus is referring to?

This has been interpreted variously over the centuries - ironically, some by the very type of people Jesus is describing here.

Unfortunately, Jesus' statement can directly be applied to many of today's institutions and their teachers that claim to follow Jesus.

Anyone who reads the news will know of the 'bad fruit' of these institutions. We have seen instances of those in authority among these institutions taking advantage of, and even harming their followers as well as non-followers. We have heard of innocent children being sexually assaulted. We have heard of monies being misused and misappropriated. And in previous centuries, we have heard of entire cultures being slaughtered by those who considered peaceful people to be "heathens."

What more in the way of bad fruit do we need to see to recognize these institutions for what they are?

Leaders and teachers within some of these institutions have abused their influence, and have offended Jesus by using his life and teachings to mislead and harm others. 

In short, these are the acts of "ferocious wolves" in "sheep's clothing." They are today's "false prophets," whom Jesus also called, "blind guides." Just consider, for example, a few of the "false prophets" who predicted the end of the world.

What are their 'fruits'?

As Jesus indicates here, these fruits are symptoms of a larger, deeper problem. While we are in no position to judge, we must heed Jesus' instructions as we consider who to follow, and what teachings we should be following. Should we be following the interpretations of those institutions and teachers that exhibit these bad fruits?

Certainly, we should always be ready to forgive someone who has harmed us personally. That is an act we are obligated to do because the Supreme Being forgives each of us for our offensive behavior.

However, it is not our right to forgive someone for an indecent or immoral act upon someone else. In this case, our responsibility is to help protect others from future harm by informing others about the abuse.

In a criminal matter, this means prosecution under the law. Why are some of these institutions trying to protect their priests from criminal prosecution? Are they saying their priests are somehow above the law?

No one but the Supreme Being is above the law.

At the very least, we can help protect our children and other innocent people from such an institution and its teachers: By discontinuing attendance or donations; and being vocal about anything we have seen or experienced.

Do we need to go into an institution built by thieves and liars in order for Him to hear us? Does God not hear us when we worship Him in private?

To this end we can consider this statement by Jesus:

"And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you." (Matthew 6:6-7)

How do these 'false prophets' get into positions of authority?

Those Jesus was referring to as 'false prophets' were typically appointed or elected by the institutional temple system, headed up by the High Priest. Appointing a Rabbi was a political process. This means the Rabbi or Pharisee would be chosen based upon how they appealed to the High Priest and those other temple officials. The

It is surely wonderful to congregate to share praising God. But selecting a teacher should be done with discretion.

To accept a preacher or priest who is chosen by election - by a council or even appointed by a single person - we are accepting that political process as representing God. Are we sure they represent God?

Such councils are politically motivated. Their interest is in their institution. They want to be sure the leader will sustain the institution in their eyes. This may or may not have anything to do with the Supreme Being.

Only the Supreme Being selects His representative. This is an absolute in spiritual life. To consider otherwise is to not accept the Supreme Being's ultimate authority.

This is also illustrated throughout the scriptures. In the Old Testament, we see repeatedly that each prophet - after having accepted a teacher - established a personal relationship with the Supreme Being. They were empowered by the Supreme Being, which was reflected in their teachings.

But their teachings also reflected those before them. They did not make up a new philosophy.

Ultimately, only God chooses who He wants to represent Him. And this will not be a person chosen by a council. Why? Because the Supreme Being doesn't empower those who have accepted the empowerment of others.

If a person accepts the empowerment of others they have - as stated by Jesus above - already received their reward. Their focus is the authority - not in the pleasure of the Supreme Being.

Thus a true representative of God will always avoid the politics relating to authority. They will follow what pleases God rather than what pleases other people. 

This occurred over and over in the life of Jesus, the life of John the Baptist, the life of Moses and others as they were met with institutional resistance.

This is because the Supreme Being wants our personal love and service. He doesn’t want a groupthink situation, because this is not a sincere relationship. We each need to develop our own personal relationship with the Supreme Being - not with a group.

This anti-groupthink was reflected by Jesus as he chastised Peter when he was curious about another disciple's fate:

"...what is that to you? You must follow me.” (John 21:22)

We should carefully examine our prospective teacher before we follow that person. We must truly understand they represent God before we commit to their philosophy.

How do we distinguish between a 'false prophet' and a bonafide spiritual teacher?

As stated, a clear sign of a bonafide teacher is that they did not make up their teachings. They are passing down those teachings handed down by elevated teachers before them.

This means they were a student before they became a teacher.

A person who makes up their own philosophy should not be trusted. Rather, only a person whose teachings are steeped in, and consistent with, the teachings of not only other bonafide teachers but the scriptures, should be accepted as a spiritual teacher.

Sometimes a teacher will form an institution or organization to help further their teachings. This does not mean they made up their teachings. This may be to further the dissemination of those teachings received and passed on.

The handing down of knowledge from teacher to student is a time-honored and sacred practice supported by scripture. The symbolic process of baptism or anointing (as documented in the Old Testament) is founded upon this practice.

The ceremony itself is not important. Such a ceremony - if it occurs - symbolizes the student accepting the teachings of the teacher.

It is for this reason that Jesus conducted baptism, but also commanded all his followers to pass on the teachings he had given them. They were instructed to receive his teachings, practice them, and then pass them on.

We can see this as Jesus instructed his students:

"As you go, preach this message: 'The kingdom of heaven is near.'" (Matthew 10:5)

This is the same thing Jesus was teaching:

From that time on Jesus began to preach, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near."(Matthew 4:17)

And this is also what Jesus' teacher John the Baptist taught:

In those days John the Baptist came, preaching in the wilderness of Judea and saying, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near." (Matt. 3:1-2)

This is the model for the passing of knowledge that composes a good tree with good fruit. And what is that good fruit? The good fruit is not measured in materialistic quantities. The ultimate good fruit is re-establishing our personal loving relationship with the Supreme Being, and helping others to do the same.

