Matt Slick Live

The following program is recorded content created by the Truth Network. It's Matt Slick live. Matt is the founder and president of the Christian Apologetics Research Ministry, found online at KARM.org. When you have questions about Bible doctrines, turn to Matt Slick live. Francis, taking your calls and responding to your questions at 877-207-2276.

Here's Matt Slick. Everyone, welcome to the show. If you want to give me a call, all you have to do is dial 877-207-2276. I want to hear from you. Give me a call. And today is, let's see, it's October 14th, 1 21 for the podcasters who are listening later on. A lot of people do that. Just a word up. If you're trying to listen to me or you want to go find these shows, whatever, that's not to make a deal for the radio shows.

But it was on, they were on, still are technically on Facebook, not Facebook, YouTube, the KARM videos section. And we've had an atheist who doesn't like my freedom of speech and says that my information is not accurate and I'm risking lives and things like that, even though it's documented. And I asked him to prove things and he really doesn't do anything. He just, he complains. And so he calls me, he says, I'm dishonest. And he even went so far in his email to say in my home life, he goes, though I don't have any evidence. He says, I suspect that you, and then he just insults me. You know, you're dishonest in your personal dealings.

And I'm like, who is this guy? So the reason I'm bringing it up, it's not that big a deal. It's just that, you know, when one person complains and they don't like what, well, that's interesting.

They don't like the idea of a Christian doing Christianity, which, you know, biblically speaking, the Lordship of Jesus Christ is in all areas of life. And a lot of Christians don't know this, but we are to submit everything to the Lord, not just a church on Sunday, everything, what you put in your body, what you do with your body, things like that. It's all important.

It's all what you got to do. So it's part and parcel, and that's what I'm doing is giving that information out for people there. And today, I started my research on deleterious side effects. And for the most part, the vaccines are pretty safe for the most part. But there is an increasing awareness and number of side effects that are becoming dominant or becoming, let's just say, evident.

And the question then becomes, how long will they go on and what are the future side effects? So this is just some of the stuff I'm researching, doing very careful research through peer-reviewed journals, having to read their material. Whoa, and I'm telling you, there's a lot to read.

There's a lot to learn. So anyway, doing that, if you want to give me a call, four open lines, 877-207-2276. Let's get to Kim from Rural Hall, North Carolina. Kim, welcome. You're on the air.

Thank you, Matt. My question is from Romans 10-9, Romans 10-13, and Luke 8-13. So my question is, is there a process you go through before you are actually seen? Because in these verses, it says, you shall be. And in 13, it says, you shall be.

So that means that's future tense. So if you couple that with the parable of the soul and the seed, in verse 13, Jesus even said, some believe for long, and then they fall away. So that tells me that there's a process and you're not actually saved at the moment. You confess and believe in Christ. Okay, what you're doing is taking different sections of scripture in different contexts with different purposes and then combining them.

And it's a problem when you do that. What Romans 10 is talking about is he's talking to the brethren and he's talking about salvation, talking about what Moses wrote and things like that. And he gets into the personal work of Christ. And he says in verse nine, if you confess in your mouth, Jesus says, Lord, and believe in your heart, God raised him from the dead, you'll be saved for what the heart, you know, a person believes, et cetera, et cetera. And whoever calls in the name of the Lord will be saved. He's just according to the Old Testament there in Romans 10-13. So what he's doing is talking about the issue of justification by faith alone and Christ alone. And that you're believing and trusting in him. And this is how you're saved.

This is what it is. Now, of course, there are other places of scripture that deal with false prophets, false Christs, false things to believe. And that negates the idea of just belief. People say, like Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses, oh, we believe in Jesus. Well, they don't believe in the Jesus of the Bible.

They believe in different Jesus created by their respective organizations. And so that's what that is. Now, the other thing, the seed that fell away or the people that fell away, that's just illustrating the basic idea of just preaching and teaching that some are going to look like they believe they're not really in something to fall away. That looked like they were in, but some weren't. That's all that's going on there. It's just a difference completely.

OK. Are you there? One other question. So once you, let's say, accept Christ, not when you say the prayer, but just when you honestly believe and accept Jesus for your sake, that is when you become saved. And that is when the Holy Spirit comes in. But not just the moment you say, OK, I'm saved.

Well, there's a yes and no. You see, we're not saved by saying sentences. We're not saved by uttering a sentence as if this prayer, the sinner's prayer, gets you saved.

That's not it. The issue is an appeal of the heart to God and looking to Him and trusting in Him. And then what we do is we confess who Christ is. We confess the lordship of Christ, that we're trusting in Him. And we're admitting our sin and we need a Savior.

All of this is a large kind of a ball that's kind of mixed up with different strands inside of itself. You have to believe that Jesus is God. The doctrine of the Trinity is also sometimes brought in there, the issue of guilt before the law, repentance, belief, knowing who Christ is.

