Dr. Brown Tackles Your Best Theology Questions

The following is a pre-recorded program. Hey friends, thanks for joining us on the Line of Fire. I'm not giving out the phone number because I'm not taking calls today. Earlier in the week, I solicited questions, theological questions, charismatic theology questions, biblical questions from Facebook and Twitter. I'm going to answer as many as I can on the broadcast today, so sit back, enjoy, take this all in. I'm going to start over on Twitter, then move over to Facebook. Here's what I posted on Twitter. I said I'll be pre-recording our Friday Q&A show, Answering Your Best Theological Questions. I'd especially welcome questions relating to charismatic theology, but others are welcome too. So, post them here now.

I'll get to as many as I can on the show. By the way, that's a good reason to follow me on Facebook and Twitter because we often do this and sometimes interact directly there. So on Twitter, it is Dr. D.R. Michael L. Brown. Make sure you got two L's in the middle there.

So that's where I am at Twitter. D.R. Michael L. Brown. Facebook, Ask Dr. Brown. A.S.K. D.R.

Brown. So the first question is from Paul. Genesis 12.1 says, Now the LORD said to Abram, some translations say the LORD had said, implying this command occurred earlier in the narrative. Can you comment on the ability of certain Hebrew verbs functioning this way? It seems to occur more than once in Genesis. Yes, Paul, this is a grammatical form called the Pluperfect.

Pluperfect. So it is not just the perfect form that he said this, but he had said this. And sometimes it is determined just by the overall context that it seems that Pluperfect would be the better way to express it because the Hebrew does not have as many nuances in its verbal structure as we have, for example, in Greek or in English. So you have to have different ways to express things. Sometimes it's just context. But other times it is word order and depends on what comes first in a sentence.

And then this gives you an indication that this in fact could be Pluperfect. So if we look at Genesis 12.1 for a moment, Genesis 12.1 in Hebrew, again, the Hebrew would just logically be translated, and the LORD said to Abram, there's nothing in the word order that would indicate something earlier. But some translated it just interpretively. So this is not one of these word order things. But if you go, for example, to Genesis chapter 2, all right, Genesis chapter 2, and it's dealing with the man Adam, God saying it's not good for him to be alone. In verse 19, some would translate the LORD God formed out of the earth all the wild beasts and say, well, that that would indicate he had already formed them. So you'll see this argument coming up.

But again, sometimes you can argue better based on word order. For example, in Genesis 1, v'ha'ar tzayitah toh v'vohu, some will argue it means as for the earth, it had become formless and void. So there is going to be debate because the Hebrew does not have a precise and simple way of expressing this like you would have in English or some other languages.

Let's see. Daniel, something you mentioned recently has been heavy on my heart. Many believers seem to have come to spirit of deception, believing, defending that most outrageous lies and that we should pray that the spirit of truth would be revealed to them while praying the same for ourselves. Can you expound on that thought?

Yes. Number one, the deception that I saw leading up to and following the 2020 elections, especially in the charismatic movement, is the worst widespread deception that I've seen now in my 50 years in the Lord. November, December will make 50 years in the Lord. I told Ruth Graham from the New York Times earlier in the year that in my 49 years in the Lord, it was the worst widespread deception I'd seen. So I've seen individual groups and individuals get more deceived and believe crazier things, but to see so many, so sure that Trump would be reelected and then after the elections to be so sure that he really had won. Okay, forget the debate about election fraud. That's a totally separate thing. But to say, no, no, no, he really did win and you watch, he's going to be reinstated and Biden's never going to be inaugurated or Biden's going to be removed and people still holding to it.

I just got rebuked yesterday. Someone called me a blind guide on YouTube for not acknowledging that the prophets were right, for not accepting that the prophets were right and that Trump really did win four more years and it really is the president. So that's serious deception. And then many believing conspiracy theories chewing on conspiracy theories.

So how did we get this far? One is many are not grounded in the word. This is widespread in the body today. We're not grounded sufficiently in the word. That's one big reason this has happened. A second big reason is that we have become very skeptical for good reason of a lot of what we hear from the secular media. And as Trump was able to blast it all as fake news, many kind of went to the extreme of thinking, well, he's the only one we can really trust or just whatever media says is fake news.

I was doing a broadcast one day and in order to say, hey, this is not coming from the right. Let me quote this from CNN. Let me quote this from the New York Times.

Did I see someone comment and I don't see most comments. I happened to spot this one and the guy said, I'm not following you anymore because you quote CNN and New York Times. So number one, I was quoting them to say, this is not just coming from the right. This coming from the left. But number two, the fact that I would even quote them and I couldn't be trusted. So these extreme reactions. And then with that, the embracing of all types of conspiratorial theories because you can't trust the news, but you didn't show they're telling the real truth.

