Is the Love Command Old or New?

Is the Love Command Old or New?

By Dr. Nicholas J. Schaser

February 14, 2025

1K 2

In John’s Gospel, Jesus says to his disciples, “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another” (John 13:34). Yet, the divine command to love each other is hardly new; it can be found all the way back in Leviticus: “You shall love your neighbor (וְאָהַבְתָּ לְרֵעֲךָ; ve’ahavta le’reakha) as yourself” (Lev 19:18). Did Yeshua forget his Father's earlier declaration, or was there something new in Jesus’ command to his disciples?

If the tension between John 13:34 and Leviticus 19:18 were not enough, the other Johannine literature complicates the old/new dichotomy. Just before stating that “whoever loves their brother or sister abides in the light” (1 John 2:10), the first letter of John reads, “I am writing you not a new commandment (οὐκ ἐντολὴν καινὴν, ouk entolēn kainēn), but an old commandment (ἐντολὴν παλαιὰν, entolēn palaiān) that you had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word that you have heard. At the same time, it is a new commandment that I am writing to you” (1 John 2:7-8). In 2 John 1:5, the author says that it is “not as though I were writing you a new commandment, but the one we have had from the beginning—that we love one another.” Clearly, the writer refers back at least as far as the Mosaic commandment of Leviticus 19:18. Which is it? Is the command old or new?

The broader context of John’s Gospel provides an answer. The key phrase in John 13:34 is Jesus’ call for his disciples to love each other “as I have loved you.” He repeats himself two chapters later, saying, “This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you” (John 15:12). Then comes the clarifier: “Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends” (15:13). Thus, Yeshua’s command is both old and new: it is old in its reaffirmation of the love described in Leviticus 19:18, but it is new in that it calls for self-sacrifice. Leviticus had required a love for others based on the care for one’s own life, but the newness of Jesus’ commandment lies in the willingness of believers to emulate him by giving up their lives for one another.

Restraint Without Submission to Injustice

 Turn the Other Cheek?

Turn the Other Cheek?

By Sandra Aviv

February 10, 2026

29 10

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Few teachings of Jesus are as well known (or as frequently misunderstood) as his command to “turn the other cheek.” In popular imagination, the phrase often suggests passivity: silent endurance, moral resignation, or unquestioning submission to oppression. Yet when Jesus’ words are read in their first-century linguistic and social context, a far more precise and demanding instruction emerges. Rather than calling for surrender, Jesus offers a response to injustice that refuses both humiliation and violent retaliation.

The saying appears in the Sermon on the Mount: “If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also.” (Matthew 5:39)

At first glance, the statement seems absolute. Yet this instruction does not stand alone. It appears within a series of antitheses in the Sermon on the Mount, where Jesus supplements received legal formulations with his own teaching: “You have heard that it was said… but I say to you.” In this case, Jesus responds directly to the Torah’s principle of proportional justice (later labeled in Roman legal language as lex talionis) summarized as “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.”

In the Hebrew Scriptures, this principle functioned not as a license for revenge, but as a legal limit on retaliation, ensuring that punishment remained proportionate. Jesus’ teaching does not abolish this concern for justice. Rather, he moves beyond the legal framework of measured retaliation and addresses personal response to wrongdoing. The contrast signals a shift away from calculative reciprocity toward a different mode of engagement, which Jesus then illustrates through concrete, everyday examples.

Matthew’s language in this section is unusually specific, and those details matter. The verb he uses for “strike” is rhapizein (ῥαπίζειν). In Koine Greek, this verb does not describe a violent assault or a punch. Instead, it refers to a slap, often understood as an act of insult or humiliation. The same verb appears elsewhere in the Gospels in contexts of mockery and derision, including during Jesus’ trial, where he is slapped as part of his public shaming, as described in Matthew 26:67, Mark 14:65, and John 18:22.

This linguistic choice already narrows the scenario. Jesus is not addressing bodily injury, but an act meant to degrade, belittle, or assert dominance.

Matthew further specifies that the blow lands on the right cheek, a detail not preserved in Luke’s parallel account. In a predominantly right-handed society, striking the right cheek would normally involve a backhanded slap. In the ancient Mediterranean world, this gesture carried a clear social meaning. A backhanded slap was not how one fought an equal; it was how one insulted someone perceived as inferior, such as a servant, subordinate, or socially marginalized person.