All these things are kind of intermixed. So we don't want to say that we're saved doctrinally. What that means is doctrinal regeneration. If you believe these doctrines, then you can be saved. Well, that would be salvation by intellectual awareness.

And that's not what's going on. We don't want to say that, as I like to say, I'll put it this way, we don't want to say that repentance brings salvation, that it's the cause of salvation. Because an unbeliever can't repent because he's a slave of sin, Romans 6, 14 through 20. But we're obligated to repent because that's what God wants us to do, Acts 17, 30. But it's not our repentance that saves us, it's not our repentance that brings us to salvation, and it's not our repentance that contributes to salvation. Repentance is the result of being regenerate, where God makes us new creatures, 2 Corinthians 5, 17. So we're made new and we're able to repent. This is why repentance is necessary in and with salvation, because you can't be saved and continue in your sin. But we have to be careful to say that when people say repent and believe, it's a package deal. You're supposed to repent, you're supposed to believe, and you're just saying it. You could say believe and repent, it could be repent and believe. But we know that God draws people, John 6, 44. Now we can't come to him or Christ unless it's granted from the Father, John 6, 65. And that our believing is the work of God, John 6, 28, 29, and we're granted the act of belief, Philippians 1, 29. So we try to move all this together in the same pile and then sort it out and make it harmonious is not hard to do, it just takes a little bit of time, if that makes sense for what I've said.

I hope it does. Yeah, it does understand, but when you say it shall be, that means there's a process you have to go through before you are actually saved. Well, there is a process you have to go through before you get saved. We can't be born, for example. But then we have the issue of what about people who are not born and they're killed in the womb?

What about that? Could they be saved? Well, yeah. Well, then the normative process isn't in effect for them, so we would say you have to exist. And generally speaking, what he's talking about here is with adults who have understanding, and so that's what Romans 10 is dealing with, not with infants. Nursing infants are unborn people.

So normally speaking, the adults have to come to this place, and they come to this place by the wooing and work of God, and they do, and they believe, and it all kind of works together. Okay. Thank you, man. God bless you. Okay. Okay, buddy. God bless, man. Thanks a lot.

All right. We have three open lines. Give me a call. 877-207.

Maybe I can just... 2276. There you go. Anthony, you're on the air, buddy. Paul. Matt, hi. Hi. You're on the air. Professor.

How are you? Not a professor, but I'm okay hanging in there. Yeah, you are.

Yes, you are. Well, I'm a teacher of the word and stuff like that. Yeah. I can see you, Professor.

Okay. Brother, what I've been thinking about, and I was trying to look it up here real quick, and I didn't have time to. Somewhere in the Book of Revelation, it talks about the tree of life, and it says that the leaves will be for the healing of the nations.

And what I'm wondering is, sir, in that period of time, if we all have glorified bodies, why will we need healing? Well, there's a lot in here, and it's a vision. And it starts off in verse 22 of Revelation, and then he showed me a river of the water of life, clear as a crystal, coming from the throne of God and the Lamb.

In the middle of its street, on either side of the river, was the tree of life, bearing 12 kinds of fruit, yielding his fruit every month, and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. You don't want to take that literally. Okay. It's just not what you want to do, and so a river... Can I ask you... Go ahead.

Can I ask you... Let me ask you this, sir. I've always been taught, and I've always been of the persuasion that when we studied the Bible, that we interpret it literally. Now, I know there's some symbolic things and so on and so forth, and I'm not a learned man such as you, although I'm trying to learn more about systematic theology and apologetics and things like that, but so explain that to me when you tell me that you can't...

I can't take that literally. Well, when you interpret Scripture, you interpret it contextually. So for the example, in the Psalms, it says, God will cover you with his wings. It doesn't mean that he has wings, or your word is a lamp to my feet.

It doesn't mean the word of wisdom is literally a light that shines that you hold down by your feet in the darkness as you're walking on the path. So there are places where it's figurative. The Book of Revelation is highly figurative. A famous place that people go to, for example, is Revelation 20, verse 1, and verse 1 and 2, actually, yeah, and so it says, Then I saw an angel come down from heaven.

Now, this isn't a vision, okay? Well, now, I would think that the angel was literal. He literally saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding the key of the abyss. Now, wait a minute, did he have a key, a literal key, in his hand?

I don't believe so. It says, and a great chain in his hand. I don't believe the angel had a literal key and a literal chain, and he laid hold of the dragon, which is symbolic, the serpent of old, which is literal, the devil and Satan, which is literal, dying for a thousand years.

Is that thousand literal or figurative? So it's things like this that we have to look at and wonder about, not make too many assumptions when we get a break. So hold on, we'll be right back, okay? Two open lines, folks, give me a call, 877-207-2276. We'll be right back. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276.