So that appeal. And then thirdly, in the charismatic movement, many, many years of lack of accountability for prophetic words, many, many years of leaders just prophesying X, Y, Z and it doesn't happen and they just go on or they change X, Y, Z to ABC. Yeah, we told you X, Y, Z and look, it's ABC and people just go on. So charismatics have a strength of being people of the spirit and being people of faith. We have a weakness of being very gullible.

So it's kind of like a perfect storm. So what we do in our own lives is we are truth based. That we surround ourselves with people who tell us the truth, with people who are not impressed with us and hey, it's simply not true. Look, my wife Nancy is not impressed with human beings, period. And there have been very few people over the decades that she's met as men or women of God that have impressed her in terms of the quality of their lives in God. For people in general, leaders in general, Christian leaders in general, she's utterly unimpressed, including with yours truly. I once sent her what I thought would be the amazing beginning of a book. I thought it would really draw people in and I sent it to her, printed it out for her, gave it to her and she gave it back to me and there in red at the top of the page were written the words total fail. That's how it started.

Total fail. I didn't see something she saw, but the point is that I'm not surrounded by flatterers and that's important. Be surrounded by people who tell you the truth and be honest with you and candid and then be truthful with yourself and then be a person of the word and then humble yourself and learn to receive correction and welcome accountability. Gamer, can a biblical case be made for differentiating between baptism in the spirit from born or indwelling of the spirit? There doesn't seem to be a clear biblical distinction.

I think you can make a distinction, but it's not a hill that I'll die on. In other words, most Christians believe that the moment you're saved, you are baptized in the spirit, that you receive everything of the spirit that you'll receive. Now, you grow in God and your knowledge of God and your experience of the spirit, but you receive everything then. Pentecostals teach that the moment you're saved, you're indwelt by the Holy Spirit. Your body's become a temple of the Holy Spirit, et cetera, and you were baptized by the Spirit into the body of Christ, but there is a baptism in the spirit where you are now immersed in the spirit and empowered for service. I believe you can make a case in arguing that the disciples were indwelt with the Holy Spirit before they were baptized in the spirit in Acts 2, that Jesus told them to wait until they were endued with power from on high, not until they were born again, but until they were endued with power from on high in Luke 24, 49, and Acts 1, verse 8. And then we see subsequently that there's an empowering in Acts 2 with an outward manifestation, and then we see the Samaritans are born again, but the Spirit does not come upon them yet in Acts 8. We see in Acts 19 that Paul asked believers he made it from Ephesus, did you receive the Spirit when you believed?

So I believe a case can be made for it, but it's certainly not one that I divide over. Let's see here. Okay, Pavloimy asks on worship. Question on worship. The song Do What You Want by Vertical Worship says, All-consuming fire fall, fall on us. How right or wrong is it to sing that? God bless you. I think it's wonderful to sing that.

I've sung similar words without that song for decades. We know that Deuteronomy 4-24 and Hebrews 12-29 both speak of God as a consuming fire, so the God of the Old Testament is the God of the New Testament. With that in mind, may I remind you, you can still pre-order the new edition, beautiful hardcover, of my first book, written in 1985, but now updated, renewed, and beautifully printed.

Compassionate Father, We're Consuming Fire, Engaging the God of the Old Testament. It's going to be printed very, very shortly. We've got an accompanying video stream that you can watch that takes you through the book. It is super practical with so many questions about the God of the Old Testament today. You can get that on our website.

You can still pre-order a signed, numbered copy, along with the free DVD stream, the free video stream, at AskDrBrown.org. All I have to say, Matthew 3-11, the baptism in the Spirit is a baptism in the Spirit and fire. Acts 2, when the Holy Spirit came, came with tongues of fire. Our God is a consuming fire, which is judgment for the wicked, but for us as believers, Isaiah 33, 14 and following, that we dwell with the everlasting burnings, meaning God who himself is a consuming fire. So, fire of God fall on us, let the God who answers by fire be called 1 Kings 18. It's not to destroy us, but it is to consume us with his love, and to consume us with his passion, and to consume us with his purity, and to consume us with his power, so that we can be used by him.

Consumed, not in the sense of destroyed, but fully absorbed with the passion and fire of God. For many years, as I would pray for people, especially if I was laying hands on hundreds or thousands of people in a night, I would pray, fire, that's just one word, fire. Why are you praying for our people?

Because it's my short prayer, because I'm praying for a lot of people, it's my short prayer for saying, God, let your holy fire fall on us. Let your holy fire burn on us. Burn away the dross. The Lord comes, Malachi 3, as a refiner's fire. Lord, burn away the dross. Burn away everything impure. Set us ablaze.

Set us on fire. Beautiful prayer. Beautiful way of saying it.

