I read the book of Matthew chapter 5. Last Thursday we stopped at verse number 30. So we begin with verse number 31, 32, and 33. Matthew 5, 31, 32, and 33. Let's begin by reading verse 31. It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement. But I say unto you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, saying to the cause of fornication, cause of her to commit adultery, and whosoever shall marry her to this divorce, commit adultery, again he hath heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not persuade thyself, but thou shalt perform unto the Lord thine oath. I remember questions at BFGBZ.org or 856-261-9018. Give us a call or comment if you care to. Anne, you got something? Greetings from the state of Wisconsin. Just want to say hello to our church family and I am glad to be in Bible study tonight. I need prayer for some health problems I am having. That is Wendy. Thank you so much for keeping Rick in prayer. also for migraines. And I just want to say how beautiful your hair is. It sure looks nice up like that. We will be praying for you with the DDS and for BFTC. Love and Christ, Wendy and Rick Kosick. That's way up in Wisconsin, way, way up there. Thank you, Wendy and Rick. Any other comments that you have, Anna? Not yet, okay. Alright, questions at bfdbc.org or 856-261-9018. Alright, verse number 31. The Lord Jesus is talking to whom here in Matthew chapter 5? We got this far last week? Yes. He's talking to whom? His disciples. His disciples, alright. Disciples, not the general word for disciples. He carries them up to this mount. It's called the Sermon on the Mount. So he's saying here in verse 31, of course it's still under the law of Moses. He hasn't died for the sins of the world yet, This is not expressed to us, but all these things are for us. In verse number 31, the quotes said, It hath been said. Where is he intending? What does he mean by that? It hath been said. In Scripture, right? Verses of Scripture and Deuteronomy, Moses' time, that's right. And these are different references. It has been said, for instance, in Exodus chapter 30, Of course, it's been said in the Old Testament, also in the New, it's talking about that. Deuteronomy 24 verse 1 is one of the references. It's a different lexicon. What has been said? What does the Old Testament love Moses regarding this subject of divorce? Whosoever shall, this is verse number 31. Whosoever put away his wife, what does that mean, put away? Divorce. Divorce, alright. Divorce shall be. What is true? What did the Law of Moses permit? In verse number 31. Writing of divorcement. Writing of divorcement. So that was a permissible thing in the Mosaic Law. permissible thing to give a bill of divorce. Now I suppose by the contrary if the wife wants to leave that she could get a bill of divorce but it's always for the man. It always puts the male here in the Old Testament. I don't think the wife can do it. Probably not. It would seem like it would be reciprocity. Sometimes there is something and there isn't. But it says here the man can put away and give a divorcement. Then in verse 32. But I say to you, what does that mean? What's the word, but, means what? That's a contrast. A contrast. It's a contrasting, an adversative, not a joining conjunction, but an adversative conjunction, a contrasting conjunction. But, though Moses said it, though it's the Old Testament, Lord Jesus Christ changes the whole thing. What does he say to that? That whosoever should put away his wife's saying, Saving for the cause of fornication and adultery. So now this has been an argumentative thing. It's repeated again in chapter 19 of Matthew. Saving for the cause of fornication. A lot of people have interpreted this as saying that adultery breaks the marriage vow. Does this say adultery here? It does not. It's fornication. Fornication technically cannot be committed by two married people, but one who is unmarried. Physically, like we say today. Yeah, Dan? Wouldn't that also, in verse 31, would that also be referring to Petrothel as well, then? Well, we're not certain what Moses said there, Petrothel. This is probably regular marriage. When we argue in 32, it's time of Petrothel. Yes. You know, I mean, so why can't I mean, I know that I never thought of this before, but why 131 possibly have the context of the trothal as well? Because their engagement or the trothal period was as strong as marriage was. It could be a trothal period. Verse 31 as well as the 32. But my point is that verse 32 is talking about Petrothel. Why can't verse 31 be talking about Petrothel? It's possible, Dan. It's possible. I think either it's possible either marriage or Petrothel. But either or is not possible, 32 then? I wouldn't think 32 is either or. But 31 is either or, 32 is strictly Petrothel? Well, the Old Testament law was very clear. It talks about a man and a wife even before there's legitimate marriage coming together as husband and wife. And so this could be the wife and the husband. The Old Testament, the New Testament is very clear especially that sometimes a wife is not physically married yet and the husband is not physically married like Dr. Joseph and Mary. They called them husband and wife before they ever came together in marriage. So that's a bit total. It's possible. It's possible in the Old Testament time. But for the