BIBLE IN TEN

Sunday, 6 September 2026
 
Therefore, in the resurrection, whose wife of the seven will she be? For they all had her.” Matthew 22:28
 
“In the resurrection, therefore, which of the seven, she will be – wife? All, for, they had her.” (CG)
 
In the previous verse, the Sadducees concluded their statement about the seven sons and the woman who was given to each of them to raise seed in the name of her dead husband, noting that she also died. With their statement complete, they next ask their question, beginning with, “In the resurrection, therefore...”
 
This lays bare their true intent for the account they have presented. Matthew preempted their statement, saying in verse 23, “In that, the ‘day’, they approached Him, Sadducees (saying not is ‘resurrection’), and they queried Him.”
 
Their question is intended to either trap Jesus in a matter of law concerning the resurrection or to make Him concede that because the law cannot answer their question, there must not be such a thing as a resurrection.
 
It is commonly stated that the Sadducees are said to have only held to the books of Moses, the Torah, as inspired. This is only found, however, in the writings of the early Church Fathers, such as Origen and Hippolytus.
 
Josephus, in his Antiquities of the Jews, notes that the Sadducees rejected the oral traditions of the elders championed by the Pharisees. However, he never explicitly states that they disregarded the Prophets or the Writings.
 
As such, it can only be inferred that they did not hold to them. In Acts 23, it says –
 
“And when he had said this, a dissension arose between the Pharisees and the Sadducees; and the assembly was divided. 8 For Sadducees say that there is no resurrection—and no angel or spirit; but the Pharisees confess both.” Acts 23:7, 8
 
As this is so, it is assumed that they could not have held to the writings after Moses because both the resurrection and angels are referred to in those writings. Whatever length they went to in such matters, they sharply disagreed with the Pharisees in points of doctrine. Understanding these things, they next ask, “which of the seven, she will be – wife?”
The answer to the exact question as stated is not given in the Torah. However, that does not mean that the question cannot be answered. If the question is invalid based on its contents, which Jesus will demonstrate is the case, then there is no need to answer the question as given. To finish, they say, “All, for, they had her.”
 
As stated, the question forms a supposed dilemma. If they were all united with her, how can she be the wife of only one of them in the resurrection? Their thought is that if Moses doesn’t address the matter, then either Moses’ writings are incomplete for proper theology, or there must not be a resurrection.
It is a false dilemma which calls for a resolution from only one of two possible answers. This is where the error in their thinking, and thus in their doctrine, lies.
 
Life application: Jesus was presented with a false dilemma by the Pharisees in verse 22:17. They presented a matter concerning paying taxes to Caesar, assuming that whichever answer Jesus gave, it would trap Him. This same avenue is taken by the Sadducees.
 
This is why it is good to know fallacies and then think through why they are incorrect when you are presented with them. What may seem obvious to someone because he is conditioned to think a certain way may actually be completely wrong.
 
When talking to a person about a medical issue, a disagreement may arise over what the doctor has prescribed. One of the people may say, “Of course it is this way. The guy is a doctor! He is the authority. You need to do what he says.” That is a fallacy known as an appeal to authority.
Just because someone is a doctor (or a Marine Corps officer, or a noted theologian), it doesn’t mean he is right, even about matters he specializes in. Truth is what corresponds to reality. If what he says is wrong, it is incorrect.
 
This is just one of innumerable fallacies that we run into from day to day. Refreshing yourself on types of fallacies is important. Jesus was confronted by the Pharisees, scribes, Herodians, and Sadducees. They were all supposed authorities, and yet He was able to see through their attempts to trap Him.
 
If you have time, get a book on critical thinking. It can help you to rethink things you may have in your mind which are not well aligned with a rational view of the world around you. This will help you in your evaluation of the Bible and how it is taught by those you may encounter. Their thinking may be just as awry as that of the Sadducees who have come to Jesus with their challenge.
 
Lord God, help us to carefully consider Your word, rationally evaluating it and thinking about how it is presented by You. What You do is logical and orderly. Therefore, Your word will be this way. Help us to see this and to rightly consider it. Amen.
 

Saturday, 5 September 2026
 
Last of all the woman died also. Matthew 22:27
 
“Afterward, also of all, she died, even the woman.” (CG)
 
In the previous verse, it said that the next of seven sons had his dead brother’s wife to raise up seed, and he died. This continued to the seventh son, all of them having her and then dying. Next, it says, “Afterward, also of all, she died, even the woman.”
 
Note: The Tischendorf and the Westcott and Hort editions leave out the word kai, translated here as even. The Pulpit Commentary says of this, “and seemingly with good reason.” If kai is original as indicated in the Byzantine and Majority texts, it is inexcusable to leave out a part of God’s word. Both doing and saying something like that epitomize the arrogance of some people in how they handle Scripture. As for the verse, the first words say, “Afterward, also, of all.”
 
The point of the words is that the woman was left until the end. There was a family with seven sons, and she was brought into the family, marrying the oldest son. After this, her husband died. From there, the law stated that she was to become the wife of the dead husband’s brother to raise up his name through his seed. This precept was followed, but before a child was born, he too died.
 
This continued through all seven sons. All seven eventually died without leaving a son in the first son’s name. Therefore, all of the players in this scene, whether true or hypothetical, were dead but her. At that point, it says, “she died.”
 
It is a sad note, but one which speaks of the inevitable fate of humanity. Though her life was used within the family in a manner obedient to the precept found in the law, it was not enough to keep her from the effects of law on humanity. As Paul says –
 
“Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. 20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.” Romans 3:19, 20
 
The Sadducees were probably not concerned about these points at all. They have come to Jesus for an entirely different reason. However, these points all come into the larger point of Jesus’ ministry and how it bears on humanity. With their statement concerning her, they finish with a point of emphasis, as if they are sealing the matter once and for all, “even the woman.”
 
Whatever hope there could have been for raising up the dead man’s name is lost with her gone. In Ruth, a similar account is given where a father, his wife, and their two sons go to Moab. While there, the two sons marry women of Moab. Eventually, however, the father and both sons died.
 