I'm all for it. I don't know all the words to the song in my head, but absolutely, I'd say them. It's the line of fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown. Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34-TRUTH.

Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. Thanks for joining the broadcast today, not taking any calls, but answering some great questions that were submitted earlier in the week on Twitter and on Facebook. Remember, if you're not connected with me online, we're also super active on YouTube. We've gotten really active now on Instagram.

Just go to AskDrBrown.org, askdrbrown.org, and whatever you use most, just connect with us. It's Facebook, if it's Twitter, if it's Instagram, if it's YouTube. We're not on TikTok now. We might be, but right now you can connect on all these different platforms, and no two of them are the same in terms of what we're putting out and content that you can receive.

Okay, over on Twitter, and after this we're going to go a couple more on Twitter, then go over to Facebook. Joshua, a question. In Leviticus 13, it speaks of the priest discerning the leprous condition of the people. Now, by the way, we translate with leprosy, but it's not Hansen's disease as we know leprosy today. It's a different type of severe skin condition. In Leviticus 13, 13, the priest is supposed to pronounce people clean when they're fully leprous.

This covered all his body. I wonder why that is and what that means. It's basically this skin condition taking its course, and now it's reached a certain point. It almost feels like someone may still have a certain symptom, but they've passed the point of contagion, and they don't have to be quarantined. Again, we don't know the exact disease.

We've spoken of something as psoriasis, but it's kind of like it's passed through your system, and this is the manifestation, and now you'll be on the other side of it. Dreamcatcher, could you talk about John 14, 20? Jesus is talking about the Holy Spirit, then he says, He is in the Father. We are in Him, and He is in us. Amazing and fills my heart, but hard to grasp beyond the surface. We'd love to hear your thoughts.

Yeah, how do I simplify that? So on the one hand, God is all in all, and His fullness so transcends our understanding that even the simplest explanations He gave to us would still be beyond our natural understanding. So some of it we receive by faith, and we fall at His feet in worship. Other things we get revelation and insight. Others we hold in holy tension.

For example, the fact that God always existed. We know to be true, but we hold in holy tension because we don't have the capacity for fully comprehending something that always was. We can say it and agree with it, but to fully comprehend it goes beyond our natural limitations. So on the one hand, God is one. The Father's in the Son, the Son's in the Father, the Spirit's in the Son and the Father, etc. And then we are in Him, and He is in us, and yet we are not Him, and He is not us. So the Father's not the Son, the Son is not the Father, the Spirit is not the Son or the Father. And yet there's one God. So when the Spirit comes and lives with us, then the Father and Son also come because there's one God. And yet, literally the Father and Son don't come to live within us, but the Holy Spirit does. Just some very simple thoughts.

Very, very basic. Let your heart continue to be filled and flooded. Jason, there's a reference in a Christian parenting book, Jesus the Gentle Parent by L. R. Nust, making the claim that the commandments, original Hebrew text is Tsavah, which is supposed to mean directions or guides. I did not see this specific word in Deuteronomy. Is this the correct interpretation of the Hebrew? Does this at all change how we should regard the Ten Commandments? Trying to dig in more here to understand if the author's interpretation aligns correctly with Biblical truth.

Thank you Dr. Brown. Mitzvah is a commandment. When Judaism talks about the 613 commandments, they're commandments.

Tsavah, the verb, can have the nuance sometimes in terms of guide or direct as in Genesis 18 that he will guide or direct his family after him. But when it comes from God, when it is God's guidance or God's directive, it is a commandment. Now the Ten Commandments are just called the Ten Words. God spoke these words, and they're the 10 words is how they're often referred to in the Hebrew Bible. But in point of fact, they are commandments. They are commandments.

We are required to keep them to be in obedience to God. So I don't know the book. The author may be making a great point, but when a parent tells the child, all right, you will brush your teeth tonight and make your bed in the morning, and then you just keep those two chores in a little kid, then you get, you know, this extra bonus after lunch or something. And the kid doesn't do it. Well, that wasn't just a suggestion. That was a directive from the parent, which is command.

There's a way to do things, obviously, but command is command. Okay. Isaac is speaking in tongues. Really, the evidence that you've been baptized in the Holy Ghost and clarified in another tweet, the initial evidence. It is the most common sign of the baptism of the Spirit in the last hundred-plus years as people are filled with the Spirit.

The common denominators, you're filled and you speak. Sometimes people will give an utterance in prophecy, but the most common sign is tongues, and it is a sign seen in Acts 2 and Acts 10 and Acts 19, and by implication in Acts 8. However, I believe there are people who have been baptized in the Spirit in keeping with my understanding that it is subsequent to salvation, a subsequent empowerment, and they have not spoken in tongues either because they didn't think they could or would or it wasn't part of their understanding. But in point of fact, it is the most common outward manifestation, but not the only, and certainly not one that we should put people under pressure to demonstrate. Prove to me that you're really baptized in the Spirit by speaking in tongues.