This good fruit is the accomplishment of Jesus' first and foremost commandment:

" 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' "And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'"" (Matt. 22:37-39)

“Why do you entertain evil thoughts in your hearts? ..." (Matthew 9:4-6)

At this, some of the teachers of the law said to themselves, “This fellow is blaspheming!”
Why do you entertain evil thoughts in your hearts? Which is easier to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven’ or to say ‘Get up and walk’? But so you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins." [to the paralytic] “Get up, take your mat and go home." (Matthew 9:3-6)

Who is entertaining 'evil thoughts?'

Jesus is responding to “some of the teachers of the law" making offensive statements about Jesus after he said to a paralyzed man:

"Take heart, son; your sins are forgiven." (Matthew 9:2)

These “teachers of the law” were questioning Jesus' authority to forgive sins. Why? Because these “teachers of the law” were envious of Jesus.

This is confirmed by Jesus' statement:

“Why do you entertain evil thoughts in your hearts?"

Here "evil thoughts" comes from the Greek phrase, πονηρὰ ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ὑμῶν. The word πονηρὰ refers to "bad, of a bad nature or condition: 1) in a physical sense: diseased or blind; 2) in an ethical sense: evil wicked, bad."

And the word καρδίαις or kardia, means "the heart" as well as "denotes the center of all physical and spiritual life; 1) the vigor and sense of physical life; 2) the center and seat of spiritual life."

From this, we derive the common expression that relates to the heart when we discuss love. Jesus used the heart symbolically to refer to the state of one's spiritual consciousness - "the center and seat of spiritual life."

Can Jesus forgive sins?

Why didn't Jesus say: "I have the authority on earth to forgive sins"? Instead, he speaks in a third-person sense - about the "Son of Man." Why not just say "I"?

Because Jesus is referring to "Son of Man" as a role - not strictly himself. If he was the only "Son of Man" then it would be useless to say this. He would just say "I" - or "me."

Jesus is not stating directly that he can forgive sins. He is using the third person - that the "Son of Man" has authority to forgive sins on earth:

"But so you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins."

This means that Jesus is speaking of a role - not solely himself. We might compare this to a statement a military officer might make: "A general has authority to give orders." Such an authority is given not to an individual, but to a role.

Otherwise, Jesus would have said, "I have the authority to forgive sins." This would imply that Jesus has the sole authority. But using the third person means that his role has that authority and that Jesus was not the only person to have been given that role.

In fact, we know that God called Job "Son of Man," and he called Ezekiel "Son of Man." And David referred to himself as the "Son of Man" in multiple Psalms.

What gives the Son of Man this authority?

"But so you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins."

This statement illustrates that the Son of Man has been given the authority to forgive sins while he is in the physical world. This indicates that empowerment by the Supreme Being. Such empowerment can only be given by the Supreme Being, since ultimately it is God who forgives sins.

But further to that, every person is given a limited ability to forgive others. Consider part of Jesus' suggested prayer (the Lord's Prayer) to God:

"Forgive us our sins, for we also forgive everyone who sins against us." (Luke 11:4)

We can know from this prayer that each one of us can forgive others who have sinned against us. This means they offended us somehow, or did something that harmed us in some way.

In the same way, Jesus can forgive others for their sins against him - which there were many who offended him.

And because Jesus was representing the Supreme Being, he could also forgive sins relating to the Supreme Being. This was not just Jesus' ability - other representatives of God (Sons of Man) were also empowered to do this. For example, we find this verse regarding something Jacob (Israel) told his son (disciple), Joseph:

‘This is what you are to say to Joseph: I ask you to forgive your brothers the sins and the wrongs they committed in treating you so badly.’ Now please forgive the sins of the servants of the God of your father.” When their message came to him, Joseph wept. (Genesis 50:17)

Joseph was being empowered to forgive sins on behalf of the Supreme Being. Because Jacob was asking him to represent God's mercifulness.

You see, the Supreme Being is ready to forgive any of us. In fact, He already forgives us. We simply have to accept that forgiveness. As Jesus states, we do that by simply forgiving others:

"For if you forgive other people when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you." (Matt. 6:14)

This means something deeper is going on. It is not that the Supreme Being is withholding his forgiveness for until we forgive others. It is that we cannot receive God's forgiveness until we open our hearts to God's mercy.

And the only way to open our hearts to God's mercy is to give mercy to others.

Jesus could, because he was teaching the Truth, invoke that change of heart in others. This was his empowerment: To change people's hearts.

This is about purification - not like taking a bath - but by having a change of heart that purifies our spiritual self. This purification opens our hearts to God's forgiveness.

Is this about love?

Jesus' statement is all about love. Jesus loved the paralyzed man and wanted him to rise up from his former life. He wanted him to have a change of heart. Jesus wanted to heal the man spiritually.

According to the temple officials, they had a problem because it was the Sabbath. This is a day where people are not supposed to work, but are engaged in spiritual activities - according to the Prophets.

Jesus is performing a spiritual act by forgiving his sins.

Love is not a subject or noun. Love is an action verb, as in "he loves someone else." The subject is "he" and the object is "someone else" in this sentence. And "love" is the verb.

In other words, "love" isn't just floating around the spiritual world as a vague force - as in "God is love."

The reality is that the Supreme Being loves us, and the perfection of our spiritual life is when we come to love the Supreme Being. These scenarios involve a relationship.

Furthermore, such a relationship - love - is inseparable from the expression of that love in the form of loving service. Loving service is the act of doing something that is pleasing to the one we love.

Jesus illustrated his love for the Supreme Being as he worked to please Him:

"By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but Him who sent me." (John 5:30)

"The One who sent me is with me; He has not left me alone, for I always do what pleases Him.” (John 8:29)

"As long as it is day, we must do the works of Him who sent me. Night is coming, when no one can work." (John 9:4)

What is the opposite of love?

Envy. Wanting what someone else has for our own self-centered desires.

This is, in fact, "evil" - "diseased or blind; evil wicked, bad."

When a person is envious of another, they are diseased. This consciousness is the opposite of love.

And this is the consciousness that these “teachers of the law” were exhibiting as they offended Jesus. Their consciousness was founded upon self-centeredness. These “teachers of the law” were looking to gain power and authority among the institutional temple. They were seeking power and authority to satisfy their own self-centered dreams of being top dog in their institution. This is why they were envious of Jesus' real authority and power.