Eventually, the wife of the father returned to Israel, and one of her daughters-in-law accompanied her. Through a series of events, she was accepted for marriage to a close relative, if a closer relative would not marry her. The closer relative could not accept the terms without marring his own inheritance. Therefore, it says –
 
“And Boaz said to the elders and all the people, ‘You are witnesses this day that I have bought all that was Elimelech’s, and all that was Chilion’s and Mahlon’s, from the hand of Naomi. 10 Moreover, Ruth the Moabitess, the widow of Mahlon, I have acquired as my wife, to perpetuate the name of the dead through his inheritance, that the name of the dead may not be cut off from among his brethren and from his position at the gate. You are witnesses this day.’” Ruth 4:9, 10
 
In the account in Matthew, with the woman’s death, even the possibility of some broader application of the principle seen later in Ruth—where the name of the dead is preserved through a more distant kinsman—was gone.
 
This is not the focus of the question that the Sadducees will propose to Jesus, but it is a way of finalizing this matter in regard to the oldest son, his name within the society, and how it could be raised up.
 
Life application: Going to Ruth for an extended evaluation of this verse is appropriate, even in the point of law is fulfilled from Deuteronomy through the actions of the family in question. The reason for this is that extended matters can arise which affect points of law within the Bible.
 
Knowing the rest of Scripture allows us to consider what is going on and how those things are unfolding in the process of redemption. The final words “even the woman” provided an emphasis that the Sadducees felt was sufficient to end the matter before presenting their question.
 
Jesus’ evaluation of, and response to, their words will be based on other parts of Scripture they did not consider. Therefore, reading and remembering all parts of Scripture will help you properly evaluate and respond to questions that may be proposed to you. Be sure to read the Bible daily. In doing so, the word will continually stay fresh in your mind.
 
Lord God, help us to keep the word near as we pass through this life. There are so many times when a chance to share what it says arises. Unless we have it fresh in our minds, such opportunities may be lost. Help us to keep this as a priority always. To Your glory, we pray. Amen.

Friday, 4 September 2026
 
Likewise the second also, and the third, even to the seventh. Matthew 22:26
 
“Similarly, also, the second, and the third, until the seventh.” (CG)
 
In the previous verse, the Sadducees spoke of there being among them seven brothers. The first died, having no offspring. Because of that, the wife went to his brother. They continue, saying, “Similarly, also, the second, and the third, until the seventh.”
 
The woman was given to each subsequent brother, and yet, she had no child from any of them to raise up the name of her first husband. Of this, the Expositor’s Greek Testament says, “As Chrys. [Chrysostom] humorously remarks, after the second the brothers would shun the woman as a thing of evil omen.”
 
It’s not a humorous thing at all. Rather, it appears to be exactly what occurred in the account of Judah and Tamar –
 
“It came to pass at that time that Judah departed from his brothers, and visited a certain Adullamite whose name was Hirah. 2 And Judah saw there a daughter of a certain Canaanite whose name was Shua, and he married her and went in to her. 3 So she conceived and bore a son, and he called his name Er. 4 She conceived again and bore a son, and she called his name Onan. 5 And she conceived yet again and bore a son, and called his name Shelah. He was at Chezib when she bore him.6 Then Judah took a wife for Er his firstborn, and her name was Tamar. 7 But Er, Judah’s firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and the Lord killed him. 8 And Judah said to Onan, ‘Go in to your brother’s wife and marry her, and raise up an heir to your brother.’ 9 But Onan knew that the heir would not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in to his brother’s wife, that he emitted on the ground, lest he should give an heir to his brother. 10 And the thing which he did displeased the Lord; therefore He killed him also.11 Then Judah said to Tamar his daughter-in-law, ‘Remain a widow in your father’s house till my son Shelah is grown.’ For he said, ‘Lest he also die like his brothers.’ And Tamar went and dwelt in her father’s house.” Genesis 38:1-11
 
It appears that Judah was truly concerned that Tamar was somehow the cause of the deaths of his first two sons. He wanted to avoid losing the third through another such union.
 
As for the seven who died, this does not mean that all seven died without an heir. The Law of Moses did not forbid polygamy. The other sons could have already had other wives. This woman was given to them to raise up a son for her first husband. What happened to the others in regard to other wives or sons is left out of this narrative.
 
Life application: The Sadducees have brought forward an example of the kind of mess that is possible in a matter of law. Though unlikely and possibly stated as merely an example of what could have happened, it also could actually have occurred. Either way, the point is that there is a seeming void in an original point of the law that had not been fully fleshed out.
 
Such a case is found in the daughters of Zelophehad in Numbers 27. A problem concerning inheritances was brought before Moses, and a judgment was rendered. However, in Numbers 36, the issue was brought up again because the judgment of Chapter 36 raised another point that could mar inheritances. Therefore, another judgment was rendered to clarify and settle that matter.
 
One can see how, when law is given, contingencies can arise that were not thought through or fully fleshed out when the original law was given. It may also be that circumstances arise that necessitate further clarification of the law. The US Constitution has been amended many times because of this.
 
Further, judgments are rendered in courts throughout the land each day, which set new guidelines within the greater framework of the government. Sometimes, they need to be elevated to the highest court in the land for clarification.
 
Understanding this, there is a problem that will be presented to Jesus, which seems incompatible with the way things are, at least as they perceive things. Within the Bible, there are seemingly an infinite number of such possibilities. How can everything in it be reconciled?
 
The answer is that all things are reconciled in Christ. The things that seem to be impenetrable, impossible to fully define, or incomplete are not so when viewed through the lens of Christ. He embodies the Law of Moses, and in Him, all points of the law find their satisfactory resolution. Without Him, it is an impossible body of points and precepts that can never bring restoration or satisfaction.
 
And yet, people cling to the law as if it were a means to an end. Other than in Jesus Christ, it is not. Rather, it is a means to no end. And without an end to its demands, there can be only condemnation. Be sure to stick with Jesus. Give up on any attempt to find your righteousness before God apart from the full, final, finished, and forever work of Jesus Christ.
 
Lord God, Your word is simply amazing. In looking at how it is structured, we find the most amazing completion of the problem that keeps us from being restored to You. We broke Your law, and yet You have restored us through a process that spans thousands of years, and which culminated in the death of Jesus on the cross. What an amazing story. Thank You for Jesus! Amen.
 