That can produce all kinds of artificial and even counterfeit results. Adri, what was Abraham's side? Was it a resting place people went before a full atonement from Jesus happened?

This is what I've heard. Abraham's side is a metaphorical expression, meaning by him, and he is a godly patriarch and the father of faith, so you go to be with him upon death in a place called paradise. Whether this was where you went before Jesus died on the cross and rose from the dead and then after that you went straight into heaven, or whether this is simply a metaphor for where you want and it could mean in heaven, that's debated. But it spoke of being at his side because of his righteousness and being a man of faith, being the father of faith, so upon death the righteous would be joined with him. Again, whether it was paradise like Luke 16 with a gulf separating from Hades where the wicked were, and that was somehow in the netherworld spiritually speaking, and then with the death and resurrection of Jesus, the righteous were brought up to heaven, or they immediately went to heaven upon death and Abraham's side or Abraham's bosom was just a metaphor for that, that can be debated.

Bradley, last Twitter question. Could you respond to this part of the article in regards to the notion that Deuteronomy 18.15 contains extra words which aren't found in the earliest manuscripts? So the argument is Deuteronomy 18.15, which says that God will raise up a prophet like Moses from among you, from your own brothers, is found in the Masoretic textual tradition, but it's not found in the Samaritan Torah, it's not found in the Septuagint, it's not found in the Dead Sea Scrolls. As if, this was created later to make it look as if Muhammad was not the true prophet spoken of by Deuteronomy 18, one of the most outlandish, ridiculous misinterpretations of the Hebrew Bible that's ever existed, that Muhammad is the prophet spoken of in Deuteronomy 18.

But the allegation would be this was added later to make clear that it couldn't be Muhammad. Well, number one, even if this was only found in what's called the Masoretic textual tradition, that existed in the times before Jesus. So that textual tradition already existed in the times before Jesus and is quoted centuries before Muhammad. It's quoted in early church writings, it's quoted in New Testament writings, it's quoted in rabbinic writings. So this is for centuries before, especially rabbinic writings and New Testament. Masoretic textual traditions quote it exactly and attest it in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Centuries, over half a millennium, before the time of Muhammad. That's the first thing.

Second thing is bogus. So here, I'm just gonna pull up some of my resources here. I'm gonna read to you from the Septuagint. Deuteronomy 18, 15, the Lord thy God shall raise up for you a prophet of your brothers like me, him shall you hear. So it doesn't have from among you, but of your brothers.

That's the first thing. Then, and like me, it says, then in verse 18, I will raise up to them a prophet of their brethren like you, and I will put my words in his mouth and he shall speak. So it's from your brothers, it's from your fellow Israelites, okay? That's the Septuagint. Deuteronomy 18, 15 and 18, if I look at the Targum, which is the early Aramaic translation slash paraphrase, there, let's just see. Yeah, so the Lord speaks and, oh, sorry, wrong verse there on my screen.

No wonder I wasn't seeing what I was looking for. Okay, right, so a prophet from among you from your brothers. That's the Targum. That's the Targum.

So this is early attestation. This goes back to the early centuries of this era with some traditions preceding even New Testament times. Right, so there it is attested in the Targum. And then if we go to the Dead Sea Scrolls, okay, if we go over to the Dead Sea Scrolls, Deuteronomy 18, 15 is not found in any manuscript of the Dead Sea Scrolls. So it's not there in terms of manuscripts. You have attestations to it elsewhere, but in terms of manuscripts of Deuteronomy, it's not attested. And either way, you still have attested from your brothers, from your brothers, which is fellow Israelites, which is...

So it is a completely lame, weak argument on every, every level. And the idea that words were added from among you, somehow these words were added, and now this means it excludes Muhammad. The whole thing excludes Muhammad from beginning to end. And the prophet that's raised up prophesies the name of Yahweh. You'd never find the Tetragrammaton, the Yud-Heh-Vov-Heh, the four letters of God's name that in English were traditionally pronounced Jehovah. You don't find that in the Quran or on the lips of Muhammad.

Why? Because he was a false prophet. He wasn't a prophet from among the Israelite brethren. And all the texts speak of that from your brethren.

So, an incredibly lame argument to support an incredibly lame point. The texts do not fly. We'll be right back and go over to Facebook and grab your questions from there. It's the Line of Fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown. Your voice of moral, cultural and spiritual revolution. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. Thanks for joining us on the Line of Fire.

No calls today. I'm answering questions that were posted on Facebook and on Twitter. We're going to move over to Facebook or ask Dr. Brown's Facebook page.