cause of fornication. So that's the battle that people have legitimizing divorce and remarriage today. They say, oh, it's taught right here in Matthew 5, verse 32. Well, it's taught very clearly in Romans 7 and 1 Corinthians 7, the contrary, that nothing breaks except death. breaks marriage. But in the cause of fornication this would be while they were in betrothal before they were legitimately married and therefore either the wife went off with some other man while they were in this betrothal period or the husband went off with some other woman in the betrothal period and that would break this marriage which had to be broken by divorce. That betrothal had to be broken by divorce and this is what this is talking about. in the trothful time. So this is not true in Luke. It's not true in Mark. Luke 16 and Mark 10 give the same picture. And there's no cause of fornication. It's just whosoever. So let's look at Mark chapter 10, for example, in verse 2, and see the clear-cut case. Matthew, remember, is principally writing to what group of people? Because of the Jews, it's a Jewish custom, a Jewish thing. But Mark, chapter 10 of Mark and verse number 11. He said to them, whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, and commit adultery against her. No question of fornication, no question of betrothal, as this is marriage and divorce. and so on. So what is the case in this point off in verse 32 when there is fornication on this Petropha period, they go out there unfaithful to their wife, like Joseph charged Mary with being. All right, he thought that she was unfaithful in this Petropha period. What was he minded to do? Put her away, divorce her. Why didn't he divorce Mary? What stopped him? The angel Lord told him, take him to your wife. That was a begotten of hers from the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit of God. And so a miracle was taking place, a miracle. So he took her back, but he was minded to put her away. He was minded to put her away, because this was fornication. Other than the betrothal period, he didn't have a call to have another wife. This is the position that I've been taught ever since I was a young Christian. Pastor Willits and Dr. Stuart Greer have taught us that. We all do that. But the Dallas Seminary was taught completely different. Trashed whatever our pastor told us. But I still hold to this position very clearly. But notice if in this situation, verse 32, except for the cause of fornication, and marrying a cause of third premed adultery, which where I shall marry her that is divorce, and that of adultery also." So this is an ambivalent adulterous situation in marriage. Does the world believe that today? Do most pastors teach and preach that today? A lot of them are squirreling that and not following that in any way, shape or form. And so this is what he saw, the Lord Jesus Christ has changed this. In 1 Corinthians 7, for example, there is a very clear teaching of the age of grace, not necessarily just in the book of Matthew, but in 1 Corinthians chapter 7, he says what? In verse number 1, it's one of the things we're going to meet, but for now let's touch on avoid fornication and have your own wife and son. Then the latter part of chapter 7, what is that? Verse 11, 1 Corinthians 7, verse 11. Alright, 10. To the married I command, yet not I but the Lord, let not the wife depart from her husband. But if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband, and let the husband put away his wife and son. So, there's clear teachings in regard to some of these matters. And the Book of Romans is another clear teaching as well. So the morality of the Bible is different from the morality of today, isn't it? Well, I was thinking about this in the light of being taught in Matthew here, this is all for the kingdom age. And because when there's different verses, we say, well, that's for the kingdom age. It's taught for when the kingdom was here. And we can take some of it today. So if I was thinking this in a different way, because I was taught by Pastor Willis, too. But I say to that, whose service shall put away his wife's saving for the cause of fornication? I'm thinking two different things. So if this is for the kingdom age, then that's maybe where people say divorce is permitted. Now, what does this mean? But I say unto you that there's a new... Well, I believe the Lord Jesus was teaching his people right then and there. If they had accepted him as the Messiah, that would have been the teaching of Antioch, but he was teaching the people right there living in his time. And then this is a new paragraph. But I say unto you that whosoever should put away his wife, save him for the cause of fornication, cause of committed adultery, How would that cause her to commit adultery if this is the betrothal period? And you just find out, like Joseph thought Mary was not a pure woman, but he loved her and didn't want to have her stolen, so he was going to give her a bill of divorce. How would that cause her to commit adultery? How if you put a woman away because you don't want to marry her? committed fornication. How would that cause her to commit adultery? Well, once she marries again, whoever she marries again... She doesn't say she's married again. I know, but if she does marry again, then she'll be an adulterer because she already had