This understanding is supported by sources outside the New Testament. Jewish historians of the period describe public striking under Roman authority as a means of humiliation and social control. Josephus, for example, recounts instances in which Roman officials ordered public beatings not as legal punishment, but as deliberate acts of degradation and intimidation (Jewish War 2.14.9; 2.15.1; Antiquities 20.8.5). A similar distinction appears in Jewish legal tradition. The Mishnah, in Bava Qamma 8:6, assigns different penalties for various forms of striking, treating a slap as a serious act of public humiliation, distinct from injury caused by a fist or weapon.

The meaning of Jesus’ instruction, “Do not resist an evildoer” (μὴ ἀντιστῆναι τῷ πονηρῷ), has been widely discussed in scholarship. The verb antistēnai can denote forceful or violent resistance, particularly in military or legal contexts, but it can also be read more broadly as opposition or resistance in general. As a result, scholars debate whether Jesus intends to prohibit violent retaliation specifically or resistance altogether. What is clear from the immediate context, however, is that Jesus does not speak in abstractions. He follows this instruction with concrete examples: being slapped on the cheek, sued for one’s cloak, compelled to carry a burden for a Roman soldier, and pressured by those who demand assistance. Each case involves coercion, humiliation, or exploitation within everyday social and legal realities, not situations of physical assault. The interpretation of Jesus’ command must therefore be shaped not by the verb in isolation, but by the scenarios through which he explains it.

When Jesus instructs his listener to “turn the other cheek,” he is not asking them to accept humiliation as deserved. Instead, he describes a response that disrupts the act of degradation itself. Turning the other cheek refuses to cooperate with the social script of dominance and shame. It neither returns violence nor absorbs insult as final.

The aggressor is confronted with a choice: escalate the encounter into a different category of action or abandon the attempt to humiliate. Either way, the original act of dominance is exposed rather than completed.

This reading aligns with Jesus’ broader teaching throughout the Gospels. He confronts unjust authority, challenges religious hypocrisy, and openly names exploitation and abuse of power. What Jesus consistently rejects is retaliation that mirrors injustice.

At the same time, the Gospels also present a deliberate limit to resistance. Jesus himself does not resist arrest or execution, even when unjustly condemned. In Matthew’s narrative, this restraint is not portrayed as weakness, but as purposeful submission to a larger divine vocation. Jesus refuses violent defense in Gethsemane and accepts the consequences of imperial power without retaliation. This tension complicates any reading of “turn the other cheek” as a strategy of social “activism” alone. The saying cannot be reduced either to passive endurance or to calculated resistance. Instead, Matthew presents a pattern in which injustice is named, dignity is preserved, and violence is refused, even when refusal leads to suffering.

Over time, “turn the other cheek” came to be read outside its historical and linguistic context. Detached from the realities of Roman-occupied Judea and the social language of honor and shame, the phrase was flattened into a general call for passivity. Yet in Matthew’s Gospel, Jesus’ words are anything but passive.

The earliest followers of Jesus appear to have lived out this teaching primarily as non-retaliation rather than organized resistance. In Paul’s letters, believers are repeatedly urged not to repay evil for evil, but to endure injustice without vengeance, entrusting judgment to God (e.g., Romans 12:17–19). At the same time, Paul does not glorify abuse or deny the reality of wrongdoing; he names injustice clearly and, when necessary, appeals to legal authority rather than responding with violence (Acts 16:37–39; 22:25). Early Christian communities thus practiced a posture of restraint and witness under pressure, marked by refusal of retaliation rather than by active confrontation or armed resistance.

Early Christian interpreters already recognized the tension in Jesus’ teaching. While figures such as Origen and Tertullian emphasized non-retaliation as central to Christian ethics, later thinkers like Augustine distinguished between inward disposition and outward action, reading the command as a rejection of vengeance rather than a mandate for passivity. From the beginning, the saying was understood as morally demanding, not simplistic.

Jesus’ words call for restraint without submission, courage without violence, and moral clarity in the face of insult. He does not teach his followers to disappear under injustice, but to stand without becoming what they oppose. Understanding the original meaning of Jesus’ teaching does not weaken its challenge. Turning the other cheek is not about giving up dignity, but about refusing to let humiliation define the truth. It is not surrender, but a deliberate, disciplined refusal to answer injustice on its own terms.

 Where Does Satan Live?

Where Does Satan Live?