If you don't join us there and you're on Facebook, by all means do. ASKDRBrown. Matthew asks this. Who were the scribes in the Gospels? At times they seemed like secretaries, yet at others almost like they were a denomination like the Sadducees or Pharisees.

Thank you, Dr. Brown. They're certainly not, quote, secretaries. The scribes were Torah scholars.

And on the one hand, this was generic. This could be speaking of Torah scholars among the different groups, or it could be singling out Torah scholars within certain groups. So, it's not used with the same precise definition that Pharisees or Sadducees would be.

So, certainly not secretaries. By scribes, it referred to Torah scholars. And there could be Torah scholars among the different groups. So, you have to read it in context to see are they being singled out. Or either you could talk about Jewish leaders, you could talk about Pharisees, Sadducees, et cetera. You could talk about those holding to the traditions of the fathers.

That would be Pharisees, another way of referring to them. So, there's some overlap and some ambiguity. That's why each would have to be looked at in context. So, completely legitimate question. Ben, how often do you get to speak on behalf of Charismatics to non-Charismatics? What sort of olive branch do you think there can be between the two groups? Number one, every day on the line of fire broadcast, I'm speaking to Charismatics and non-Charismatics, and often speaking about issues that unite us and issues that divide us. And I've spoken even today about levels of deception in the Charismatic movement that we've addressed with false prophecies and unaccountable prophecies and even following conspiratorial theories and things like that, and why Charismatics can do that. In other words, the strength of Charismatics is to really be believers and step out in the spirit.

A weakness can be gullibility, just like a strength of non-Charismatics can be to be more circumspect and evaluate things, and then often there can be cynicism and skepticism. So, each have strengths and weaknesses, so I'm constantly speaking of both because we need each other. To me, the quote olive branch is number one to say, what does the Word say? Can we agree on what the Word says?

Forget this experience, that experience. Can we agree on what the Word says? So, in that sense, I want everyone to embrace the things of the Spirit. And even if you're a non-Charismatic, to see, hey, we have Scripture reasons for this.

That's one. And then the other thing would be, in terms of quote an olive branch, is we need each other. We need each other. That each group has strengths that the other group could benefit from. Each group has weaknesses that need the strength of the others, so together we come into fullness. Now, again, obviously, because it's scriptural, I would like everyone to believe in the gifts and power of the Spirit for today, but we're never going to have complete doctrinal harmony and everything, maybe miraculously right before the Lord returns, but otherwise we're always going to have strengths. Look, there are strengths that a megachurch has that a house church doesn't have, and vice versa. Now, one may have more biblical foundations for doing what it does.

The fact is, God can be working in the midst of both of them, and he can be working in a Pentecostal denomination and a Baptist denomination and a non-denominational church, and each one brings certain things to the mix. So let's learn from each other as much as we can. Let's honor each other, and let's provoke one another to go deeper in God.

You have something I don't have? Provoke me in a good, healthy way to go deeper in God. Mark, could you explain your understanding of the Kingdom of God theologically and express how important you feel this view of the Kingdom is in expecting manifestations of the Spirit today, deliverance and healing alongside proclaiming the Gospel as that normative? Also, could you express your position on what is happening in Acts 2, 8, 10, and 19 in relationship to the Spirit baptism? I did address the latter question a little earlier in the broadcast, so let me focus on the Kingdom of God. The Kingdom of God is God's reign, God's rule. The Kingdom of God is not a location, but a spiritual reality. So as the Gospel is preached, the Kingdom of God comes in power. As the Gospel is preached and we proclaim Jesus as Lord, as people submit to that message, turn from sin by grace and faith, become born into God's Kingdom, and submit themselves to Jesus as Lord, in doing that, then the Kingdom of God is advanced. These people have now come under the power of the Kingdom. Do I therefore think that as the Gospel is preached and the message of the Kingdom is announced, that with it there should be signs, wonders, and miracles?

Yes. Look at it like this. You've got a flashlight. That flashlight does not drive out all darkness or cut through all darkness, but depending on the strength of that flashlight, it shines the light over a certain area, and in that area, there's no darkness, or there's limited darkness. The other night, I was going through the house, and everything was dark in one part of the house, and I had to find something. I thought, you know, rather than turn on all the lights down here, I just got my flashlight on my phone. It was very bright, so I turned on my phone.

Most of your smartphones are going to have this. You just flip on the flashlight setting, and so where I'm walking has been illuminated. The darkness has basically disappeared from those areas. So as the Kingdom of God comes in, it has that influence of light shining in darkness. It has that influence of light driving out darkness, and therefore it brings forgiveness of sins. It brings liberty to captives.