fornication. That's probably what it is. Yeah, Anna? Malachi 3.16 states, For the Lord, the God of Israel, saith that ye hateth putting away. For one covereth violence with his garment, saith the Lord our host. Therefore take heed to your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously. So it doesn't seem to me like if God hates putting away, it doesn't seem like it would be permitted during the millennium. So if she hates the divorce, that's what you're saying? It's possible that the divorce is not recognized. And since it's not recognized, that if and when the lady marries somebody else, So she and her second husband are committing adultery. I think that's what it means, Von. I think that's understandable. Yeah, that's true. So this is the standard that he's made here. And of course, it's repeated in let not a wife depart, let not the husband depart, let them stay together. And in fact, it's very clear in the book of Romans 7 that the New Testament under grace is very clear as to what this person will be called if they leave the husband. 7-1, is that right? Romans... It's true. For the woman, yes, the law has dominion over a man, 7-1, as long as he liveth. For the woman which hath a husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as she liveth. But if the husband be dead, she is loose from the law of her husband. So then if our husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress. But if her husband be dead, She's free from that law, so that she's no adulteress, though she be married to another man. So, there's lots of different verses and scriptures that are clear. And for those 1 Corinthians 7, there's a clear place, and this certainly is clear as well. But it gets me all confused now. When we apply everything to the kingdom, and then... Well, these conditions won't be applied, I'm sure, to the kingdom. Well, there's some other law teachings. But he also applied it right to his day in which he lived, talking to these Pharisees and what else? If you have a coat, give your coat to somebody. Yes, like that. So, I mean, how can we dissect one person? I mean, I believe it like I was taught. But I'm just saying I'm looking at this with different light, different eyes. Well, just like Dan mentioned, he said, I should put his wife away, let him give her a written divorce. Same words, put his wife away, put his wife away. Yes, in Mark and Luke, without this except for the cause of vocation, there's no exception clause in Mark or in Luke. So maybe in the kingdom there's an exception clause. Well, that's up to the Lord and reign of Christ to determine. Yes, Hannah? I don't see how that makes any sense if God hates putting away. He does hate putting away. So then why when he would be on the throne, when God himself is on the throne, Why would he make a law permitting divorce? I don't think he would. That's why. Why would this apply? It's OK. He's very strict on this. He's not causing or encouraging a divorce. In fact, he says, very clearly, for this fellow shall a man leave his father and mother, Cleveland, his wife, the twins, to be one flesh. For God has joined together another man, let not man put asunder. He's very clear. No, it's in other places in Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Yeah, dad? I mean, I would think the exception clause, the exception clause is a misnomer, a strawman, whatever you want to call it. It's a misunderstanding of the Petrophil period. Someone argued the exception clause doesn't exist. If it doesn't exist, then it won't exist in the future. Exception clause, what it really is, is talking about a patrothal time period. It's in the context of what we consider an engagement time period. Patrothal is a stronger type of engagement. So that's what that would be referring to. I mean, if there is an exception clause, it would be in the context of the patrothal. If there is a patrothal in the millennial time period. You see, the people that say that you're going to have divorce if the person that your husband or wife commits adultery with someone else, if they say that that's proved by this accepted clause in verse 32, they're using two words in the same sense, in the same verse. You can't do it. Fornication and adultery, you can't say they're both equal. They're separate. These are different words. Cornelia, Marcello, there are two different words in the meaning in English and in law and legal situations. Fornication, for those that are not married. Adultery, those that are married. These are different situations. So they throw it all together and those preachers that are preaching that adultery, part of the innocent party, he or she is free to marry somebody else. That's not scripture. We don't agree with that at all. This seems clear here at least to give us an understanding of it if we get married we do not want to Get a divorce We're to follow through with our commit our oaths To the Lord and continue to remain in that marriage. However in society today I don't know how we can reconcile our understanding with what they have done. I don't know what to say on something like that. Well, they cannot undo the past. For example, if they had this all happen, for example, before they're saved or they're born again, now they come into this thing and they read it. I've known many people that way through the ministry, through