Here's Matt Slick. All right, ladies, welcome back to the show. Let's get back on the air with Anthony. Anthony, are you still there? Yes, sir.

All right. So, it's called hermeneutics, and it deals with the proper methodology of interpreting scripture. The parables are different than the poetry of psalms and proverbs. Could you suggest to me, Matt, a text that I might study on my own that would enlighten me to this, perhaps, in hermeneutics? Well, I would just look up, you can go to CARM, and you can look up how to interpret the Bible, and I've gone through the basic principles that are there, and go through a particular text to show that what people commonly understand it to mean is not what it means when you look at it in context.

And that's the issue of two men in a field, one is taken, one is left. And I show it from context, and when you do that, you know, it's a way to learn. And so that's one of the things I would suggest is to do that, okay? Okay. Okay, thank you. All right. Well, God bless, buddy. God bless.

All right. Let's get to Adam from Sunset, Utah. Adam, welcome. You're on the air. Hi, Matt.

Thank you very much for taking my call. Sure. Sure. What do you got, buddy? I, well, I've got a, I guess the best way for me to say it is I struggle with free will.

True to my name's age. Adam struggles with free will. Okay. And I think that, well, is there anywhere in the Bible that it says free will is a gift of God? No, but we have to define our terms first. So let me ask you, what do you think free will is? What do you understand it to be?

Well, I actually think that your definition is the closest thing that makes sense to me, and that what you're capable of doing, like within character, the whole thing about my question, though, is starting to think that free will altogether is just a prideful lie. The Bible tells us that we're either a slave of sin or we're a slave of Christ. If we follow Paul's example, we're slaves. If we follow James' example, we're slaves.

But you're making a mistake in logic. If free will is the ability to be able to do what you want without being forced, then it's not a problem if a sinner who's a slave of sin still does what he wants within his sinfulness. A sinner will freely choose to sin.

No one's forcing him. He has free will. So when it says a slave of sin, it doesn't mean the slave in that sense doesn't have free will. I think that's what your problem is, is a slave of sin. Oh, it means he doesn't have free will.

That's not what's going on there. He means he's bound by sin. But he's still free because he's free to do what he wants within his sinfulness, and that's all that's going on. But he's only free of sin. Right. Yeah, because he's by nature a child of wrath, and he's damned, and he's a slave of sin, a hater of God, doesn't do any good, cannot receive spiritual things. He freely will act in that manner. So the believer we're not to be slaves of sin, though, correct?

I'm sorry, what? When we're to die to our sinful life, we're not to be slaves of sin anymore. Right, because we're regenerate. Right, we're to live as Christ, we're to be Christian.

Right. So we have a broader... Look at freedom for the unbeliever as a circle. Say it's, you know, six inches in diameter, and the freedom for a Christian is like a foot in diameter. The freedom of the unbeliever is restricted to his sinfulness and sinful choices. But the believer can make sinful choices and non-sinful choices. Non-sinful choices, which is a broader area. Okay. But is either of those choices considered free will? Yes, free will.

Because he's a slave to sin, or it's because he's a slave of Christ. Okay. Do you think the word slave means you have no free will? Do you...

Yes, actually, yeah. Okay, that's not what it means. This is your problem, is you think to be a slave of Christ means you have no free will.

That's not what it is. The Bible never teaches that. No theologians teach that either. So the mistake you have is to think that the word slave means you don't have any free will. You have to show me that in scripture, because your definition is faulty.

This is why you're having a problem. Do you believe in the scripture that free will is a gift either? Yes, sir. So let me ask you, did Jesus have free will? Did Jesus have free will? Are you there?

Yes, sir, I'm still here. Yeah, I would say that he was only capable of being God. Okay, so I asked you, but I asked, did he have free will? The answer is yes or no. Did he have free will? Yeah, then I'm going to have to say no. Yes, I'll have to say no, because he said himself, let this cup pass this one.

But if not, you know, let your will be done. So didn't he have the freedom, the free will to choose to do the will of the Father? Right. And he did. So he couldn't be acted any other way.

He did, he freely chose to submit to the will of the Father. That's what he did. Yes, sir, I agree with that. I agree with that, but he could not have done it any other way. Well, that gets more complicated. There's a sense in which you can and cannot.

There's different senses, but God by nature has free will, right? Isn't that correct? Are you there? Hello?

I am here. I struggle answering the questions, Matt, because yes, I would say God is the author of will. Everything that we do is within his will. Anything that he decides is right and good, but God cannot decide the why. I said, does God have free will?

That's right, yeah. Does God? He's restricted to his nature, which is perfect. Okay, does God have...

But he could not do anything imperfectly. No. Does God have free will? No.