But just consider Jesus' source of power and authority:

"For I did not speak on my own, but the Father who sent me commanded me to say all that I have spoken." (John 12:49)

“My teaching is not my own. It comes from the One who sent me." (John 7:16)

This indicates clearly that the Supreme Being is the source of the power and authority that Jesus displayed as he forgave the man's sins. This authority is derived from the loving relationship that existed between Jesus and the Supreme Being and the fact that Jesus was working to please the Supreme Being - and this is why Jesus has authority. Jesus clearly confirmed this:

"By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who sent me." (John 5:30)

This is also why Jesus can say with authority to these "teachers of the law:"

"the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins."

What does Son of Man mean?

As to the meaning of this phrase, and why Jesus would refer to υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου - the Greek being mistranslated to "son of man."

The word υἱός (huios) can only mean "son" "in a restricted sense, the male offspring (one born by a father and of a mother)" according to the lexicon. How could Jesus be speaking of himself literally as being a "son" "of man" here? What kind of distinction is that? Every male is a son of a man.

The lexicon clarifies the word υἱός in this context, as "used to describe one who depends on another or is his follower." The cultural use of this word υἱός is thus "servant" within the context of Jesus' statement.

And as ἀνθρώπου means "mankind" or "humanity" and τοῦ means "of," we can arrive at the more appropriate translation of υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου:

"Servant of Humanity"

Yes, Jesus saw himself as the servant of humanity. Just as a government worker will sometimes refer to themselves as a "civil servant" or a "servant of the people," Lord Jesus humbly considered himself a servant of all humankind.

This could also be translated to "Servant of the people" - a phrase many use when they feel they are civil servants and want to help people.

Why? Because he was teaching humanity about the Supreme Being and how to love the Supreme Being.

This is the highest service, not only to the Supreme Being, but to those who are being given the message.

Just consider the kind of authority that an ambassador - who might refer to himself as a "civil servant" or "servant of the people" - has when he goes to a foreign country and begins to negotiate with that foreign government. The ambassador, as the representative of his government, is seen as powerful as the government itself. This is because of the authority that his government conveyed to the ambassador.

In the same way, Jesus was the Supreme Being's perfect loving servant, and God's representative. His intimate loving relationship with the Supreme Being empowered him to act on God's behalf. This included the authority to forgive sins.

“It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. ..." (Matthew 9:12)

While Jesus was having dinner at Matthew’s house, many tax collectors and sinners came and ate with him and his disciples. When the Pharisees saw this, they asked his disciples, “Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?” On hearing this, Jesus said, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. But go and learn what this means: 'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners." (Matthew 9:10-13)

What does Jesus mean by 'call'?

Notice that he doesn’t say that "I have come to die for people’s sins." He specifically says that he has come to “call” the sinners. How does he “call” the sinners?

The word "call" is being translated from the Greek word καλέω (kaleō) - meaning "to call aloud, utter in a loud voice." Let’s consider the practical meaning of the word “call:”

Let’s say it is dinner time, and we want the kids to come in the house from their play, and eat dinner. What do we do? We call them.

Let’s say that we want to go out to dinner with a friend. What do we do? We call them.

Let’s say that we have a long-lost relationship with an old friend, and we’d like to renew that relationship. What do we do? We call on them.

Let’s consider what Webster’s Dictionary says about the meaning of “call:”
1) a: to speak in a loud distinct voice so as to be heard at a distance: shout; b: to make a request or demand c: an animal: to utter a characteristic note or cry; d: to get or try to get into communication by telephone; d: to invite or command to meet: convoke; e: to rouse from sleep or summon to get up; f (1): to give the order for: bring into action."

As we review the applications of the word "call" to this situation, it would probably apply most appropriately to: c: "to summon to a particular activity, employment, or office d: to invite or command to meet: convoke e: to rouse from sleep or summon to get up f: to give the order for: bring into action."

What does 'call the sinners' mean?

In this case, what would the “particular activity” Jesus use to “call” ‘sinners’ (like us)? Quite simply, the "call" is coming from Jesus' teachings - the most important of which is the greatest commandment:

“Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.” (Matt. 22:37)

None of this has to do with anyone dying for our sins. The concept of Jesus dying for the sins of future generations was the creation of sectarian institutions to attract followers by creating an easy, yet imaginative way for feeling saved.

This is easy because no change of heart or change of one's lifestyle is needed.

But this isn't what Jesus taught. Jesus was asking us to have a change of heart - a change of consciousness from being self-centered to being God-centered.

Jesus' teaching to love God "with all your heart" is the opposite of self-centeredness. And this requires work. It is not so easy. It requires a commitment to change.

As far as sins, we already know that God can forgive all of our sins, simply by our humble request for forgiveness. This is why Jesus advised his students to pray to God for forgiveness:

"Forgive us our sins, for we also forgive everyone who sins against us." (Luke 11:4)

If God can forgive our sins, why would Jesus need to suffer on the cross for that purpose?

Furthermore, what good is it to have our sins forgiven if we just go back and do them again? What gain is made? Unless we are pursuing the “call” that Jesus is making - the call to return to our loving relationship with God, we will simply fall back into 'sin' after being forgiven.

Who are the 'healthy' and who are the 'sick'?

It is also clear that Jesus is seeking to educate and teach those in need. When he says, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick,” what is he saying?

He is clearly saying that those who are lost need his help. In other words, he has come to bring the fallen back home to God - back to their loving relationship with God.

Then he says, “But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice.’”.

This is taken from the Book of Hosea when God said:

"For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings. Like Adam, they have broken the covenant — they were unfaithful to Me there." (Hosea 6:6-7)

Jesus is explaining the meaning of God's statement with his activities of sitting down with 'sinners.' Rather than focusing on rituals, God is looking for our focus upon Him - He wants us to give Him our hearts and our dedication to Him. He wants us to return to our relationship with Him. And He is looking for those who seek Him to also have mercy upon others - helping Him "call" them home.

This is loving service. Acknowledgment and mercy are actions. They are expressions of love.

And this is precisely what Jesus is doing, and what he is explaining. Jesus is pleasing God by having mercy on the 'sinners' by inviting them to dinner and teaching them about the Supreme Being.

Yes, Jesus was exhibiting mercy in his loving service to the Supreme Being.