Thursday, 3 September 2026
 
Now there were with us seven brothers. The first died after he had married, and having no offspring, left his wife to his brother. Matthew 22:25
 
“They were, also, among us seven brothers, and the first, having married, he died, and not having seed, he left the ‘wife, his’ to the ‘brother, his’.” (CG)
 
In the previous verse, the Sadducees cited the law from Moses concerning the levirate marriage. With that laid before Him, they now bring in a scenario based on that law, beginning with, “They were, also, among us seven brothers”
 
As the basis for their question was the levirate marriage prescription found in the law, we can already assume their question will be based on that, which necessitates an evaluation from Jesus. However, it is to be remembered that Matthew introduced the Sadducees in this section as saying there is no resurrection. That will somehow be connected to their question.
 
Being seven brothers, and their proposal being dependent on the prescription from Moses, the assumption is that these are seven brothers from the same father’s side of the family. The reason for this is that it is the name and inheritance that is being dealt with, something that is irrelevant to a half-brother who is from another father.
 
Their words continue, saying, “and the first, having married, he died.” One can already assume what the rest of this situation will be. They are speaking to Jesus about the levirate marriage. A son in the family has died. The natural assumption would thus be as is next stated, “and not having seed, he left the ‘wife, his’ to the ‘brother, his’.”
 
The man had no children before he died. Because of that, it is the responsibility under the law that the next son would perform the duty of raising up a son in the name of his deceased brother.
 
So far, there is nothing unusual about the matter at hand.
 
Life application: The prescription of the levirate marriage, being a part of the law, was considered mandatory. However, during the later period of the Second Temple, preserved writings note that there was a shift in thinking about it.
 
The obligation is that if a man married and died childless, a surviving brother was to raise up a son in his name. However, the law did allow for refusal, with a ceremony specifying what was to be done. The result, based on the prescription, was intended to shame the one who refused to fulfill his obligation.
Despite this, there came into the sages’ thinking the issue of the practice of the precept and the alternative of declining the obligation. In fulfilling the obligation, the word used to describe the matter was yabam, the act of marrying the brother’s widow. That comes from the noun yabam, the brother-in-law mentioned in Deuteronomy 25:5 and 25:7.
 
On the other side of the matter is halitzah, the removal, meaning the removal of the sandal noted in Deuteronomy 25:9. During the later Second Temple period, there was a historical shift in the debate about this practice. The sages debated whether performing the marriage, yabam, could be replaced with simply allowing the halitzah.
 
The point of approving the the practice of halizah as the standard method of dealing with this was so that there was no shame attached to the matter. This would then allow the woman to marry anyone she pleased, and the name of the brother would end.
 
One can see the problem here. The law sets forth a requirement, and every effort imaginable is made to circumvent the unpalatable precepts. This is seen in the New Testament when Jesus debates with the religious leaders.The matter of the obligation to help one’s aged parents is a prime example. People will openly and with a pious attitude do things that they find easy to stomach or that don’t complicate life, but those things which are more complicated, distasteful, etc., are given a workaround.
 
As seen in the typology explained in the previous commentary, there was to be a sense of shame for not fulfilling the law. However, in Christ’s fulfillment of it, there would then be honor. That is obliterated by those who change the intent of the law from an obligation to a general guide for right living.
 
It is a problem, because the law is written and it is expected to be adhered to. What is interesting, however, is that it was around the time of Jesus that the law began to go away from the original intent. As He is the fulfillment of the typology (as seen in the previous commentary), the precept is no longer needed.
 
It is as if the mental state of the sages could somehow get the slightest hint in their mind that the law was only a shadow of something else. Unfortunately, they never put two and two together to make the leap that the “something else” was Jesus. Because of that, they failed to come to Him. As such, every person in the nation is still bound by every single precept of a law that has already been fulfilled.
 
Their state of condemnation remains because of this. Only when a person steps away from the law through faith in Jesus Christ does the law’s burden come off of him. Despite this, and despite the fact that all of the world except Israel was never under the Law of Moses, people rush to place that burden upon themselves.
This is not clear thinking. Imagine giving up the glory of the cross and asking for what brought about the need for the cross in the first place to be placed on your shoulders! God is not pleased with such ridiculous thinking. Eyes on Jesus! Anything else will lead to a bad end.
 
Heavenly Father, we are so grateful to You for Your open hand of grace. From the smallest flower to the most beautiful sunset, You lavish us with what we do not deserve. And above it all stands the cross of Christ and freedom from the burden of sin. Thank You for Jesus. Amen.
 

Wednesday, 2 September 2026
 
saying: “Teacher, Moses said that if a man dies, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife and raise up offspring for his brother. Matthew 22:24
 
“...saying, ‘Teacher, Moses, he said if anyone, he should die not having children, he will affinitize the ‘brother, his, the wife, his’, and he will raise seed – the ‘brother, his’.’” (CG)
 
In the previous verse, the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to Jesus to query Him, “saying, ‘Teacher, Moses, he said if anyone, he should die not having children, he will affinitize the ‘brother, his, the wife, his’.’”
 
A new word is seen here, epigambreuó, to affinity with. It is from epi, upon, and gamos, a marriage or wedding. This is its only use in the New Testament. Of this word, Vincent’s Word Studies says –
 
“From γαμβρός [gambros], a word used in classical Greek to denote any one connected by marriage' a brother-in-law, father-in-law, even a bridegroom. The word is appropriate here because it refers to marriage between marriage-relatives.”
 
