By: The FGT Team Faith, Grace, and Torah Ministries
Mr. Steven Anderson delivers a message of lies and Anti-Semitism.
Response to Steven Anderson
Before proceeding with this teaching I’d like the reader to understand my emotions as I listened to this man’s teaching and as I began to contemplate writing this response. It saddened me listening to his ‘teaching’ (if you can call it that) and my zeal burned within me; I understand probably 1/8th of what Phineas felt in Numbers 25. As I thought of writing this I was overtaken by a great sadness for this man and apprehension over whether to even write this. Knowing full well that the Scriptures teach the following:
2 Peter 2:12 But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption; 13 And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they feast with you; 14 Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children: 15 Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness; 16 But was rebuked for his iniquity: the dumb ass speaking with man’s voice forbad the madness of the prophet. 17 These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest; to whom the mist of darkness is reserved for ever. 18 For when they speak great swelling words of vanity, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through much wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who live in error. 19 While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage. 20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. 21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. 22 But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.
And keeping in mind what Hebrews 10:26 teaches I was fearful of delivering this message. But alas the call to all of us is to be a watchman on the wall and warn of the impending judgment against these people who speak falsely in the name of the Almighty. So saying this I will proceed to openly rebuke and pray that this man repents and falls on his knees in humility to our King.
Mr. Anderson suffers from what is quite common in Christian circles: a lack of foundational understanding of the scriptures and the context in which they were written. His main premise is this (paraphrasing his words): “There is a necessity of a change in the law and more specifically the changes are in diverse washings, meat and drink ordinances, and holy days. On the other hand homosexuality and bestiality and cross dressings all remain a sin.” This is quite a convenient position for one who is so vehemently against homosexuality and in reality is a great example of what James says in,
James 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. 6 But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed. 7 For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord. 8 A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.
Mr. Anderson’s position is most definitely double minded and we can certainly tell that he is unstable in his understanding of the Word of God. Before even attempting to understand his perceived scriptural support for his doctrine it is important to note that the things that he wishes to be done away with are all things that intrinsically signs of Hebrew culture (Sabbath, dietary laws, Feast days etc etc). This points to an underlying degree of anti-Semitism and as can be seen in his video on numerous times does he refer to the Jewish people as “antichrist”, “spirit of antichrist”, and his words closely echo the words of the “church fathers” in their anti-Semitism. The entire last 15 minutes of the first part of his teaching is devoted to telling us that Jesus, his Apostles and the first century believers did not live like Jews! So before proceeding let us deal with his false claim that the Jews rejected Jesus Christ. It is a fallacy to say that as a whole the nation of Israel (which was made up of the House of Judah) in the first century rejected our Messiah Jesus or his Hebrew name Y’shua. We can see from the New Testament itself that this is an obvious fallacy:
Matthew 21:1 And when they drew nigh unto Jerusalem, and were come to Bethphage, unto the mount of Olives, then sent Jesus two disciples, 2 Saying unto them, Go into the village over against you, and straightway ye shall find an ass tied, and a colt with her: loose them, and bring them unto me. 3 And if any man say ought unto you, ye shall say, The Lord hath need of them; and straightway he will send them. 4 All this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, 5 Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass. 6 And the disciples went, and did as Jesus commanded them, 7 And brought the ass, and the colt, and put on them their clothes, and they set him thereon. 8 And a very great multitude spread their garments in the way; others cut down branches from the trees, and strawed them in the way. 9 And the multitudes that went before, and that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna to the Son of David: Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest.
Now we can see that a multitude accepted him as the Son of David, the promised Messiah of Israel! In the Greek the word Multitude has this meaning:
G3793 — Strong
From a derivative of G2192 (meaning a vehicle); a throng (as borne along); by implication the
rabble; by extension a class of people; figuratively a riot: company,
multitude, number (of
people), people, press.
This is by no means a minority of people, and we get a good estimate of how many people of the Jews accepted Messiah in,
Acts 21: 18 And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present. 19 And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry. 20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law:
So thousands upon thousands of Jews accepted their messiah in the first century! What has changed? It is no coincidence that as the “church” began to flourish the number of Jews who accepted Messiah diminished. For more on this topic please see 119 Ministries teaching:“The Deuteronomy 13 Test” and also our teaching: “Jesus vs. Yehsua”, as well as our teaching: “Discerning False Prophets” . In reality it was the leadership of Israel who rejected Messiah, a leadership made up of an illegitimate and corrupt priesthood. Let us now look at Mr. Anderson’s perceived scriptural support for his position. The verses in question are found in,
Hebrews 9: 8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: 9 Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; 10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.
Mr. Anderson perceives that verse 10 indicates that meats and drinks and other ordinances of the law have to be what was changed in the law. Before addressing this verse we must see why he even believes there is a change in the law as Messiah tells us in Matthew 5 that not one jott or tittle would change. His argument is based on this often misunderstood verse in,
Hebrews 7: 12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.