“How can the guests of the bridegroom mourn ..." (Matthew 9:15)

“How can the guests of the bridegroom mourn while he is with them? The time will come when the bridegroom will be taken from them; then they will fast." (Matthew 9:15)

Why does Jesus tell this parable?

This parable is Jesus’ reply when John the Baptist’s disciples challenged the fact that Jesus’ disciples did not fast on a day they and the Pharisees fasted.

Jesus is responding to this:

Then John's disciples came and asked him, "How is it that we and the Pharisees fast often, but your disciples do not fast?" (Matthew 9:14)

Fasting in remembrance of a particular prophet or saintly teacher is an ancient custom among many traditional religious disciplines: This is why the Pharisees and John's disciples fasted on days to commemorate Prophets such as Moses, Abraham, or Jacob.

These traditions honor the representative of God or Prophet, often on their day of appearance (birthday) or disappearance (death of their body).

In much of the world, the appearance of Jesus is now celebrated as Christmas and his disappearance as Good Friday. In this case, scholars have determined that these dates do not correspond with Jesus' actual birth or death.  These dates were politically determined by the Roman Catholic institution to coincide with two secular holidays - the solstice celebrations and the beginning celebration of the Saxon idol Oestre or Eastre, respectively.

What does the parable of the bridegroom mean?

The word "guests" is a mistranslation of the Greek word υἱός (huios), which means, according to the lexicon, either a son (in the case of a family) or servant or follower (if not of the physical family - "used to describe one who depends on another or is his follower"). 

In fact, this is the same word translated to "son" in "son of God" and "son of man" along with other uses, such as "children of God" (Matt. 5:9), "your people" (Matt. 12:27), "people of this age" (Luke 20:34) and so on.

As such, "guests" would be an inappropriate translation. As mentioned above, the word relates to someone who is a servant or follower, not a "guest." The more appropriate translation would be "attendants" or "servants" of the bridegroom. This is similarly stated in the wedding parable.

In ancient times, large weddings were galas typically done by wealthy landowners who had servants and attendants. As the couple was married, these servants or attendants took care of things. Over the centuries this custom evolved into more of a family affair. But still even today we find that a groom will often have several "groomsmen" and the bride will have several "bridesmaids." 

Notice the word "maid" in the latter. This comes from the tradition of them being attendants or servants of the bride and groom.

This understanding is critical to the meaning because Jesus is comparing those who are the servants of a bridegroom during a wedding to those who are the servants of the spiritual teacher - the representative of God in Jesus' case.

The point Jesus is making here is that for Jesus’ disciples, Jesus is in the same role as representative of God that those previous prophets had been in. Jesus is stating that there was no need to “mourn” the passing of a prior representative of God if the disciples are in the service of a current representative of God - especially if that fasting interfered with their service.

The analogy is even more applicable when we consider the intimate relationship of love between Jesus and God. This concept of "bridegroom" illustrates a relationship between two persons - a relationship of love that exists between God and His representative.

While some might feel that this role of representative of God somehow diminishes Jesus’ stature or identity, quite the opposite is true. To be the authorized representative and servant of God is the highest position in the kingdom of God, as it relates to having an intimate devotional relationship with God. 

Jesus indicated this esteemed position of being a servant of God in many previous statements. For example:

"For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of Him who sent me." (John 6:38)

and

“My teaching is not my own. It comes from the One who sent me." (John 7:16)

and

"The One who sent me is with me; He has not left me alone, for I always do what pleases Him.” (John 8:29)

These statements by Jesus reflect his self-identification as God's servant.

What is Jesus providing them?

For Jesus’ disciples, Jesus is their access and doorway to re-establishing their own relationship with God. Thus their focus, according to Jesus' statement, should be upon Jesus’ teachings so that one day they might also be prepared to serve and represent God.

This event also communicates the relationship that existed between Jesus and his teacher, John the Baptist. Why would John the Baptist's disciples challenge Jesus on how his disciples acted?

It is because Jesus was also a disciple of John the Baptist, evidenced by his baptism by John. So John's other disciples were seeing themselves as Jesus' peers. And thus they were wondering why Jesus did not follow the same practices with regard to fasting during the commemoration of previous prophets.

This, however, was a short-sighted understanding of Jesus' actual position. They obviously did not see Jesus' true exalted position as God's representative and loving servant.

Is this about honoring Jesus?

We can understand from this event that Jesus was one of John’s disciples. This is clear by Jesus' having traveled to the place where John was teaching, and by Jesus' eventual baptism by John.

We also know from this event that both the Pharisees and John’s disciples were observing the same religious holidays. We also know that Jesus and his disciples also observed these same holidays.

However, Jesus did not request from his disciples they fast. Why not?

Because they were traveling the (hot) countryside by foot and were doing God's service. He was teaching them to put their focus upon the practical matters of serving God. The ritual of observance by fasting was replaced by their practical service.

Jesus indicates here also that once he leaves the planet, his disciples should then honor his birth and death as the others were honoring the prophets before: with fasting.

"The time will come when the bridegroom will be taken from them; then they will fast."

The representative of God's appearance and disappearance should be honored with fasting, prayer and service. Currently many disrespect Jesus’ appearance and disappearance with a mad chase for materialism and commercialism. Both Christmas and Easter are typically celebrated with indulgence and a focus on materialism rather than a thoughtful day of fasting, worship and service.

On the day celebrated as Jesus’ appearance, the sectarian and secular worlds would rather honor a fat man in a red suit than honor God and His representative.

This is truly offensive to God and Jesus - who came to teach us to focus our lives upon God, not materialism. To use this day (Christmas) to celebrate materialism is truly a desecration. 

Jesus instructed his students to love God with all our heart and soul, and not love the world.

“No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment ..." (Matthew 9:16-17)

“No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment, for the patch will pull away from the garment, making the tear worse. Neither do men pour new wine into old wineskins. If they do, the skins will burst, the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined. No, they pour new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved." (Matt. 9:16-17)

What does the parable of the 'unshrunk cloth' mean?

Many have called this a parable by Jesus, but it is really more of an analogy. The difference between a parable and an analogy is that a parable is a symbolic tale - a story of sorts. An analogy, on the other hand, is a metaphorical comparison.