The matter brought by the Sadducees refers especially to a levirate type of marriage. That is described in Deuteronomy 25 –
 
“If brothers dwell together, and one of them dies and has no son, the widow of the dead man shall not be married to a stranger outside the family; her husband’s brother shall go in to her, take her as his wife, and perform the duty of a husband’s brother to her. 6 And it shall be that the firstborn son which she bears will succeed to the name of his dead brother, that his name may not be blotted out of Israel. 7 But if the man does not want to take his brother’s wife, then let his brother’s wife go up to the gate to the elders, and say, ‘My husband’s brother refuses to raise up a name to his brother in Israel; he will not perform the duty of my husband’s brother.’ 8 Then the elders of his city shall call him and speak to him. But if he stands firm and says, ‘I do not want to take her,’ 9 then his brother’s wife shall come to him in the presence of the elders, remove his sandal from his foot, spit in his face, and answer and say, ‘So shall it be done to the man who will not build up his brother’s house.’ 10 And his name shall be called in Israel, ‘The house of him who had his sandal removed.’” Deuteronomy 25:5-10
 
An example of such a marriage is found in the account of Tamar and the sons of Judah in Genesis 38. Of the Sadducees’ question, they continue their words to Jesus, saying, “and he will raise seed – the ‘brother, his’.” This is just what was described by Moses in Deuteronomy 25.
 
Based on this mandate, the Sadducees will propose a question to Jesus.
 
Life application: The Unwilling Brother. Why was this ancient rite included in the Law of Moses? As noted, the precept predates the law. A brother was to step in and perform the duty of the brother-in-law. The account in Deuteronomy provides a short review of the inability of the law to bring forth children.
 
Man, once connected to God, is the dead husband, typified by Adam. The woman represents humanity. A son, in this scenario, would indicate a spiritual reconnection to God. Adam, the man who was once spiritually alive, died and left her no such children.
 
The purpose of Genesis 38 was to set that idea as a precedent. The story there is one that anticipates the restoration of this spiritual connection to God. To understand that passage, refer to the Genesis 38 sermons from the Superior Word. A full typological explanation is provided there.
 
Life under the Law of Moses is typologically given as the brother. It is, ostensibly, available to give children to the woman as a brother-in-law. As it says in Leviticus 18 –
 
“And you will guard My enactments and My verdicts, which he will do them, the man, and he will live in them. I, Yehovah.” Leviticus 18:5 (CG)
 
However, “being under law” does not delight in the woman, and is – in fact – in a state that is at enmity with her. Paul states that explicitly in Ephesians 2 –
 
“For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace.” Ephesians 2:14, 15
 
In typology, life under the law will not perform the duty to give the woman a son. Hence, she performs the rite of disgracing him and stripping him of any authority to ever have any right to her again. However, Christ is of the woman, meaning humanity. And of Him, it says in the law itself –
 
“Then I said, ‘Behold, I come;In the scroll of the book it is written of me.8 I delight [khapets] to do Your will, O my God,And Your law is within my heart.’” Psalm 40:7, 8
 
Because life under the law would not perform the duty, as is evidenced in the 1400+ years of it bringing no one to restoration with God, Christ came to do it. He delighted to do the will of God, and He performs what life under the law was unwilling to perform.
 
In this, He – as a member of humanity – took away the authority of the law and brought it to its end. Thus, life under the law is “The house of him who had his sandal removed.”
 
This is indicated in Paul’s words to those at Corinth, saying, “And so it is written, ‘The first man Adam became a living being.’ The last Adam became a life-giving spirit” (1 Corinthians 15:45). God in Christ is the nearer brother who could, and who did, give a Son, His Firstborn, to the barren woman. From there, life is restored to any who come to Him.
 
The lesson: There are no born-again children in humanity through life under the law, not before, nor will there ever be. Only in Christ is there a delight in bringing children to God through humanity. In this Son comes a new family, among whom Christ Jesus is the Firstborn.
 
Deuteronomy 25 is a beautiful passage, found in the law, that conveys to us the truth that life under law is insufficient to save anyone. Only in Christ’s fulfillment of the law is there any hope for fallen man. That thought is perfectly expressed by Paul in Romans 3 –
 
“But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe.” Romans 3:21, 22
 
The law itself witnesses to what God was going to do in Christ. Righteousness is imputed to those who simply reach out to God through Him, by faith, and accept what He has done.
 
If you have friends or family stuck in some law-observant church, keep pecking away at them. Their time is short, and they have an infinitely high hill to climb going that route. They won’t make it. Trust in Christ, rest in Christ, and put away your futile attempts at pleasing God through any other avenue than Jesus Christ.
 
He is the answer to the problem that separates us from God. And surprisingly, the law itself testifies to that fact. Thank God for Jesus Christ.
 
We are so grateful to You, O God, for sending Jesus to be our Kinsman Redeemer, bringing us back to Yourself through Him. We thank You for the eternal life that is granted to us through what Jesus has done. Thank You for ever and ever. Amen.

Tuesday, 1 September 2026
 
The same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to Him and asked Him, Matthew 22:23
 
“In that, the ‘day’, they approached Him, Sadducees (saying not is ‘resurrection’), and they queried Him.” (CG)
 
In the previous verse, the Pharisees and Herodians marveled at Jesus’ words and departed. Maybe having seen or heard about this, another group comes forward, ready to test Him. Matthew records, “In that, the ‘day’, they approached Him, Sadducees.”
 
This sect was first seen, along with the Pharisees, in Matthew 3:7. This was at the time John the Baptist was baptizing in the Jordan. They were noted again, several times in Matthew 16.
 
Their specific interaction at that time was with Jesus as they, along with the Pharisees, asked for a sign from heaven. Of this group of religious leaders, Matthew specifically notes a point of doctrine that they held to, which is “(saying not is ‘resurrection’).”
 
Surprisingly, this is a new word in Scripture, anastasis, a standing up again. It is from the word an anistémi, to stand up. That is prefixed with the word ana, up, but used in various other ways in a distributive manner. In the New Testament, other than Luke 2:34, anastasis is always used in reference to a resurrection. In Luke 2:34, it says –
 
“Then Simeon blessed them, and said to Mary His mother, ‘Behold, this Child is destined for the fall and rising [anastasis] of many in Israel, and for a sign which will be spoken against...”
 
As for the reason they have come to Jesus, Matthew records, “and they queried Him.” The word used to describe their query is one of deliberate asking. Thus, their query is specifically designed to glean an answer or response from Jesus about a matter.
 
Life application: In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul writes the following –
 
“Now if Christ is preached that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen. 14 And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty. 15 Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up—if in fact the dead do not rise. 16 For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen. 17 And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins! 18 Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most pitiable.” 1 Corinthians 15:12-19
 
The key point of Christian faith is that Jesus Christ rose from the dead. The cross of Christ is the key focus of our faith, and the point on which every Christian’s boast should be directed (see Galatians 6:14), but a crucifixion without a subsequent resurrection is a pointless place to direct one’s hope.
 