By Dr. Nicholas J. Schaser

May 25, 2025

1.4K 10

In John Milton’s Paradise Lost, Satan declares that it is “better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven” (1.263). This famous line contributes to the popular notion that the devil dwells in hell and deceives humanity from his fiery throne below. According to the biblical texts, however, Satan spends most of his time on earth and ascends intermittently to heaven. Rather than being a place where the devil “reigns,” hell will be the place of Satan’s ultimate ruin. 

Scripture clarifies that Satan is usually bound to the earth. At the start of Job, God and the Accuser meet in heaven: “There was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and the Satan also arrived among them. The Lord said to the Satan, ‘From where have you come?’ And the Satan answered the Lord and said, ‘From going back and forth upon the earth (בָּאָרֶץ; ba’arets), and from walking around in it” (Job 1:6-7). While the devil can ascend to heaven for an audience with God, his usual stomping ground is the earth, where he roams around looking for people to accuse of sin. This is why 1 Peter 5:8 warns, “Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil walks around (περιπατεῖ, peripateī) like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.” If Satan were living in hell rather than on earth, then this call for earth-bound individuals to “be watchful” would make little sense. The Greek word for “walks around” in 1 Peter is the same that appears in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible) when the devil tells God that he has been “walking around in (ἐμπεριπατήσας) that which is under heaven” (Job 1:7 LXX)—that is, roving upon the earth.

Revelation corroborates the idea that Satan is established on earth but can also arrive in heaven. Jesus tells the church in Pergamum (in modern-day Turkey): “I know where you dwell, where [is] the throne of Satan (ὁ θρόνος τοῦ Σατανᾶ, ho thrōnos toū Satanā). Yet you hold fast my name, and you did not deny my faith… [in the place] where Satan dwells” (Rev 2:13). According to Yeshua, the devil dwells in the very same place as do the people of Pergamum—Revelation does not place the devil’s dwelling in hell. Later in Revelation, Satan (called the “great dragon”) fights a war “in heaven” (ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, 12:7) and is thrown down “into the earth” (εἰς τὴν γῆν, 12:9)—not into hell. Much like in Job, the devil spends most of his time on earth, alongside the occasional trip to heaven. Quite contrary to Milton’s view of Satan ruling in hell, Revelation designates hell as the place of Satan’s ultimate downfall: “And the devil who deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet also are, and they will be tormented day and night into the ages of ages” (Revelation 20:10). According to Scripture, though Satan lives on earth in the present age, hell will be his final destination in the world to come.

Did the Lord Jesus Contradict Torah?

 Did Jesus Contradict the Torah?

Did Jesus Contradict the Torah?

By Dr. Nicholas J. Schaser

February 02, 2026

13 11

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus quotes from the Torah several times with the introductory phrase, “You have heard that it was said…” (Matt 5:21, 27, 33, 38, 43). According to English translations, Jesus follows his quotations with another statement: “But I say to you….” Most scholars refer to these juxtapositions as the “Antitheses.” But this scholarly label makes it sound like Jesus’s words are antithetical to the words at Sinai—as though Jesus is contradicting the Ten Commandments and improving upon the lesser law that his Father had given to Moses. However, this understanding of Yeshua’s sermon stands in tension with his introductory declaration that he had “not come to abolish the Law.” (5:17). A closer look at the language of the Gospel suggests that Jesus is not superseding the earlier commandments; instead, after citing the Torah, Jesus appends his own affirmative commentary to the command so that his hearers can observe it even more closely.

In the first of his so-called “antitheses,” Jesus states, “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder’ [Exodus 20:13], and whoever murders will be liable to judgment” (Matt 5:21). Then, according to English translations, Jesus adds,​ “But I say to you that anyone who is angry with one’s brother or sister will be liable to judgment” (5:22). The Greek word translated at the start of 5:22 as “but” is δέ (dē). When translators choose the word “but,” they create an antithetical construction for the English reader. The implication is that Jesus acknowledges the command at Sinai, but then offers his own law in contradistinction to the Mosaic statute—and this implied bifurcation leads many interpreters to assume that the “old law” has been superseded by Jesus’s teachings.