the years. My conclusion is they got to right now, wherever they are, live for the Lord, stand for the scriptural position, and no matter what their condition was. I remember we had a lady at the Faith Baptist Church in Newton, Massachusetts. She was divorced, and she wondered could she help in the church. I said if she could help, and so I was a little bit And as soon as we found a teacher for the students, oh, we got another teacher, she realized that too. There's two attitudes for those that are divorced and remarried. And one is, I'm all right, I've done nothing wrong. That's a bad attitude. On the face of the scripture, there's got to be serious repentance of that wrong. The second attitude, yes, I did do something wrong, but now I understand from scripture, I agree that that was wrong and I'm trying to live my life to please the Lord from now on. See, that's all you can do. You can't change the divorce from marriage. No way in the world. What's terrible is you've got some pastors who are preaching against fornication and who are preaching against adultery and then we can end up, as time goes by, they end up doing it themselves. Doing it themselves. That's a terrible thing. Doing what they're preaching against. Questions, if you can see that at all, 856-261-9018. Give us a call, give us a comment, question or say hello. That's worse. I think that's even worse than the people who are not pastors, who are doing it. Because here are these people, they're preaching against it. And then they end up doing it. And not only is it against the Bible, but it's hypocritical as well. Hypocritical. And there are many pastors that are guilty of this, as well as deacons and other church members. We don't want to slight anybody. All right, 31, 32. Any other comments on 32 before I go on to 33? All right, this is a big subject, that marriage and divorce and adultery and all these other things. Verse 33, again, you've heard. Now, where do they hear this? What's he referring to here, the Lord Jesus referring to here? The scriptures in the Old Testament. So the whole time, what do they hear? What does forswear mean? Give an oath. Give an oath, right. But what shall happen? Renounce an oath. Renounce, right, renounce. Swear. But perform unto the Lord thine oaths. In other words, what you promised to the Lord would be good. What were the conditions, if you remember, in the Old Testament, when a wife made a vow before the Lord and her husband didn't hear it? What would happen to that vow? If the husband didn't hear it, if the husband heard it and disavowed it, what would happen? It was not oath. So, different vows, different things. This is what he's talking about here, the oath, or at least right now. Then in verse 34, we have read that, let's say, read 34, 35, and 36 together. But I say unto you, so are not at all, neither by heaven, for it is God's throne, nor by the earth, for it is the fulcrum to it, neither by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great king. neither shall I swear by thy hand that thou shalt not take one hair of black." Did we stop there? 34, 5, and 6, is that it? Yeah, okay. So, what does the Lord say in contrast to the Old Testament? Anna's got something. Go ahead, Anna. Dear Pastor Ray, hello and good evening to everyone. Thanks for tonight's Bible study. We are listening here in California from Joe and Norma Fassio. Hi Joe, Norma, thank you for greeting us, the way through. Oh, you're out in California, okay. But I say to you, what does he say in verse 34? What does it mean, swear not at all? What's that mean? Don't take an oath again. Don't take an oath, and he's specific isn't he? You can't get married, you don't take an oath again. What is the difference between a vow and an oath? A vow. Which is stronger, a vow or an oath? A vow? It seems like it should be. I would say an oath. We got a difference of opinion. One says a vow, one says the oath. What is an oath? That would be, well, it says here, swear not at all. That means take an oath, swear not at all, and it gives some of the things we should not swear by. That's the first thing. Don't swear by what? In verse 34? By heaven. By heaven. Why? For God's sake. That's wrong. People say for heaven's sake. It's a swearing by heaven. It's calling upon heaven as your witness. Nor what else in verse 35? Neither by what? By the earth. By the earth either, see? Land's sake. That's by the earth. In other words, a different type of thing. Don't swear to take your Neither gets God's footstool. Neither by what else? By Jerusalem. Verse 35. Why? For it is the city of the great king. So anything that they put in there to swear by and give an oath is forbidden by the Lord. And also in verse number 36, what else is forbidden? Neither shalt thou swear by thy head. Why? Because thou canst make one hair white or black. Thou canst not make one hair white. You can't make your hair black or white. So not swearing of any kind. This is repeated in the New Testament later about swearing and taking an oath. But thy yea be yea and thy nay nay whatsoever more cometh of sin and of evil. And so this principle here is of the Old Testament, they didn't have oaths and so on. So as Christians, as I say, this is a principle here, but it's also, as I say, repeated in the Age of Grace and the epistles, you have to take oaths. So