It brings healing of disease. Acts 10 38, Peter explains how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power, and he went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil. So there is this freeing, this liberating that comes as the Holy Spirit is poured out, the Kingdom of God advances. So the Kingdom advances until Jesus returns with the final and full manifestation of the Kingdom, and then sets up his Kingdom over the whole earth, and will rule and reign over the whole earth. But now as the extending of his reign, one life at a time, could be one area at a time, as the Gospel goes forth and more and more people come under the Lordship of Jesus, they submit to the Kingship of God, and with it his Kingdom is extended, and people are sent free. Hence the one old words in Matthew 10 7 and 8, where Jesus says to his disciples to go and preach the Kingdom of Heaven, preach the Kingdom of God is near, Kingdom of Heaven, Kingdom of God being synonymous, as you compare usage through the Gospels. And then when you do that, heal the sick, drive out demons, etc.

Why? Because the Kingdom is here. Let's see, Timothy, since only God's elect can respond to a special call for salvation, how can God be sincere in offering a general call to all when the non-elect can't respond? I don't agree with that, sir. So it's a great question.

I believe everyone can respond, and everyone is held responsible. It's what Arminians would call prevenient grace, that through the cross, Jesus draws all people to himself. John 12 32. That through the cross, the grace of God has been revealed to all. Titus 2 11 and following.

There is now a message that has gone out to all. Romans 10, faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of the Lord. So when the Word is preached, there is the ability now by grace to every human being to say yes or no. The Bible nowhere says that only the elect can respond.

Yes, Jesus' sheep will hear his voice. So those that say, Lord, I want to follow you, we will hear his voice. Well, what's written in John 1 12, as many as received him. So then he gave the power to become the sons of God. They were not born again first and received him. They were born again supernaturally. John 1 13 makes that plain. But they were born again by their choice. God in his sovereignty gave us a choice.

That's why he says choose this day. Get in Deuteronomy, the 30th chapter, and then before it and after it in many other ways, choose, choose, choose, choose. Right till Revelation 22.

Whoever is willing, let him come. So through the Gospel, God makes salvation available to all. And everyone can say yes or no, which is why God holds us responsible. Otherwise, it would be God telling a cripple, get up and walk, when this person has been crippled from birth and has no possibility of walking, and then God holding them responsible for not walking.

Moreover, with all respect to my Calvinist friends and James, if you're listening now, keep your eyes on the road as you're on that bike. So for Calvinists, they would say that Jesus only died for the elect. To secure the salvation of the elect, he did not die to make salvation possible for everyone. Therefore, if you urge your sinner to believe in the Lord Jesus, you'll be saved.

Even if he could believe, it wouldn't matter because Jesus didn't die for him. So it creates this dilemma, which is not a biblical dilemma. It's a Calvinistic dilemma, but not a biblical dilemma, with all respect to my Calvinist friends. So again, Jesus is drawing all people to himself, beginning with the cross and resurrection, in a new way. God is doing something. His grace is available, and grace is not a work if it's by faith, it's by grace, Paul says in Romans 4. Can you save yourself?

No. Is self-salvation, Dr. Brown, you believe in self? No, you cannot save yourself. In a trillion billion years, with infinite numbers of opportunities, we could never save ourselves, period.

We are lost. But we can receive the offer of salvation by grace, and it's still grace, because it's all his grace, and it's not our works. We're simply saying, yes, Lord, have mercy on me, a sinner. What does Jesus say in Luke 18? The tax collector who goes to the temple and says, God, have mercy on me, a sinner, and beats his breast, goes home justified. He asked for mercy, and God had mercy.

All right, let's see. Doug, Dr. Brown, please discuss the difference between speaking tongues publicly within the congregational setting and privately as a boon edification for the believer's spirit. Thank you for the glory of Zion, his eternal word and promises.

Amen. So, privately, we speak in tongues as much as we want. When I'm away on prayer retreats, I will often speak in tongues hours over the course of a day. Sometimes I'll speak in tongues hours consecutively, and my heart and mind are absorbed in the Lord and his purposes, and I may be speaking in tongues and getting insights and writing things down as I'm praying, or I may pray in tongues for five minutes, and then that moves to groaning and intercession for a specific burden or a very targeted prayer in English. But Paul says in 1 Corinthians 14 that when you pray in the tongue, you're speaking mysteries in the Spirit of God. You're edifying yourself, and Paul says, I thank God I speak in tongues more than all of you. But publicly, he said, I'd rather speak five words in a known tongue than 5,000 words in an unknown tongue. So unless there's interpretation with the tongue, which would be like prophecy, or unless you're just at a prayer meeting with 10 believers and you're praying in tongues together and then one leads in English or your native language and you agree with it, we are not to be speaking in tongues publicly. I get up behind the pulpit and I pace back and forth and speak in tongues for 10 minutes.

I may be getting built up, but others are left out. So there's a profound difference in terms of the function. One is very targeted, specific and public. Unless, like I said, you just got a prayer meeting with a few people praying together. But a general public meeting where non-believers and others come in, tongues very targeted, specific and with interpretation.