Jesus is making a metaphorical comparison in this instance. He is making a comparison between wineskins and spiritual teachings.

This analogy by Jesus - spoken to the disciples of John the Baptist when they questioned Jesus' disciples' not fasting - indicates Jesus' role as the authorized prophet and representative of God ("Messiah").

Let's consider the meaning of this analogy more specifically:

"No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment"

The "patch" here represents the message of the Supreme Being - which is ever-fresh and applicable to our particular culture, time and circumstance.

The "old garment" represents the teachings of sectarian teachers that teach out of context with the time and circumstances. This was the case with the institutional temple teachers during Jesus' time - who claimed their teachings represented the Prophets and quoted them out of context with current events and issues.

Today, this would be applicable to those sectarian teachers who quote Jesus out of context to his message, and the time and circumstances of today.

What is the difference between specific and general teachings?

There are generally two types of instructions given by a spiritual teacher, not just Jesus, but John and the other Prophets as well. There are specific instructions regarding how to live our lives in current circumstances, current society and situation. Then there are general universal teachings that apply to anyone at any time.

The specific instruction may apply to a particular individual or audience at a point and time. It might be appropriate at that time and circumstance, but may not be able to be applied centuries later, during a different time, circumstance and society.

The timeless universal teaching can be applied to any time or circumstance. For example, Jesus taught his students to love the Supreme Being. This is an example of a timeless universal teaching.

Specific instructions given by a teacher can easily be misunderstood and misapplied if they are applied centuries later.

Timeless universal teachings from ancient times can be applied in later centuries. 

This means that one must be able to distinguish between an ancient teacher's specific instructions and their universal teachings.

This is the topic of Jesus' analogy of sewing a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment:

The specific instruction misapplied centuries later is being symbolized by Jesus as like a "patch" pulling away from an old "garment." The specific outdated instruction will not apply to the current situation. Thus it can be seen as "making the tear worse."

This applies similarly in Jesus' next analogy:

"Neither do men pour new wine into old wineskins."

The "new wine" represents the teachings of God's representative that can be applied in the current time and circumstances. And the "new wineskins" represent the physical vessel - the current representative of God who speaks in contemporary language to a particular time and circumstance.

Jesus is responding to the fact that the specific instructions of a former teacher - remember Jesus is speaking to John the Baptist's disciples - may not be applicable to the current condition - time and circumstance - of the audiences and students Jesus was teaching.

For this reason, the Supreme Being periodically sends His representatives to teach us in different times and circumstances. They may, or likely not, be obvious to the general public. This is because God specifically steers those who are serious to those He sends to earth. Jesus stated this clearly:

“No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them ..." (John 6:44)

We can see that Jesus also applied this by the preaching efforts of many of Jesus' disciples who became teachers after Jesus left the planet. Those that did took on the role of representative of God. This is why Jesus sent them out to preach:

"Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you." (Matthew 28:19-20)

Furthermore, Jesus acknowledges that before him came many Prophets, who also were representatives of God. This included John the Baptist, who Jesus highly praised, calling him:

Truly I tell you, among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist; yet whoever is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. (Matthew 11:11)

It is obvious from this question by John's disciples and the above statements that the holiday that John’s disciples and the Pharisees were observing commemorated a particular Prophet from the past. To honor a past Prophet’s day with fasting was a tradition for thousands of years in ancient times, as documented in various scriptures.

This also illustrates an accepted lineage of teachers - accepted by John the Baptist, the Pharisees, and Jesus himself. This is why Jesus often quoted the teachings of the Prophets.

"No, they pour new wine into new wineskins..."

God uses a living person who is surrendered to Him to communicate to us his message with words and example. We can see this by the many practical teachings made by God's representatives throughout the ages. We can also see that in each era, those teachings were applicable to the customs and the circumstances of that particular society.

While the same overall message can be received from these messages - to love and serve the Supreme Being - specific practical instructions may not apply to a later society and culture.

Assuming a person can distinguish between specific instructions and timeless universal instructions, we can follow the ancient teachers including Jesus in terms of guiding our lives. But attempting to apply specific instructions from 2,000 years ago today can cause confusion and misunderstanding.

What do the wineskins becoming 'ruined' mean?

Many from different sects around the world teach that their particular Prophet or Saint is the only real messenger of God. This may seem loyal, but it is an offense - not only to the Supreme Being's ability to have and send His other servants to save us - but also to those many servants who made a sacrifice coming here to the physical world to help bring us home in different times and places.

The culture and society of Jesus’ time were dramatically different from what prevailed when Moses or Abraham lived thousands of years earlier. The environment, customs, and daily circumstances were entirely different. Yet each was able to spiritually elevate those students who followed them - bringing them closer to the Supreme Being.

This analogy of the "ruining" of the "wineskins") that Jesus was speaking of, has also happened with respect to the use and interpretations of Jesus' teachings today. This comes as a result of political manipulation by ecclesiastical organizations who want to utilize Jesus' teachings to bolster the strength of their institutions and their quest for power and followers.

This was predicted by Jesus - who gave this clear answer:

“Not everyone who says to me ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.” (Matthew 7:22)

Jesus is stating the bottom line here. Having a relationship with the Supreme Being is the goal. (Doing someone else's will requires knowing what that will is - and that requires a relationship.)

Jesus came to teach us - in words and actions - how to love God and do God’s will. And he was willing to suffer to underscore the importance of those teachings. He put aside his own physical comfort in order to serve the Supreme Being, and show us the ultimate love and sacrifice in that service.

But imitation is not the same as service. Service means understanding what the Supreme Being wants us to do now.

Through dedication, commitment, praise, prayer and making offerings to God - all universal teachings, we can connect with God. Gradually, we can change our consciousness from self-centeredness to God-centeredness: We can gradually develop our own personal relationship with the Supreme Being, and make Him the center of our lives.

As this takes place, He opens up more to us, and we begin to know Him more. As we come to know Him more, our love for Him can begin to blossom.