when you go before a court and you're a witness, you raise your right hand and the bailiff says, do you solemnly Swear. What should you say to the Baileys? I do. I sound like... Affirm. Affirm. And some of the Baileys have got wise to that. And some Christians are that way. They said, you swear or affirm. See, they put that right in there. So they know that some people don't want to be swearing, but affirm. And that's what we always do. And that's a difference, swearing. Calling God's name. This blasphemy of God's name, using it all the time, is a terrible thing. Yeah, Ron? I had to leave the room. Did you say what the difference between an oath and a vow is, and which is what? Well, we had a difference of opinion. One said an oath is stronger, one said a vow is stronger. Is it possible that two different animals, two different things, are completely different? It's possible. And it's possible, Ron. Wedding vows? Yes. I thought that was strong. Well, you see, a vow is a form of a promise. An oath or an affirmation is part of a testimony. Usually somebody swears and always says, By God's sake, or for God's sake, in the name of God, I will promise this. They used to take an oath in God's name. By heaven above. That's an affirmation swearing by God's name. In the name of God, I will do this. They're calling God part of this in their oath. That memory? It reminds me of Leviticus, chapter 19, verse 12. And ye shall not swear by my name falsely, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God. I am the Lord. Not swear falsely. That's very good. So that's what usually taking an oath is. When you put your hand on the Bible, I affirm, solemnly affirm, how I testify to be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God. Well you don't have to say help me God if you affirm. But the oath, so help me God, that's swearing in God's name, so help me God. That's what the scriptures and James and other places forbid us. Is it possible one is short term, one is long term? About what you mean what? About an affirmation. Which is which? About is supposed to be long term until death to this part. An affirmation. Is a short term. It's a short term when you give a particular testimony about a particular case. You're saying this this this amount of this information I'm giving you I affirm it's true. It's very limited in scope, whereas the vow is broader in scope, long term. One is limited in scope, one is broader in scope. I was just looking at Hebrews 6, because I was talking about swear. I'm still a little confused about it myself. For men verily swear by the greater, and an oath for confirmation is to them at the end of all strife. Wherein God, willing more abundantly to show unto the heirs a promise, the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath. Two agreeable things. God took an oath, that's right, of course, God's able to do that. I just don't understand. So in the sense of Abraham, I think that I referenced Abraham, the covenant there in Hebrews chapter 6. Yes. A promise. I mean, so in that case, it's very similar to a vow, a promise, the oath. I mean, in the context of Hebrews 6, the oath is referring to the promise that God made Abraham. That God swore to Abraham, unto thee I will bless thee and keep thee and shall always. God swore. God did on his own self. His promise, his oath. He did swear, but we're not to swear. We're not to take oaths. That's up to God to do, but not us. Anne? The so help me God part, that sort of, well, originally I think Washington was the one who first said that, or it wasn't written into the constitution for the presidential oath or affirmation, but he said it. So it's possible that one could say it, really asking God to help them, and it's not the same as taking an oath because they're not saying more. Is my question clear or unclear? That's possible. The context of taking God's name in vain, you know, clearly, you know, someone could be praying, or someone could be swearing. For instance, praying, or in the example that Anna gave, 5th Washington, which, you know, there was their We don't know much about Washington. There's this dispute about, you know, he was, I guess, Episcopalian. Yeah, he was a Mason. But apart from all that information, as far as if he, from some, from his heritage, if he was, when he was taking his oath of office, at the end of the oath, he was saying, you know, he, that was his comments. I would have said an editorial comment about the oath he just took, you know, to uphold, to defend, you know, the Constitution and foreign and domestic, all these different things that are part of the oath of office. And then he added, as Anna was saying, you know, with God's help, I can do this. Acknowledging the fact that in his own strength, he was not able to do it, but with God's help. So it's not a vain repetition, it's not a, not a, not taken as in vain in that particular context. But if you use God's name in that way, just like, so help me God, or God's, it's almost invoking God's part of it, it's almost swearing an oath, it seemed like to me. An oath, swearing? Someone said, oh God, please help me. Now that doesn't mean you're swearing. But other people... No, no, you can pray in the Lord, that's right, but if you... No, just like something's happening, and so a quick prayer, like... That's a prayer, but to see