Many people have been crucified in human history. They died, and they remain dead. But Jesus was resurrected from the tomb. This event then solidifies the meaning of the cross. Someone can say, “I will give up my life to save another.” And, in fact, many have done that throughout human history.
 
But that type of saving is only to prolong the temporary life we live. A soldier could jump on a grenade to save his fellow soldier, but the saved soldier could be shot dead thirty seconds later. Both are dead and both will remain dead.
 
However, no human can die for another’s sin when they have already inherited Adam’s fallen nature. The sin is there in us from the moment we are conceived. Various pagan religions sacrificed babies, young virgins, etc., all hoping for some type of atonement, but such a sacrifice is ineffectual because of original sin.
 
Jesus, however, was born without Adam’s fallen nature. His father is God. Thus, with a human mother, He is the God/Man. He was born without sin, He lived under the law without sinning, and He died in fulfilment of the law, taking away sin committed under law for those who trust in Him.
 
The resurrection proves that our sin is atoned for. It also proves that we are eternally saved (because we are no longer under law, and it is by law that sin is imputed). The resurrection also proves that Jesus is God. As all humans who descend from Adam have sin through their father, and because Jesus resurrected, it proves that Jesus’ Father is God.
 
As all beings reproduce after their own kind, the resurrection provides irrefutable proof that Jesus Christ is the God/Man. Hope? Hope? We have the greatest hope of all when we put our trust in Jesus Christ. Nothing can ever separate us from God again when we come to Him through Jesus Christ.
 
Let us remember this as we pass through this world of toil, trouble, trial, and times of temptation or turmoil. These things are bound to come, but Christ has overcome the world. For those who are in Him, they too have overcome the world.
 
Praise God for Jesus Christ our Lord!
 
We praise and exalt You for what You have done for us, O God. The majesty of what You have done is more wonderful than all else. Thank You for the giving of Jesus Christ our Lord, in whom, we now have the hope of the resurrection to eternal life. Amen.
 

Monday, 31 August 2026
 
When they had heard these words, they marveled, and left Him and went their way. Matthew 22:22
 
“And having heard, they wondered, and having left Him, they departed.” (CG).
 
In the previous verse, Jesus told those He was talking to that, based on the image and inscription of their own coin, they needed to render unto Caesar what was to Caesar, and to God what was to God. With that stated, it next says, “And having heard, they wondered.”
 
Once the thought-process of such a statement is known, people can easily slip into the thinking that Jesus’ words would have been easily presented and that anyone could come to the same conclusion. “Surely I would have figured that out!” But this is not true.
 
The dismissal of what Jesus said in this manner will usually come from those who already have a bias against the Christian message. In other words, a rabbi may be shown this account, and his answer might be, “Sure, sure. We already know this. We’ve been living it out for two thousand years. There is nothing new in this.”
 
But such words dismiss the clear and confident intent of the plan brought forth by the Pharisees and the Herodians. They were positive Jesus would trip up over their question. It takes a very well contemplated response, something not usually forthcoming when asked on the spot about such a matter, to be able to think this through quickly and clearly.
 
Of course, hindsight is 20/20, and we as humans are quick to think that we would have been just as quick at giving such a response. As for those who proposed the question to Jesus, they knew the truth of the matter.
 
The Pharisees could not hint at Jesus’ words being inappropriate within a religious context. The Herodians were completely shut down in their attempt to accuse Jesus of sedition. Therefore, Matthew records, “and having left Him, they departed.”
 
What else could they do? They were embarrassed into silence. If any of their own disciples were present, they had embarrassed themselves in front of them. With tails between legs, they turned and scampered.
 
Life application: Throughout the years, there have been great thinkers who can easily think through difficult issues on the spot. If a technical challenge is needed to overcome a situation, someone may be right on the spot to suggest something that will save the day.
 
In a military setting, there may be a seemingly impossible situation. And yet, the skill of a single man in understanding the layout of the land may change the course of the battle. Sgt Alvin York was able to do this in WWI.
 
When facing the onslaught of moral depravity within a society, there may be a handful of voices from people who can quickly and reasonably speak against the tide of perverse thinking of people who come forward with arguments as to why what they are doing is acceptable.
 
In America today, there are a few such voices, mostly Christians or Jews, who will engage the masses in open discussions about moral issues. In such cases, their logic is irrefutable, and it quickly destroys the arguments of those with opposing views.
 
Unfortunately, such moral thinkers are often targeted by those who disagree with them. Their websites are attacked, their video platforms are demonetized or scrubbed entirely, their lives are threatened, and the forums where they debate are often shouted down or shut down entirely, even before they get a chance to speak.
 
In the case of clear biblical thinking, there are those who know what the Bible says, in its proper context, and without irrational thinking being included in their presentations. When this is the case, those who base their theology and doctrine on emotions, presuppositions, or biases (such as what is the state of Israel, whether a single version of the Bible is the only true word, or the timing of when the rapture will occur), will openly attack those holding to the proper view, calling them false teachers or heretics.
 
Jesus was eventually crucified for His proper stance on what was occurring in His society and in regard to the Law of Moses. Over the years, this has been the case with many of His true followers. Hence, the term martyr is well known to those who remember Christian history.
 
As believers in Jesus Christ, we should hold fast to the word of God, be firm in our moral convictions, and be ready to defend what we believe. We may not be as quick or clear-thinking as some people, but that is why they are in the public spotlight, and we are not. If their words are in accord with what is biblically sound, we should applaud them.
 
Matters such as creation versus evolution, support for Israel or standing against it, homosexuality within the church, and so forth, are all things we should have a firm stand on, even if we are not quick enough to publicly enter into a debate about them.
 
Lord God, thank You for those who rightly interpret and divide Your word, including those who can do so in open forums where others are watching. Help us to consider such arguments and mold our thinking to what is pure, right, moral, and just. To Your glory, we pray. Amen.
 