Developing this relationship with God is precisely what Jesus illustrated to us with both his teachings and his ultimate sacrifice. This is why he prayed to God:

“My Father, if it is not possible for this cup to be taken away unless I drink it, may Your will be done.” (Matthew 26:42)

“Take heart, daughter, your faith has healed you.” (Matthew 9:22)

Jesus got up and went with him, and so did his disciples. Just then a woman who had been subject to bleeding for twelve years came up behind him and touched the edge of his cloak. She said to herself, “If I only touch his cloak, I will be healed.” Jesus turned and saw her. “Take heart, daughter,” he said, “your faith has healed you.” And the woman was healed at that moment. (Matt. 9:19-22)

What does Jesus mean by 'faith'?

The word "faith" in this verse is translated from the Greek word πίστις or pistis. πίστις means, "the character of one who can be relied on" according to the lexicon. Thus, being faithful within this context is referring to trust. Being faithful means having complete confidence. Being faithful means relying not upon the temporary trappings of the physical world, but relying solely upon God.

This situation and statement by Jesus indicates that the key requirement of Jesus’ healings was reliance upon God. Jesus simply wanted to teach those around him to trust and rely on God. The message of Jesus was not about his power to heal. Jesus wasn't trying to prove he was great.

Rather, Jesus' healings were meant to demonstrate our need to rely upon God.

Jesus drew his power from the Supreme Being. This is confirmed by many statements, including:

"By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but Him who sent me." (John 5:30)

"By myself I can do nothing" reveals the source of Jesus' ability to heal others. It also reveals why Jesus stated that the woman's "faith" - or trust in the Supreme Being - healed her.

Not only was Jesus' power to heal coming from the Supreme Being. His entire life was focused upon doing what the Supreme Being wanted. Jesus was focused upon pleasing God:

"My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will." (Matthew 26:39)

Jesus' intention to do God's will and not his own will illustrates - what?

Why should we rely upon God?

Jesus' teachings indicate clearly that the Supreme Being is not a vague force or burning bush. He is a Person - albeit the most powerful, beautiful, gracious, intelligent and loving Person.

And this is why Jesus was also promoting the notion of coming to rely upon - trust - the Supreme Being: Because He is trustworthy.

Typically when we put our love upon the forms of this physical world those forms at some point abandon us. We might put our love upon an institution but the institution breaks up. Or we might put our love upon our family, but the family members die. Or we put our love upon our children but the children grow old enough to leave. Or we might put our love upon a spouse only to have our spouse die at some point or divorce us.

So we cannot really trust - rely upon - the temporary forms of this physical world. While most might be good-intentioned, every form of this world - every body - will die. Or that person might leave us before that time.

But we can rely upon the Supreme Being. He is eternal and always with us. He never abandons us - even if we abandon Him.

And that is precisely why we are in the physical world, seemingly away from Him. Because we rejected the Supreme Being and our relationship with Him.

So the Supreme Being set up this physical world - for those who do not want to love Him or serve Him. This is confirmed in Genesis:

The Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them. (Genesis 3:21)

Our physical bodies, and the identities associated with them, are "garments of skin." They are temporary coverings of our spirit-persons. This coincided with the Supreme Being tossing us out of the spiritual realm (Garden of Eden).

So the Lord God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground (Genesis 3:23).

Furthermore, God set up the physical world to be a place where we cannot see Him with these physical eyes - unless God specifically arranges it. This allows us the ability not to have to face God.

Are we hiding from God?

Within this physical world, we can pretend to hide from God. We can pretend He does not exist. Although it is not possible to really hide from God, we are given the opportunity to ignore Him. This gives us the ultimate freedom to choose to be with Him or not.

After all, if the Supreme Being was visible to our physical eyes, how could we choose to ignore Him?

In other words, the world is set up so that we have the freedom to choose whether we want to love God or not - because love by definition requires freedom. We can instead focus our love upon ourselves, and those temporary material assets like money, family, wealth, prestige, power, and so on.

Or we can decide that we want to have a relationship with the Supreme Being.

Not only does this temporary world give us the freedom to choose God or not, but this world is set up to test our faith should we take some initial steps towards Him. Why?

The Supreme Being does not want us to choose Him whimsically. He wants us to be serious about Him. Therefore, for those who make some effort to know Him, He has created various barriers (illusions of potential material happiness) in order to test us. This is because He wants us to be sincere.

Any relationship requires sincerity. If a boy whimsically asks a girlfriend to marry her without being serious, would the girl immediately say yes? Only a stupid girl would marry a boy who was not serious.

And what would the girl do if she wanted to marry the boy but also knew he wasn't serious? She would probably begin to test his sincerity in the hopes that he would realize his lack of seriousness and become more serious.

This is precisely what the Supreme Being does. His physical world tests our faith by throwing all kinds of doubts and temptations at us. He also continues to hide from us, revealing Himself only when we become serious and sincere.

This testing of the seriousness of our trust in God is precisely why modern scientists have come up with theories about how the universe was created by accident. It is the Supreme Being who gives those who don't want to be with Him the means to deny His existence.

Certainly, if the Supreme Being wanted to force us to acknowledge Him and serve Him He could.

But He doesn't because He enjoys loving relationships - not slavery.

This is why Jesus stated:

“ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment.” (Matt. 22:37-38)

“Do you believe that I am able to do this?” (Matthew 9:28)

Jesus asked this question of two blind men who followed Jesus and called out to him:

“Have mercy on us, Son of David!” (Matt. 9:27)

After Jesus went inside a building they followed him in, and this is where Jesus confronted them with the above question:

“Do you believe that I am able to do this?” (Matthew 9:28)

"Yes, Lord," they replied. (Matt. 9:28)

Why did Jesus ask them this?

Jesus was most interested in knowing that they were relying upon the Supreme Being. To trust Jesus is to trust the Supreme Being according to the teachings of Jesus.

That's because Jesus is representing God. He is God's ambassador. As God's emissary, Jesus wants to know if they are trusting in the Supreme Being and not just pretending so they can be healed.

How was Jesus the 'son of David'?

One of the essential points of this exchange is that the blind men greeted Jesus as the “Son of David.”

But we know that David was not literally Jesus’ father. We know that David lived about a thousand years before Jesus’ time - his life is put at around 1040 BCE to 970 BCE. So how could Jesus be David's son?