this other is invoking God, So it's a... See, these things, that's why I wonder about the oath of office. The oath. Swearing. So you put your hand on the Bible and they swear. Well, now it would be the affirmation of office. They should affirm the office. That would be what I would prefer. Yes. I'm not sure when, during the last inauguration, if Roberts said swear or affirm. I don't remember. Yes. I mean, you get... It's a horrible situation. Horrible situation. I don't know whether it was planned that way or not, because then it was a private one with no press, nobody else. Who knows what the President said. I don't think Roberts was involved in any conspiracy like that. No, no. He made a mistake. He made a mistake. Well, that's true, but... He failed to read it. He was trusting on his memory. He's got a big memory, but his memory failed him during that point. But the reason if he failed it, he should have done it a second time publicly, not as private. The cameras ran out, you see. Nobody knows the real oath that our president took or not took. It's all crap. That's what I'm saying. And that's why policemen, when they read something, they're supposed to read the rights of the people in New York City. They pull out the piece of paper and they read them. Chief Justice, next time, in November, he will read them. Let's read verse 37 also in the post for tonight. But let your communication be yea, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay, nay But you want to be careful you don't use God's name too much and it's used in an inappropriate way. So it ends up being God's name in vain and we don't want to be engaged in blasphemy. You're right. At the school when we were studying interjections, it seemed like it was difficult sometimes for them to think of ones that were not missed us. Yes. Yes. Just because it was so, so much a part of us. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It's just, yes. Yes. You don't have to say yes. You don't have to make it happen. For heaven's sake or for God's sake or for anybody else's, this is a blotsome against the law. All right, we'll stop there. Any other comments or questions before we close? We have a few things. All right, go ahead, Ann. This is from the Cossack's Webster's 1828 Dictionary. Oath. Oath, noun, a solemn affirmation or declaration made with an appeal to God for the truth of what is affirmed. The appeal to God in an oath implies that the person imprecates his vengeance and renounces his favor if the declaration is false, or if the declaration is a promise, the person invokes the vengeance of God if he should fail to fulfill it. A false oath is called a perjury. Now, on to the next email. Per means by the side. Quro means to swear. Swear on the side. False oath. Perjury. Okay, go ahead. Webster's 1828 Dictionary. Thou, a solemn promise made to God or by a pagan to his deity. The Roman generals, when they went to war, sometimes made a vow that they would build a temple to some favorite deity if he would give them victory. A vow is a promise of something to be given or done hereafter. A person is constituted a religious is constituted a religious, I suppose this refers to monk, by taking three vows of chastity, of poverty, and of obedience. Among the Israelites, the vows of children were not binding unless ratified by the express or tacit consent of their father. Numbers 13. A solemn promise as the vows of unchangeable love and fidelity. In a moral and religious sense, vows are promises to God as they appear to God to witness their sincerity and the violation of them is the most heinous offense. Vow, verb transitive, to give, consecrate, or dedicate to God by a solemn promise. When Jacob went to Mesopotamia, he vowed to God a tenth of his substance and his own future devotion for his service. Genesis 28. When thou vows to vow, defer not to pay it. Ecclesiastes 5. 2. To devote. Vow. Verb intransitive. To make vows or solemn promises. He that vows must be careful. It sort of gets cut off. Okay. Any other comments yet, Anna? None apparent. Okay, thank you. That's from Wendy Costa. Let's wave at her again and say hello. Thank you, Wendy. So that's the definition. Any other comments or questions before we close tonight? Yeah, Mom? When we're done, we should pray for Wendy. She has to pray. She's not feeling good. And Rick's headaches, terrible headaches. We'll do that. Any other comments or questions before we close? Let's close that in the word of prayer. Oh, Father, we do thank you for our grace. We thank you for this lesson that we could read and study tonight on Matthew 5. to pray for Wendy and Rick. There's headaches and her health, which is not always what it ought to be. Thank you for the comments that you've made and others that have commented and talked about and given us emails. We thank you for their interest. Thank you for that word. Help us, Lord, understand these things. This terrible situation of adultery and breaking divorces and remarriages. and all these other things, the swearing, these are important matters. And we know that Thou has given us truth, not only in Matthew and all these other Gospels, but also throughout Thy words in the New Testament. So help us to live for Thee, to please Thee. Keep us strong for Thee in all that we do. In Jesus' name we ask and pray. Amen. I thank you for coming.