However, while the Greek δέ can mean “but,” it can also mean “and” (along with several other English terms). In fact, the appearance of δέ immediately before Jesus’s first “but I say to you” clearly means “and.” Yeshua states, “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder,” and (δέ, dē) whoever murders will be liable to judgment” (Matt 5:21). Then, in the very verse, Matthew uses δέ again: “δέ I say to you…” (5:22). Since the immediately prior usage of δέ means “and,” translators have good reason to render the ensuing statement not as “but I say to you,” but rather “and (δέ) I say to you.” This alternative translation eliminates the apparent antithesis; instead of Jesus contradicting the Torah with “but I say to you,” he affirms the Law of Moses and includes another statement to back it up: “And I say to you, whoever is angry with one’s brother or sister will be liable to judgment” (5:22). The rationale, then, is that Moses’s prohibition against murder continues to be valid, and Yeshua includes his prohibition against anger to ensure that the Mosaic command is never broken: if you never get angry with your neighbors, you’ll never go so far as to murder them! In this way, Jesus is protecting his listeners from breaking the original Law given to Moses. The Sermon on the Mount does not offer “antitheses,” but rather “protections.”

Did the Church Replace Israel as the Only People of God?

 Only One People of God?

Only One People of God?

By Dr. Nicholas J. Schaser

February 17, 2026

137 5

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​“There has always been only one people of God.” A quick internet search will show how common this assertion has become in Christian commentary. Often, the idea that God has had only one identifiable people throughout history precedes a further claim that, after the arrival of Jesus, the Christian church has become the true people of God. Conversely, since most Jews do not follow Yeshua today, the original chosen nation of Israel is no longer included in the one people of God. This view is known as supersessionism—the belief that the (mostly gentile) Christian church has replaced ethnic Jews as the new Israel. Yet the notion that God can embrace only one people is inaccurate. In fact, Scripture envisions many different peoples worshiping the one true God.

The ethnic nation of Israel is God’s chosen “people” (Hebrew: עַם; am). As early as Exodus, God tells Moses, “I will send you to Pharaoh and you will bring out my people (עַמִּי; ami), the children of Israel (יִשְׂרָאֵל) from Egypt” (Exodus 3:10). Later in the same book, Moses asks God, “Is it not in your walking with us that we are set apart, I and your people (עַמְּךָ; amekha), from all the people (מִכָּל־הָעָם) on the face of the earth?” (Exodus 33:16). Indeed, God identifies Israel as the people who are distinguished from all others in their special relationship with the Lord.

Yet Scripture also describes gentile nations as peoples of God. Isaiah 19:24-25 declares that the Lord will bless multiple nations, saying, “Blessed be my people Egypt (עַמִּי מִצְרַיִם; ami mitsrayim), and Assyria the work of my hands, and my inheritance Israel (וְנַחֲלָתִי יִשְׂרָאֵל).” Following texts like these, Revelation envisions countless peoples worshiping God. John recounts, “I heard the number of the sealed, 144,000, sealed from every tribe of the children of Israel (υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ, huiōn Israēl)…. After this, I looked and behold, a great crowd that no one could number, out of all nations and tribes and peoples (λαῶν, laōn) and languages, stood before the throne and before the Lamb” (Rev 7:4, 9). According to this vision, the goal of God is to have many different peoples worshiping before the divine throne: the tribes of Israel are distinct from an innumerable multitude that contains tribes from all other nations. In Messiah, all of these collectives become diverse peoples of God. Thus, the claim that God has only one people—or that the gentiles of the global church make up that one people—is an unbiblical idea. Ethnic Israel remains the chosen people from the exodus to the eschaton, and other peoples are blessed to join Israel under the parentage of God.

Is the Giving of the Law intended for Salvation?

 

• 

HomeHebrew BibleIs the Law for Salvation?

Is the Law for Salvation?

By Dr. Nicholas J. Schaser

May 03, 2021

15.6K 153

According to a widely accepted view of the gospel, Jesus had to die for people’s sins because human beings are unable to follow the Law. If only we could keep the Torah, so the argument goes, then it would lead to salvation; but since Law observance is impossible, Jesus comes to save us. However, this view reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of why God gave the Torah to Israel in the first place. The commandments do not “save” anyone; God does that. The Law was given not for salvation, but for relation.

The so-called Ten Commandments (in Hebrew, the “ten words” [עשׂרת הדברים; aseret ha’devarim; cf. Exod 34:28; Deut 4:13; 10:4]) are the preamble to the Torah; they introduce the rest of the God’s stipulations, which span from Exodus to Deuteronomy. At the outset of the Ten Commandments, God declares, “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. You shall have no other gods besides me” (Exodus 20:2-3). The first declaration of the Law—not to worship any other gods—comes after the God of Israel has already saved the people from slavery in Egypt. Before Moses ascends Sinai, he refers to the "salvation" (ישׁועה; yeshuah) that the Lord wrought in rescuing Israel (cf. Exodus 14:13; 15:2). God offers the free grace of salvation before the Israelites observe a single task of the Torah. The point of the Law was not to “save” the Hebrews. Instead, God saves prior to giving the Law, and the commandments reaffirm the divine-human relationship.