Yes, Matthew gives a genealogy connecting Jesus’ ancestry to King David. But this hardly makes Jesus David’s son. That might make David a distant relative of Jesus, but this is kind of relationship is not described as being someone's son.

Furthermore, there are issues with the genealogy in Matthew, making the conclusion that Jesus is David's son even more problematic.

The first problem is that according to New Testament texts and their translations, Mary was a virgin. This would mean that Joseph did not father Jesus. If we accept that Joseph did not father Jesus we cannot accept that Jesus' physical body is in line with David's family according to Matthew 1:1-16.

And yet, two verses later, it states in Matthew:

This is how the birth of Jesus the Messiah came about: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit. (Matt. 1:18)

And yet Matthew 1:1 still states, before it lists the fathers and sons supposedly leading up to Jesus:

This is the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah the son of David, the son of Abraham. (Matt. 1:1)

So how could Jesus be the "son of David" who was the "son of Abraham" if Joseph - the son of Jacob the son of Matthan the son of Eleazar and so on up to Abraham according to Matthew 1:1-16 - was not the father of Jesus' physical body?

What was Jesus' lineage?

Furthermore, the lineage detailed in Matthew 1:1-18 is completely different than the lineage detailed in Luke 3:23-38. This genealogy starts backward from Joseph:

Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph, the son of Heli, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Melki, the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph, the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos, the son of Nahum, the son of Esli, the son of Naggai, (Luke 3:23-25)

This lineage continues not just back to Abraham, but also to Adam. The problem is that the genealogy is completely different between Joseph and Abraham. Consider just the portion of the lineage right before Joseph according to the Book of Matthew:

Zerubbabel the father of Abihud, Abihud the father of Eliakim, Eliakim the father of Azor, Azor the father of Zadok, Zadok the father of Akim, Akim the father of Elihud, Elihud the father of Eleazar, Eleazar the father of Matthan, Matthan the father of Jacob, and Jacob the father of Joseph (Matt. 1:13-16)

This says that Jacob is Joseph's father, but in Luke, it says that Heli is Joseph's father. The Book of Matthew says that Matthan is Joseph's grandfather and Eleazar is his great-grandfather while Luke says that Matthat is Joseph's grandfather and Levi is his great-grandfather.

The differences between the genealogies of Luke and Matthew don't stop there. The genealogy is completely different all the way through to David. In Matthew, Joseph is in line with David's son Solomon while in Luke, Joseph is in line with David's son Nathan. And there are other differences as well between the two genealogies.

So they are completely different genealogies to Joseph, and Joseph was not even the father of Jesus' physical body according to the texts.

Furthermore, we find this statement in Luke's genealogy to consider as it rises up the chain to Adam:

the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God. (Luke 3:38)

So rather than Jesus being the son of God, Adam is the son of God? And Jesus, who is by these texts, not Joseph's son, is the son of David - even though David lived 1,000 years before?

Why is the genealogy different between Luke and Matthew?

Quite simply, Jesus has been misidentified and misunderstood by those who have managed the assembly of the ecclesiastical versions of the New Testament.

These texts have suffered from a combination of manipulation, deletion and addition over the centuries, beginning with the Latin version of the New Testament as assembled by Eusebius in the Fourth Century. Eusebius was contracted for this project by none other than the Roman Emperor Constantine.

Can you believe the irony? The same Roman government that crucified Jesus took the opportunity to assemble the life and teachings of Jesus?

Yes, it is not only irony. In fact, the manipulation of the remaining texts continued for at least 200 years by the Roman Catholic institution. There are proven instances of manipulation of these texts:

1) The dramatic exclusion of so many Scriptures such as the Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Mary, which reveals many more teachings of Jesus.

2) The addition of a variety of verses throughout the four Gospels. This includes Mark 9 through Mark 20. This entire section was added after the earliest records of Mark were recorded. Various other verses were added. A variety of single verses were added or deleted as well. Just in the Gospel of Matthew, the verses of Matt. 6:13, Matt. 16:3, Matt. 17:21, Matt. 18:11, Matt. 23:14, and Matt. 27:35 were either added altogether or added to. These and others are documented in the footnotes of the Lost Gospels of Jesus for Matthew and the other books.

3) The Romans and the Roman Catholic Church burnt all the other libraries containing other Gospels that should have been included in the New Testament. Many of these were found in the desert in the Nag Hammadi library and elsewhere. For some, copies have never been found, but we know they existed because the early Fathers quoted from them.

4) The Romans and Roman Catholic Church persecuted anyone that taught anything that was taught by Jesus and documented in other Gospels, outside the four approved by the Romans. People were systematically burnt at the stake or otherwise persecuted. This began with the disciples of Jesus, most of whom were jailed or otherwise persecuted. Peter was crucified upside down. And James was also persecuted.

5) For nearly 1,000 years, the Roman Catholic institution did not even allow the Latin Bible (Vulgate) to be publically available. The only people who could personally read the Vulgate were priests, Cardinals, Bishops, Pope and other officials of the Church. The only way a "commoner" could access the Bible was through hearing selected readings given by Priests during their sermons.

Even today, the Roman Catholic institution will not open its library of manuscripts to the public. They say now that they plan to make some of the library digitally available, but again not to the public. They will only make it available to Biblical scholars. Who determines who is a biblical scholar? Certainly, it is the Roman Catholic institution.

Does this sound like an organization we should trust to reveal the true teachings of Jesus? Yet it is the translations and interpretations of the Roman Catholic Church that have become indoctrinated (i.e. brainwashed) into the consciousness of practically every other sect that sprouted up in the centuries following the Holy Roman Empire.

Most of the early English and other language translations were translated from the Roman Catholic Latin translation (Vulgate). Thus the foundation of the King James and other early English and other language translations of the Bible is the Roman Empire's Latin translations.

Translating any differently often resulted in being banned and called a heretic by the Roman Catholic institution. The prime example here is John Wycliffe.

Could there be another interpretation?

The critical word used in these verses is the Greek word, γένεσις (genesis). This word means “source, origin,” and “a book of one's lineage” according to the lexicon. Matthew 1:16 and 1:18 illustrate that Joseph was not Jesus’ father. This and other inconsistencies conflict with the notion of ancestry.