Now the main reason many misunderstand this verse is that the English word Law is ambiguous. The Hebrew word Torah (Greek word being Nomos) means instructions, among other things, and the entire context of Hebrews 7 is about the INSTRUCTION concerning the Levitical priesthood. The law itself does not change, all this is referencing is a variation of instructions to different priesthoods. We see Paul trying to make this point a few verses before verse 12:
5 And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of Abraham: 6 But he whose descent is not counted from them received tithes of Abraham, and blessed him that had the promises. 7 And without all contradiction the less is blessed of the better. 8 And here men that die receive tithes; but there he receiveth them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth. 9 And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in Abraham. 10 For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchisedec met him.
So the context is set: The Author is making an excellent point about the the switching of priestly modalities from Levitical priesthood to a Melchizedec priesthood, and of course he uses the Torah to prove his point! This sets the entire context of the next few chapters and in reality as with all letters, reading the entire letter also helps to set context. Moving back to the aforementioned verse in Hebrews 9, let us set the context once again. Hebrews 8 ends this way:
Heb 8:13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
Notice that the word “covenant” is in italics indicating it is added by translators, so in reality this verse reads:
13 In that he saith, A new, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
So what is the new? Considering that verse 1 of Hebrews 8 reads:
1 Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens.
As we have already seen the entirety of chapter 7 is about the priesthood we can only conclude that was is New is the priesthood (Melchizadec) and what is old and ready to vanish is the Levitical priesthood system which did pass away a few years after the writing of Hebrews! Now we are more prepared to understand what Paul was speaking of in,
Hebrews 9:1 Then verily the first had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary. Again we see that the First or Old is in reference to the priesthood.
Moving back to verses surrounding verse 10 we see this:
8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: 9 Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; 10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. 11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;
A few key things to notice is that these meat and drink offerings and their like were until the time of reformation. These ordinances were earthly symbols of heavenly happenings as seen in verse 11. In reality this is no different than what Paul says in,
Col 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: 17 Which are a shadow of things to come…
This is the same concept. Paul is simply saying that the ordinances of the first priesthood were symbols, as Moses was commanded to do those things as an earthly representation of the heavenly temple and as such these things all point to Messiah. Simply because one thing is a symbol does not mean it is no longer binding on us, rather after Messiah we now know more about WHY we do the things that we do! What Steven Anderson fails to realize is that these “Jewish” customs will be reinstated in the time of Messiah’s reign on earth as Ezekiel 40-48 reveal! If this is Mr. Anderson’s key scripture for his doctrine than what he teaches is beginning to crumble and as we will see he has no scriptural basis for any of the things he says. In a later portion of the first part of his teaching he brings up an interesting passage from,
Gal 2:11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. 12 For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. 13 And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation. 14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?
This is the basis for his claim that none of the first century believers lived like Jews but rather like Gentiles. First and foremost notice that the circumcision party is involved; meaning, those who hold to a legalistic view most notably the view found in Acts 15 that you must be circumcised to be saved. The argument that ensues here is not that of Peter instructing the gentiles to live according to the Torah, that argument is covered at length in Acts 15. The issue here is that Peter is being a hypocrite and in front of the circumcision party observing their tradition of not eating or associating with gentiles! The traditional interpretation of this passage is that Peter who had rightfully abandoned the law was now compelling the gentiles to live by that law that had been done away with! But we see Paul make this contrast:
Gal 2:15 We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles,
So is it a GOOD thing that Peter is being accused of acting like a gentile? Of course not! Paul was NOT saying, “If the law is done away with how can you dare compel the gentiles to observe the law?” rather what he was trying to say was, “How could you expect the gentiles to be compelled to keep the law when you are acting like a gentile?” This blows Mr. Anderson’s theory out of the water; I challenge this so called man of God to really show from the scriptures that all the first century believers lived like gentiles and stayed far away from anything “jewish”. His claim that none of the apostles lived as Jews is downright insulting and he must explain why if they did not live like Jews did Paul observe the Sabbath over 80 times in the New Testament? Why did he perform a Nazarite vow that included sacrificing animals at the temple?
Act 21:19 And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry. 20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law: 21 And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs. 22 What is it therefore? the multitude must needs come together: for they will hear that thou art come. 23 Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them; 24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law.
Again Mr. Anderson’s problems stems from the fact that he does not have a firm understanding of the foundational doctrine that Messiah taught. Messiah came to exalt his Father’s Torah as it was already written. Let this be clear to Mr. Anderson: This is a warning. A watchman on the wall is blowing the trumpet and Mr. Anderson at one point or another will understand this. The same judgment he meted out to us as Torah observant believers in Messiah will be placed on him if he does not repent. We are commanded to wield the Sword of the Spirit and as such let this be a clear line in the sand: people speaking false words in the name of the Almighty will be brought to their knees. Lest Mr. Anderson be among those in Matthew 7 who are told to depart from the presence of our Master Y’shua I implore Mr. Anderson to step down from his position and HUMBLE himself and REPENT and ask God to give him the answers he so desperately needs.
Proverbs 27:5 Open rebuke is better than secret love.
Yah Bless, Faith, Grace, and Torah Ministries