Sunday, 30 August 2026
 
They said to Him, “Caesar’s.”And He said to them, “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” Matthew 22:21
 
“They say to Him, ‘Caesar’s.’ Then He says to them, ‘You render, therefore, those Caesar’s to Caesar, and those the ‘God’s’ to God.’” (CG).
 
In the previous verse, Jesus asked the Pharisees and Herodians whose image and inscription were on the coin. In response to that, “They say to Him, ‘Caesar’s.’”
 
Rather than holding up the coin and saying, “Look, this is Caesar’s image and inscription,” Jesus had them respond to His question. By doing so, they have, with their own mouths, affirmed that the coin they used belonged not to the Jewish nation, but to their overlords, the Romans.
 
Therefore, their thought of trapping Jesus in His words will fail. Their question to Him in Verse 17 was not an either/or response after all. Instead, the correct response, when thought through, is seen in the continued exchange, “Then He says to them, ‘You render, therefore, those Caesar’s to Caesar.’”
 
The nation was subject to Rome. They used its currency, they lived by whatever laws were imposed on them, and they could be elevated in the Roman society or cast into Roman prisons. The coin in Jesus’ hand confirmed this. To say otherwise would be an act of rebellion against those who ruled over them. Along with that thought, Jesus says, “and those the ‘God’s’ to God.”
 
To the Jews, whether they believed in God or not, they knew that the culture of the nation was established on the premise that there is a God and that He had given His law through Moses to the nation. Nobody would deny that. Anyone who spoke against it could be punished up to death, even if the death penalty had been reserved for Rome to mete out.
 
As this is so, their laws mandated many things that the people were expected to do. This included the sacrificial system, the tithes and offerings, observing particular days like the Sabbath and the Day of Atonement, etc. Even the garments they wore had aspects mandated in the Law of Moses.
 
The crops they could grow in a field and the types of food they could eat were also governed by the law. Obedience to the law was considered rendering to God because their law came from Him. These points were undeniable, and these leaders’ attempts to trap Jesus in His words had failed, epically.
 
Life application: If these men had taken .00156 seconds to think through what their own Scriptures said, they would have seen the error in their thinking concerning an either/or answer to the question they asked of Jesus. In Jeremiah 29, it says –
 
“Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, to all who were carried away captive, whom I have caused to be carried away from Jerusalem to Babylon:5 Build houses and dwell in them; plant gardens and eat their fruit. 6 Take wives and beget sons and daughters; and take wives for your sons and give your daughters to husbands, so that they may bear sons and daughters—that you may be increased there, and not diminished. 7 And seek the peace of the city where I have caused you to be carried away captive, and pray to the Lord for it; for in its peace you will have peace. 8 For thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: Do not let your prophets and your diviners who are in your midst deceive you, nor listen to your dreams which you cause to be dreamed. 9 For they prophesy falsely to you in My name; I have not sent them, says the Lord.” Jeremiah 29:4-9
 
The fate of the people, be it living in freedom, in captivity, or under the rule of their enemies in their own land, was solely at the will of the Lord. This is recorded throughout Judges and onward. The word of the Lord through Jeremiah explicitly notes this.
 
It is the Lord who sent them into exile. He did it by the hand of Nebuchadnezzar, and their exile was to Babylon. This wasn’t an aberration. Rather, it was prophesied in advance, and even the number of years the exile would continue was told to them by Jeremiah in his words to them.
 
During the time of that exile, at the Lord’s direction, they were expected to render unto Babylon the things that belonged to Babylon. Babylon was God’s chosen instrument to chastise Israel for its aberrant ways. If they rebelled against the authority placed over them, there would be consequences.
 
The Lord instructed them to live in peace in their new land. To disobey that would be to incur the Lord’s wrath. Likewise, they would incur the wrath of those who held them captive. That truth has not changed to this day. Whether they accept their state in the world or not, and whether they believe in the Lord or not, they are to render unto whatever nation they live in what belongs to that nation, and they are to render unto God what belongs to Him.
 
The same is true for believers. Paul says in Romans 13 –
 
“Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves.” Romans 13:1, 2
 
Stand on the word when such things arise. God has ordained your time, place, and station in life. Live within the framework of those things in a manner that will honor Him.
 
Lord God, in so many ways, You have taken the pressure off us. When Your word tells us to do something, all we need to do is be obedient to what You have said. Help us to remember this, complying with such things according to Your will for each of us. Amen.

Saturday, 29 August 2026
 
And He said to them, “Whose image and inscription is this?” Matthew 22:20
 
“And He says to them, ‘Whose, the ‘likeness, this’? And whose inscription?’” (CG)
 
In the previous verse, Jesus asked for the coin of the census. Complying with His request, they offered Him a denarius. With that now in His hand, Matthew next records, “And He says to them, ‘Whose, the ‘likeness, this’?’”
 
This is a new word, eikon, which signifies a likeness. HELPS Word Studies says “properly, ‘mirror-like representation,’ referring to what is very close in resemblance (like a ‘high-definition’ projection, as defined by the context).”
 
In 2 Corinthians 4:4, it is used of Christ, “who is the image of God.” That thought is expressed again in Colossians 3:14. In this word, one can see the etymological ancestor of our modern word icon. That passed into English through the Late Latin icon during the 1500s. Jesus’ question specifically asks of a person who is stamped onto the coin. From there, He adds, “And whose inscription?”
 
Another new word is seen, epigraphé, an inscription. The word is derived from epi, upon, and graphó, to grave, particularly to write. Thus, a literal translation would be to upon-write. However, this is what an inscription is: something written upon an object, paper, etc. This word is found only in the synoptic gospels.
 
Some older translations say “superscription,” but that is technically off. A superscription is written on the top, outside, or above something else, while an inscription is carved, engraved, or written directly onto a surface or into the main body of an object. One can see the etymological granddaddy of our modern word, epigraph.
 
Of this coin, Vincent’s Word Studies says –
 
“Images on coins were not approved by the Jews. Out of respect to this prejudice none of the earlier Herods had his own image impressed on them. Herod Agrippa I., who murdered James and imprisoned Peter, introduced the practice. The coin shown to Christ must either have been struck in Rome, or else was one of the Tetrarch Philip, who was the first to introduce the image of Caesar on strictly Jewish coins.”
 