Deuteronomy clarifies that the Law comes in response to God’s salvation, not as the way to achieve that salvation. Moses proclaims to his people, “Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and the Lord your God rescued you from there (ויפדך... משם; va’yiphdkha... misham); therefore, I command you to observe this word” (Deut 24:18). Torah observance is the thankful response to God’s gift of salvation. This same sequence of grace followed by action appears in the New Testament: “By grace (χάριτί; chárití) you have been saved (σεσῳσμένοι; sesosménoi) through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God (θεοῦ τὸ δῶρον; theou tò doron), not [a result] of works so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Messiah Jesus, for good works (ἐπὶ ἔργοις ἀγαθοῖς; epì ergois agathois), which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them” (Ephesians 2:8-10). Salvation comes through the grace that God provides in Yeshua, and good works are the way that saved human beings say, “Thank you.” Thus, the Torah provides the blueprint for what God accomplishes through Jesus, and for what is expected of those who follow him.

Although contemporary Christianity tends to frame salvation through Christ in opposition to the Law, as though the Law was meant to produce salvation but did not accomplish its goal, the Torah was never a means for being saved. In the history of Israel, God did the saving and Torah observance was a way for God’s saved people to live in relationship with the Lord.

You can learn more profound insights (CLICK HERE for more)

THE BOOK OF HOSEA

📘 THE BOOK OF HOSEA

🔹 THEME

“God’s Faithful Love Toward an Unfaithful People.”

Hosea reveals the heart of God as a loving husband whose people (Israel) have become spiritually adulterous, yet He still calls them back in mercy and covenant love.

Key Verse:

“I will heal their backsliding, I will love them freely: for mine anger is turned away from him.”

— Hosea 14:4 (KJV)

🧭 SYNOPSIS

Hosea prophesied to the Northern Kingdom of Israel during its final years before being conquered by Assyria (around 722 B.C.).

God commanded Hosea to marry a woman named Gomer, who would become unfaithful to him. This marriage became a living prophecy of Israel’s relationship with God:

Hosea = God (faithful husband)

Gomer = Israel (unfaithful wife)

Despite Gomer’s unfaithfulness, Hosea redeems and restores her, illustrating how God desires to restore His people even after spiritual adultery.

The book alternates between:

Judgment for sin (idolatry, injustice, rebellion)

Hope of restoration through repentance and love

🧩 OUTLINE OF THE BOOK OF HOSEA

I. Hosea’s Marriage as a Living Parable (Chapters 1–3)

1. The Marriage to Gomer (Chapter 1)

Hosea marries Gomer.

Their children are given symbolic names:

Jezreel – Judgment is coming

Lo-Ruhamah – No mercy

Lo-Ammi – Not my people

2. Israel’s Spiritual Adultery (Chapter 2)

Israel chases other gods (Baal worship).

God disciplines but promises restoration.

“I will betroth thee unto me for ever…” — Hos. 2:19

3. Hosea Redeems Gomer (Chapter 3)

Hosea buys back his unfaithful wife.

Picture of God redeeming Israel.

II. God’s Case Against Israel (Chapters 4–13)

1. Charges Against the Nation (Ch. 4–7)

Lack of knowledge of God.

Corruption among priests and people.

“My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.” — Hos. 4:6

2. Judgment for Idolatry and Alliances (Ch. 8–10)

Israel trusts foreign nations instead of God.

Reaping what they sow.

“They have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind.” — Hos. 8:7

3. God’s Love Rejected (Ch. 11–13)

God recounts His love from Egypt onward.

Yet Israel continues in rebellion.

“When Israel was a child, then I loved him…” — Hos. 11:1

III. Call to Repentance and Promise of Restoration (Chapter 14)

Final appeal: return to the LORD.

Promise of healing, blessing, and fruitfulness.

“I will be as the dew unto Israel…” — Hos. 14:5

📖 SURVEY OF THE BOOK OF HOSEA

Section

Chapters

Focus

Key Message

Living Parable

1–3

Marriage to Gomer

God’s love despite unfaithfulness

Charges

4–7

Sin exposed

Lack of truth and knowledge

Judgment

8–13

Consequences

Idolatry leads to destruction

Restoration

14

Hope

Return brings healing

💡 KEY THEOLOGICAL INSIGHTS

1. Covenant Love (Hesed)

God’s love is faithful, loyal, and enduring, even when His people fail.