Otherwise, leave it in your prayer closet. It's The Line of Fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown. Your voice of moral, cultural and spiritual revolution.

Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. I can tell you what a blast I'm having answering your questions on Facebook and Twitter today. So no calls, just fielding questions that I solicited earlier in the week. I love, I love doing this. I hope you find it edifying and helpful. If you do, share the podcast with a friend. Share the link with a friend. Tell them about the radio station on which you listen. Listen, not lition. Listen. Share the good word so we can reach more people together.

All right, Danica. What's the difference between someone who's strictly reformed, therefore not charismatic, almost anti-charismatic and a hyper critic? It all depends on the attitude of the heart. In other words, a hyper critic is destructive. A hyper critic is not necessarily reformed. A hyper critic is not necessarily cessationist, although many hyper critics are. A hyper critic is just that. They're destructive in their criticism. They tear down and they don't build up or they tear down much more than they build up or they use unequal weights and measures or or they use personal judgments and attacks against people rather than constructively look at things in the word and bring constructive correction. Constructive criticism is life giving, helpful, brings edification, can save someone from from error. Hyper criticism is often destructive, tearing down, mocking. There's very little redemptive in it.

There's very little love behind it. Often there's very little willingness to dialogue. Constructive critic will say, oh, great, you want to talk? Good, because I've got some real concerns about your ministry. I'd love to talk with you and interact. A hyper critic is just going to tear down, mock, destroy, or if they want to talk, it's just to prove their point.

There's not an openness to interact. So it's it's one of the characteristics in my revival answer book. If you don't have that, you'll find it helpful. Revival answer book, which came out originally in the title, Let No One Deceive You, almost 25 years ago, and then the second edition revival answer book in the early 2000s, that you'll find really helpful. I have a whole chapter on destructive criticism.

Let's see. Sandy, why did Charismatics start teaching people to speak in a tongue? Did it take too long to let the baptizer baptize them when from tarrying or seeking to receive the Holy Ghost to a quick microwave formula of what they call receiving a prayer language? What good is the language without the Holy Ghost giving the utterance? That method is unknown in the Scriptures, actually an unknown method throughout church history. Nor in the Bible are you told to seek tongues.

Sounds like putting the cart before the horse, which doesn't work in the natural or spiritual. Yes, Sandy, it's been a real problem. I don't know when it started. Certainly in the modern Pentecostal Charismatic renewal beginning in the late 1800s and then up until today, which has reached, maybe accounts for about 600 billion, excuse me, 600 million, that'd be quite a number, 600 million believers in the world today would be part of this larger movement. So I can't say when it happened. I remember hearing about it, you know, fairly early on as a believer. But I don't believe that the only method is tarrying. The tarrying, the waiting for the Holy Spirit, takes place between Luke 24, 49 and Acts 2, 1 through 4. So Jesus telling his disciples that he's going to ascend to heaven, stay in the city of Jerusalem until you're in dude with power from on high, and then Acts 1, 14, day and night they're praying, waiting before the Lord, and then the Spirit falls. But then thereafter, Acts 8, when Peter and John lay their hands on the Samaritan believers, they received the Spirit right then. And Acts 10, as Peter's preaching, they received the Spirit right then. And Acts 19, Paul lays his hands on the believers from Ephesus and they receive right then. So I believe that through the laying on of hands, the Holy Spirit can be imparted now.

I don't believe that we have to quote tarry. I believe that we can pray in mass and the Holy Spirit can fall on people right now. And the most common outward evidence will be tongues, but you are 100% right. Number one, we're not seeking tongues. We're asking for an empowerment of the Holy Spirit, and not just to receive a prayer language. That's more the charismatic emphasis than the historic Pentecostal one. So yes, we are asking, Lord, fill me afresh with your power. Lord, baptize me in your spirit if we've never received that so I can be empowered for service.

Yes. And then tongues is the most common sign that we receive the baptism of the Spirit. It's not the only, but the most common. But we're not seeking tongues. And this whole thing of kind of repeat after me, you know, the car salesman, oh, you should have bought a Honda. Just say that 10 times fast.

Oh, you should have bought a Honda and you'll be speaking. I mean, say hallelujah over and over again until your mouth starts to trip on the words and you find yourself speaking in tongues. Even if, in the mercy of God, people stumbled into the baptism of the Spirit through that, it's absolutely wrong. Now, the only thing I can say is that some people have the misconception of they just sit with their mouth open and God just takes over and forces words to come out of the mouth so nothing ever happens. What I tell people is, I'm going to lay hands in you and pray for the Holy Spirit to touch you, explain what this is scripturally, then pray for them, and then tell them as they feel something welling up inside of them, the Holy Spirit coming on just to give utterance to it, to begin to open their mouths and speak.