Life application: This is undoubtedly a Roman coin. Jewish coins were not minted with human figures due to prohibitions found in the Law of Moses. In Deuteronomy 5:8, it says, “You shall not make for yourself a carved image—any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.”
 
The reason for this goes back to Deuteronomy 4:12, “And the Lord spoke to you out of the midst of the fire. You heard the sound of the words, but saw no form; you only heard a voice.”
 
Israel was to learn to reverence the unseen Lord, never attempting to replicate what they thought He might look like, something that would otherwise lead them directly into idolatry. That, however, didn’t work. Their history, from their very inception at Sinai, was filled with making images and bowing down to them.
 
This is because we as humans desire something tangible and visible to help us process our thoughts or direct our attention to. God knows this, but the lesson had to be lived out. In the coming of Christ Jesus, God has revealed Himself in a way that removes this lack.
 
We now have the image of God in the Person of Jesus. Although the Jews call this blasphemy and many Christians condemn portraying Jesus in photos, as if that is idolatry, it is exactly what God has allowed.
 
The same people who get bent out of shape over a painting of Jesus’ face will never have a problem with a painting of Jesus riding on a donkey, as if the scenery changes the intent.
 
Jesus is represented in plays and movies as an evangelism tool. This is applauded by the same people, but for some reason, having a portrait of Jesus sends them into a conniption. This is illogical. God has given His Son to the world as a means of understanding Him. The humanity of Jesus allows us to understand God in a way we can appreciate.
 
Hold fast to the notion that what God has done is good. It is what keeps us from the sin of idolatry when we follow the admonition of Scripture, “...looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith, who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God” (Hebrews 12:2).
 
Lord God, thank You for Jesus. In Him, we can contemplate Your goodness in a way that would never have been otherwise possible. We praise You for Your glory, displayed in His Person. How great You are, O God. Amen.
 

Friday, 28 August 2026
 
Show Me the tax money.”
So they brought Him a denarius. Matthew 22:19
 
“‘You display to me the ‘coin, the census’.’They also offered to Him – denarius.” (CG)
 
In the previous verse, Jesus knew that they were setting a trap for Him with their question about paying the census. Therefore, He challenged them on it, calling them hypocrites. In order to give them a response, He next says, “You display to me the ‘coin, the census’.”
 
Instead of directly answering their question, He asks for the coin used when paying the Roman census. As this was the approved coin, it means that every person in the country had their census paid for with it.
 
Whatever they hand Him, therefore, will provide His answer to their question. If He sides with the Herodians, the Pharisees will be able to accuse Him. If He sides with the Pharisees, the Herodians will be able to accuse Him. How will He get out of this? Not yet knowing His intent, “They also offered to Him – denarius.”
 
The denarius is a Roman coin. Depending on what the census tax was referring to in Matthew 17, this may help us understand the didrachma mentioned there –
 
“When they had come to Capernaum, those who received the temple tax came to Peter and said, ‘Does your Teacher not pay the temple tax?’25 He said, ‘Yes.’And when he had come into the house, Jesus anticipated him, saying, ‘What do you think, Simon? From whom do the kings of the earth take customs or taxes, from their sons or from strangers?’26 Peter said to Him, ‘From strangers.’Jesus said to him, ‘Then the sons are free. 27 Nevertheless, lest we offend them, go to the sea, cast in a hook, and take the fish that comes up first. And when you have opened its mouth, you will find a piece of money; take that and give it to them for Me and you.’” Matthew 17:24-27
 
Regardless of the meaning of that tax, the denarius was a standard coin, known to be widely used among the people. It has already been noted in two parables, indicating that it was the standard coin used by the people when dealing with such matters –
 
“But that servant went out and found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii; and he laid hands on him and took him by the throat, saying, ‘Pay me what you owe!’” Matthew 18:28
 
“For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard. 2 Now when he had agreed with the laborers for a denarius a day, he sent them into his vineyard.” Matthew 20:1, 2
 
As this is so, Jesus will make a point about the matter based on this.
 
Life application: If you are planning on making an accusation or a defense about a matter, one sure way to bolster your side of the argument is to have a physical prop at hand. In a trial, something with fingerprints on it is a certain way of proving that a person’s hand was on whatever is presented.
 
Having photos of a person doing something, legal or illegal, can be used to prosecute or defend. Such things work because people can see them. They become undeniable pieces of evidence to support one’s position.
 
Instead of just saying what is on His mind, Jesus uses a physical, tangible prop to support what He is about to say. Depending on what is said, and also who says it, an air-tight case can be made, beyond which there can be no contestation.
 
Remember this as you deal in such matters. If you have such a prop available to you, be sure to include it. Words can have strength, but physical evidence of some sort can be the final nail in the coffin when it is presented.
 
Lord God, help us to think matters through so that we will take the right avenue that is needed to resolve the difficult matters that arise in our lives. May this be especially true when we deal in matters which include our relationship with You. May our lives and actions always bring glory to You. Amen.
 

Thursday, 27 August 2026
 
But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, “Why do you test Me, you hypocrites?” Matthew 22:18
  
“Having known, also, the ‘Jesus’, the ‘depravity, theirs’, He said, ‘Why, Me, you test, hypocrites?’” (CG)
 
In the previous verse, Jesus was questioned whether it was right to give a census to Caesar, or not. In response, it says, “Having known, also, the ‘Jesus’, the ‘depravity, theirs’.”
 
A new word is seen here, ponéria, depravity. It is derived from ponos, toil, and by implication anguish or pain. HELPS Word Studies defines it as pain-ridden evil. These men were working out evil like a criminal would. Spending their effort on what would benefit them at the expense of others.
 
In Mark, it says that Jesus knew their hypocrisy. Luke uses a word signifying craftiness. Jesus was able to know, without a moment’s hesitation, that they were trying to trap Him. As such, “He said, ‘Why, Me, you test, hypocrites?’”
 
They were presenting one face while getting ready to put on another, as the term hypocrite implies. As soon as they heard Him give an incorrect answer, which they thought would come from any answer He gave, they would pounce on Him like rabid animals.
 
But that seems less likely now that He has demonstrated that He is aware of their wicked intentions.
 