2. Spiritual Adultery

Idolatry is not just sin—it is betrayal of relationship.

3. Knowledge of God

“I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.” — Hos. 6:6

God values relationship over ritual.

4. Divine Discipline

God allows consequences to bring His people back.

5. Redemption

Hosea redeeming Gomer foreshadows Christ redeeming sinners.

🌿 CHRIST IN THE BOOK OF HOSEA

The Faithful Husband → Christ and the Church (Ephesians 5:25)

The Redeemer → Hosea buying back Gomer mirrors Christ’s redemption

The Call from Egypt →

“Out of Egypt have I called my son.” — Hos. 11:1

→ Fulfilled in Christ (Matthew 2:15)

🕯️ SUMMARY THOUGHT

Hosea reveals one of the most beautiful truths in Scripture:

Even when God’s people are unfaithful, His love remains faithful.

It is a message not only of warning—but of relentless grace.

“Come, and let us return unto the LORD…” — Hosea 6:1 (KJV)

Breaking the Impossible

 GVS Message

Breaking the Impossible: The DNA of Korea Now Leads to the “Spiritual Highway”

Introduction:

From a 100-Year Curse to a 50- Year Miracle

In 1953, looking at the streets of Seoul devastated by the Korean War, a foreign correspondent made a cold prediction:

“This country will not rise again even after a hundred years.”

To his eyes, Korea was a “perfectly destroyed ruin” where buildings, bridges, and even hope were shattered. But he was dead wrong. Korea rose up again in just 50 years, not 100.

Today, 70 years later, it stands as the world’s 12th largest economy and a global cultural powerhouse.

We have proven to the world: even without natural resources, even with a small land, and even when everything is destroyed by war, it is possible to rise.

What we needed was not resources, but a 6-step formula for success: Education, Speed, Perfectionism, Crisis Management, National Unity, and an Unstoppable Spirit of Challenge.

Point 1: The Paradox of the Highway—History Runs Where Roads Exist

The most symbolic event in this incredible history was the construction of the Gyeongbu Expressway in 1968. At that time, Reuter's news agency mocked the decision:

“Why build a highway when Korea has so few cars? This is an incomprehensible decision.”

In fact, there were only 27,000 cars in the entire country. However, our logic was clear: “We don’t build roads because there are cars; cars increase because there are highways!” That bold, strategic conviction—cutting through mountains with shovels and pickaxes—created the great artery of the Korean economy today.

Point 2: 20 Years of GVS—A “Spiritual Highway” for Global Ministers

Dear GVS Alumni and Youth,

For the past 20 years, GVS has served with this “Expressway Spirit.” Since 2005, we have traveled to 15 countries, paving the “GVS Spiritual Highway” for local seminaries and regional pastors.

Some skeptics asked, “Why train people when there are no fields or churches to serve in?” But our answer remained steadfast: “History moves forward only when trained ministers are ready to run.” On that road, the 3,000 ministers trained over the past 20 years have become God’s powerful army, transforming the world today.

Point 3: Youth GVS—A Spiritual Academy

Compressing 9 Years into 2 Weeks

On April 28, the youth of Youth GVS will step onto that glorious road.

The world says it takes at least 9 years—from four years of theology school to three years of divinity school and the ordination process—to become a minister. However, Youth GVS provides a “Spiritual Acceleration” that compresses your training into a 2-week full-course intensive session.

Just as Korea rewrote the history of global construction with bare hands and no equipment, this training will transform you into elite ministers equipped with both spiritual boldness and professional expertise.

The practical know-how and powerful anointing from 30 world-class instructors will be the ultimate engine, enabling you to transcend the 9-year limit and run toward the nations immediately.

Conclusion: Miracles Are Not Awaited; They Are Executed

Just as the miracle of Korea was a result of “Strategy” and “Execution,” the history of GVS has been one of “Overwhelming Obedience” to the calling.

On the “GVS Spiritual Highway” paved by your seniors across 15 nations, it is now your turn to run, Youth GVS!

From April 28 to May 10, get on this highway that will fundamentally transform your life.

There are no miracles. There is only strategy and execution toward God’s calling.

You are the engine for the revival of the next generation!

God bless GVS!

God bless you!