That happens. The Holy Spirit comes on us, we speak. But the seeking tongues, trying to get people to formulate to speak in a tongue, of course we're missing the whole point of the baptism in the Spirit.

I dealt with this already in 1991 in my book, Whatever Happened to the Power of God. Scott, I'd love to hear more about the endowment of the Holy Spirit, especially how it relates to effective service and evangelism. Do you believe non-charismatic Christians are lacking sufficient power to effectively serve and win others to Christ? Would this be an example of quenching the Spirit? Quenching the Spirit is shutting something down.

Not being aware is not quenching the Spirit, but resisting, rejecting, shutting something down is. So there are many non-charismatics that are great soul winners. They love the Lord, they share their testimony regularly, and they see people come to the Lord and some of them put us, Charismatics and Pentecostals, to shame. That being said, absolutely, the baptism in the Spirit, being endued with power, does make a difference in evangelism. That's why around the world today the great majority of mass evangelists are Pentecostal Charismatic. There is power in their words and their messages confirmed with signs following, and a large percentage of people that get born again around the world get born again in response to a demonstration of God's power. And Paul even wrote in 1 Corinthians 2 that when he came to the Thessalonians, to the Corinthians, having terrible experiences in Philippi and Thessalonica, now he comes to the Corinthians and said, I was with you in weakness and fear and much trembling, and my speech and preaching were not with wise and persuasive words of human wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and power set your faith, may not rest in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.

Absolutely, absolutely, there is an endowment of power. Even those who didn't speak in tongues, famous evangelists of the past, be it Charles Finney or D.L. Moody or others, they talked about a seeking God or receiving from God and receiving power, and this power then marked them in their evangelistic ministries afterwards. Let's see, Bruce, could you do a quick verse-by-verse exegesis of the book of Romans? Okay, but seriously, I'd love to learn how to exegete Scripture properly, but I don't have the time or money for enrolling in seminary.

Could you recommend a book or textbooks that could get me started doing exegesis properly, as well as any dangers to avoid when exegeting thanks? Let me address the dangers first. Never get away from the fact that the Word of God speaks to us with power and authority. In other words, sometimes we are so micro-focused on the meaning of a text that we don't let the text speak to us. Okay, so what's it saying?

How am I supposed to live? Therefore, what? Therefore, what do I do with this? That's one thing. Second thing is this.

You want to start with context, background, wherever you can. So, okay, who is this written to? Why is it written? What's the message about?

And then start within that and work from there. And, if you can't read Hebrew Greek at all, then read in one main translation, but then as you're digging deeper, read it in multiple other translations to see, okay, is this saying things the same way? If you have to read one book, and you're a serious student, the book that's been used for a couple generations now of students is Gordon Fee and Douglas Stewart, How to Read the Bible for All It's Worth. Still a worthwhile book, How to Read the Bible for All It's Worth.

You'll find it helpful. Jason, do you think structure order in a Sunday morning church service hinders the move of the Holy Spirit? Not necessarily. Structure and order can be great. God's a God of order. God's a God of structure.

But, if that structure is inflexible, if that order cannot be moved, yes, that can hinder the Holy Spirit. For example, let's say you're a large congregation, and you've got 15,000 people coming in and out of your building on a Sunday and a Saturday. So, you have two Saturday night services and three Sunday morning services. If you are irresponsible with your time, and you let the first service run 15 minutes late just because you decided to get all your points preaching, even though you kind of add in extra stories and just were irresponsible, you're going to create a traffic jam. You're going to create a mess.

Children's work is getting people in and out. You're going to have chaos. You're going to be irresponsible. If, however, you cannot give room to the Holy Spirit in the midst of your structure, in other words, during the worship to get up and say, hey, friends, the Holy Spirit's really moving here, and I'm going to cut short my sermon. I don't even know if I'm going to preach at all. But we've got, or after one song, listen, I feel we've got to change the order of the service. I'm going to preach now and give you an opportunity to respond. If there's no room for the Holy Spirit to move within the structure and the order, then yes, that could be a problem. Or the very nature of the structure and order can be such. If you've got, okay, we're going to sing for 10 minutes and then preach for 15 minutes and be out of here. I mean, it's super exaggerated there. Well, there's almost, there's almost no room within that for people to really start to encounter God and be in his presence.

The structure and order themselves are not wrong, but it's their flexibility within that for the Holy Spirit to move. All right, friends, I'm out of time, but what a joy. Again, if you don't get my emails, take a moment now. Go to AskDrBrown, askdearbrown.org. Sign up for my emails. You won't be disappointed. And then once again, if we've been a blessing to you, spread the word. We want to reach as many as we can for the glory of God.