Life application: How often does it happen that you have something occur in your life and you’re not sure what to do about it, but then a few days later, the pastor preaches on exactly what you needed to know? Or maybe, you read the Bible a couple days later, and there is the answer that you could have used to resolve your difficulty.
 
Likewise, how often does something happen which would otherwise be difficult for you to handle, but just the day before, or maybe that very morning, you had read something in the Bible that mirrors the situation in which you find yourself?
 
When this happens, what does that tell you? In the first instance, you might say to yourself, “I need to read the Bible more often. If I had just spent my time there, this wouldn’t have been a problem.” In the second instance, you might say, “I sure am glad I spend each day reading the Bible. If I had skipped this morning’s reading, I may not have had a clue about what to do!”
 
The Bible is a book of many types of instruction, one of which is life in general. As you go through your life, you are bound to have instances like these come up because God created mankind. His word is a blueprint for the proper operation of human beings.
 
Marriage, work ethic, saving money, raising children, etc., are a part of what we engage in during our lives. The Bible gives sound advice, whether implicit or explicit, on such matters. Therefore, it is natural that we will find the answer to difficulties in such matters there.
 
Jesus’ example provides us with the knowledge that we should consider what people are up to when they ask various questions. Some people may seem like they are asking about one thing, when their ulterior motives are kept hidden away for a later time. The people Jesus interacted with are real people, not characters in a book.
 
As such, when we see how they interact with Jesus, we can learn from that. Consider this as you read the Bible. We can learn so much as we consider the words before us, one aspect of which is human behavior. Great stuff from the Creator to those willing to engage with His word, our blueprint for a properly run life.
 
Lord God, it is always a joy to read Your word and then find that what we read fits into the next things we are doing in our daily lives. It is like a wink from You that You have ordained our days and are directing us according to Your wisdom. Thank You for Your wonderful word. Amen.

Wednesday, 26 August 2026
 
Tell us, therefore, what do You think? Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?” Matthew 22:17
 
“You tell, therefore, us what You, it seems? It permits to give census to Caesar or not?” (CG)
 
In the previous verse, it was noted that the disciples of the Pharisees and the Herodians went to Jesus, buttering Him up with platitudes. Now that they feel He is primed for a fall into the trap they have set, they say, “You tell, therefore, us what to You, it seems.”
 
Here it goes. In the previous verse, they said to Jesus, “Teacher, we have known that true, You are, and the ‘way, the God’ in truth You teach, and not it concerns You about anyone. Not, also, You look to ‘appearance, men’.”
 
Now, instead of asking what Scripture (the ‘way, the God’) says, they ask for an opinion that is surely intended to trap Him in a moral, religious, or cultural dilemma. One can see them salivating over the answer He will give, knowing that they have Him in a box. And so, with this in mind, they ask their question, “It permits to give census to Caesar or not?”
 
The kensos, census, was introduced in Matthew 17:25. It is a poll tax that was not paid in their Jewish currency but in Roman coin. This is a problem and a dilemma that the people faced. Should they obediently submit to those who ruled them, or should they rebel against their authority?
 
This is where they feel that they have trapped Him. If He says to not pay it, the Herodians are standing there, ready to report Him to the Roman authorities for being a rebel against their duly set authority.
 
On the other hand, if He says that they were to pay the poll tax, the Pharisees, as the religious authorities over the people, would be able to tell the masses that Jesus was a traitor to the nation, placing the authority of the Romans above supposed allegiance to God, who established them as a people.
 
The idea of “supposed” is not that the people could be disobedient to God, but that there may be a contingency not suggested in the presentation of their false dilemma that had nothing to do with disobedience to God.
 
Life application: As noted in a previous commentary, fallacies are mistakes in reasoning that render an argument weak, unsound, or invalid. The content of the fallacy is based on an already broken structure of argumentation.
 
The problem is that people quite often do not know what fallacies are or when they are presented. Instead, they hear what is being presented and, without thinking the matter through, assume that what is stated is valid.
 
And there are a seemingly endless number of fallacies to contend with. Some, like the false dilemma, are often so seemingly innocuous that they are hard to pin down, especially when one is under pressure to give a response.
 
A few common fallacies are: Ad Hominem – Attacking the person making an argument instead of the argument itself. Straw Man – Changing or exaggerating an opponent's argument to make it easier to knock down. False Dilemma – Pretending there are only two choices when there are more options. Appeal to Authority – Claiming something is true just because an expert or famous person says so, without real evidence. Bandwagon (Ad Populum) – Saying an idea is right because lots of people believe in it. Circular Reasoning – Repeating the claim inside the proof itself instead of giving a real reason. Slippery Slope – Claiming that a small first step will lead to a giant, bad disaster without proof. Hasty Generalization – Making a giant rule based on just a small example.
 
We hear these errors in thinking all the time, but don’t consider them because we have not taken the time to understand what is being presented or who is presenting the information.
 
Take time to go to a website that specifically lists fallacies and look them over. Consider each one in your mind before moving on. This will help you immensely when you hear people refer to all types of matters.
 
One from a religious perspective was given by John Hagee when he was selling a book about Jesus. He said, “Jesus never claimed to be the Messiah.” Obviously, he had never read the Bible through because Jesus explicitly claimed to be the Messiah in John 4:26, John 17:3 (which uses the word “Christ”, and which means “Messiah”), etc.
 
Further, the terms Messiah and Christ, when referring to Jesus, are stated well over 250 times. But what John Hagee did was to build a Straw Man fallacy by redefining what “Messiah” means for his own purposes. He then essentially said, “See, Jesus never claimed this.”
 
But how many people went out and bought the book? And how many continued to sit under his teaching after such an enormous, purposeful attack against the position and authority of Jesus? The fact that they accepted his word reflects another fallacy mentioned above, the Appeal to Authority. “Oh, the preacher is a specialist on this or that. Therefore, what he says must be true.”
 
Be careful to know when you are being sold a bill of goods. Jesus was prepared, as we will see.
 
Lord God, keep us from false teachers who present misleading, bogus, and even heretical doctrines that will blind us to the truth of Your word. Give us wisdom to understand how what they present is false so that we will not be duped by their words. Yes, help us in this, O God. Amen.