The Greek word γεννάω (gennaō) used here as well can mean “to father” but also, according to the lexicon, “in a Jewish sense, of one who brings others over to his way of life, to convert someone.” Such a scenario requires providing guidance and mentorship. This would indicate the list documents a heritage of spiritual teachers and mentors leading up to Jesus, indicating that his teachings had been handed down through a lineage of Teachers and Prophets.

The list may better reflect a lineage of spiritual mentors or teachers as indicated in the next verse.

The central problem is the misunderstanding relating to Jesus' relationship with the Supreme Being and the Prophets. The other part of the issue is the mistranslation and misinterpretation of the texts by those ecclesiastical scribes who did not understand the basics regarding Jesus' relationship with the Supreme Being.

A critical element relates to the translation and use of the Greek word υἱός (huios). It is clear from not only the lexicon but other uses of this word throughout the scriptures, that this word does not always mean "son" as in the male son - the physical body - of a father. Just consider these other uses of the word υἱός (huios) (in bold):

"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God." (Matthew 5:9)

"But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous." (Matthew 5:44-45)

"And if I drive out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your people drive them out? So then, they will be your judges." (Matthew 12:27)

Jesus replied, "The people of this age marry and are given in marriage." (Luke 20:34)

"They are God's children, since they are children of the resurrection." (Luke 20:36)

"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when you have succeeded, you make them twice as much a childof hell as you are." (Matthew 23:15)

"Yet to all who received Him, to those who believed in His name, he gave the right to become children of God."(John 1:12).

We can see from these translations of υἱός (huios), that the word doesn't always mean "son" as in the physical male son of a father.

Thayer's lexicon elaborates on this meaning:

Used to describe one who depends on another or is his follower 1) a pupil

and further, with respect to υἱός related to God (typically translated to "son of God"):

"Pre-eminently, as the supreme representative of God"

and

"those who revere God"

and the pious worshipers of God

Thus we can apply the word υἱός to the situation where a person is a follower of another - or dependent upon another. These two applications cover many of the uses above.

And in the case of Jesus being the "son of David" - we can clearly understand this is a mistranslation by those who have misunderstood the devotional relationship between Jesus and David.

This misunderstanding has missed the reality that Jesus was essentially a devoted follower of David.

In this sense, a devoted follower as in someone who is practicing the teachings of David. One who is in line with David's teachings and living those teachings.

What about the misunderstanding regarding the Messiah?

This is the same misunderstanding with respect to those who were "anointed" - which was translated in the New Testament to "messiah."

While the sectarian interpreters of the Old Testament texts would like us to think the "anointed one" relates to someone who was the king of Israel - it actually refers to someone who was a spiritual teacher - someone empowered by the Supreme Being to represent Him. This is confirmed in this statement by God:

"Bring Aaron and his sons to the entrance to the tent of meeting and wash them with water. Then dress Aaron in the sacred garments, anoint him and consecrate him so he may serve Me as priest. Bring his sons and dress them in tunics. Anoint them just as you anointed their father, so they may serve Me as priests. Their anointing will be to a priesthood that will continue throughout their generations."Anoint them just as you anointed their father, so they may serve Me as priests. Their anointing will be to a priesthood that will continue throughout their generations.” (Exodus 40:15)

This word - anoint - coming from the Hebrew word מָשַׁח (mashach) is a synonym of the Greek word Χριστός which also means "anointed". It relates directly to the empowerment of someone by the Supreme Being to be His representative:

"so they may serve me as priests"

This was Jesus' role, and he admitted this was his role:

“My teaching is not my own. It comes from the One who sent me." (John 7:16)

Jesus also said:

"For I did not speak on my own, but the Father who sent me commanded me to say all that I have spoken." (John 12:49)

These two statements - along with many others - clearly indicate that Jesus was empowered by the Supreme Being as His representative. This is Jesus' role and identity.

Was Jesus God's representative?

This does not reduce Jesus' importance. The issue is that when we are reading about Jesus' teachings and his activities, we can understand that those teachings are coming from the Supreme Being, and those actions are pleasing to the Supreme Being. This was confirmed by Jesus:

"For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of Him who sent me." (John 6:38)

"By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but Him who sent me." (John 5:30)

This specifically relates to Jesus' statement above - “Do you believe that I am able to do this?”

Jesus is not feeling that by having faith that Jesus is able to do this is only having faith in Jesus alone. Jesus is referring to the power and authority given by the Supreme Being to Jesus.

And thus believing in Jesus' abilities is believing in the Supreme Being. He said this specifically:

“Whoever believes in me does not believe in me only, but in the One who sent me." (John 12:44)

This is a central point about who Jesus was and where he gained his authority. When Jesus went to John the Baptist to be baptized, this sends the message of Jesus' authority. Jesus was not teaching on his own authority. He was clearly accepting himself a student of a teacher following and teaching the teachings of David, Abraham and Moses. Becoming a follower of John made Jesus a follower of David, Moses and Abraham.

John had also trained under a particular teacher in line with David. This tradition of teacher and student has been an honored tradition and the process for passing God's information and becoming linked up with God. 

We can also see this when Jesus taught his followers and then told them to go out and pass on his message to others - taking on their own students. In other words, Jesus wanted his students to in turn teach and take on students - which they did.

Since Jesus was also passing on the same message as John the Baptist, and John was passing down the message of his teacher, we can know that God utilizes a lineage of messengers as His representatives, in order to pass on the essence of how to return home to Him to different generations and cultures.

Therefore, the authority to represent God is not created by an election by men in an ecclesiastical-political process. It is transmitted and given via a personal relationship between the teacher and the student - and ultimately, the Supreme Being.

This defining of the position and authority of Jesus in no way diminishes Jesus’ position as our savior and master. Jesus had an intimate relationship with God: A relationship that transcends time and space. A special and deep relationship of loving service. 

Through the writings of Jesus' followers, we become aware of the teachings of Jesus. These followers - to the degree they were empowered by their relationship with the Supreme Being - became linked up with Jesus' mission, and recorded Jesus' teachings for us. It is through them that we know today that Jesus' most important instruction mirrored Moses' most important instruction:

" 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment." (Matthew 22:37-38)