No? He does not. So God can't do whatever... So then God cannot do whatever he desires to do? God does do whatever he desires to do. Well, then how can he not have free will if he does whatever he desires to do? Because he cannot act outside of his nature.

Nobody can't. You are so confused, Adam. Adam, you are so confused on what the terms mean.

That you rightly understand it in one sense, then you abandon the definition as you start talking about it. You're completely inconsistent. Free will is the ability... I told you I struggle with free will.

Because you're not thinking clearly. And I don't mean to be mean, but you're not thinking through this properly. You see, we've already established free will is the ability to make choices that are consistent with your nature and not forced.

Yes. So God is holy, so he can only make holy choices. So he's still free. He has free will to do whatever he desires to do. No one's forcing him. That's what free will is. Okay, so that's what free will is. Is there any man on the planet that has that level of free will?

Yes. All people act in a manner consistent with what their nature permits them to be able to do. I can talk.

But then if we talk about total depravity, then our nature tells us that we're only capable of sin. Adam, Adam, hold on, buddy. We'll be right back after the break, okay? Okay, whoa.

This is where terms become very important and understanding those terms when you use them. Hey, folks, we'll be right back. We have three open lines, 877-207-2276. Come on back. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276.

Here's Matt Slick. All right, welcome back to the show. Let's get back to Adam. Are you still there, Adam? I sure am.

Yeah, thank you, Matt. All right, now, probably what you need to do is write down on paper the definitions of the terms. And you can't assume anything beyond the definitions. The definition of free will is the ability to make a choice consistent with your nature that is not forced. Because God is the standard of free will. God cannot sin because he's holy. He cannot choose to sin because his nature is holy. Free will is the ability to make a choice consistent with your nature that's also not forced. This definition is based in God's nature.

It works for us as well. A person who's touched by sin in all areas of his life, total depravity, means that the effect of that sin on him is that he cannot receive the things of God, 1 Corinthians 2 14, cannot serve God because he's a slave of sin, Romans 6, 14 through 20, et cetera. And so he is free because he has a fallen nature. God has a holy nature. The sinner has a fallen nature. God acts freely according to his nature. The sinner acts freely according to his nature. God does holy things, the sinner does sinful things, and they're both free. And so the unbeliever will do that which is consistent with his sinful nature, and he's certainly free to make the choices he wants within his ability to make choices. To say, well, he can't freely choose God means he's not free. That's not the right definition. Because to say that God can't sin, therefore God is not free, okay, hold on. To say that God cannot sin.

What you said is correct. I don't argue any of that. The problem that I start to have is with believers. It seems that we have two natures. Okay, let me explain the believers. Let me explain the believers' situation, okay? That we are caused to be born again, 1 Peter 1-3, born again not of our own will but the will of God, John 1-13, made new creatures, 2 Corinthians 5-17. We're indwelt by God, John 14-23, we're indwelt by God. So the thing is that he is living in us, and we are born again.

Now, no one knows exactly what this born again thing is, but the scriptures teach that we're indwelt by God, we're no longer slaves of sin, because there's been this born again experience within us. That means, then, the Christian, because his eyes are on Christ and his works are filtered through the work of Christ, ultimately, then we can, so to speak, do good works, those things pleasing to God. An unbeliever can never do anything pleasing to God, ever. And the reason is, even a Mormon or Jehovah's Witness, they can't do anything pleasing to God because in order for something to be considered good, it has to be based on the character of God. In order for something to be considered good, it has to be based on the character of God, as a standard, and the motive has to be ultimately for his glory, and it has to be worked through the person of Christ. This is what makes something good, based in God's nature, not ours. That's where the cults fail.

They think that we have this ability in ourselves to do good things, and they don't realize our humanists in that as an atheistic kind of a philosophy they're imposing. So, what you understand is, once we're born again, the Lord's indwelling us, and there's this presence of God in us. And so, we're no longer enslaved to sin, though we can still sin, but we can also not sin in our actions. Where an unbeliever, no matter who or what they think they are, they can think they're believers, like Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses, but they're ultimately never doing a single good work, because they don't have the true God, the true Christ, and the true reason for what they're doing. And so, this is why unbelievers can never please God. That's why they're slaves of sin, they can do no good, et cetera. That's what Romans 3, 10, 11, and 12 says.

And this is the ultimate reason. Is free will constant and consistent? Free will is always constant and consistent, if you define it as the ability to make choices, consistent with your nature, that are not forced upon you.

That's it! So, Saul's nature was to ride on that horse and kill Christians. But that was Saul's nature. But God knocked him on his rear end and blinded him, and it sure didn't seem like free will was involved.

Well, wait, wait, wait, wait, hold on, hold on, hold on, hold on, hold on. You don't understand, you think free will means no one can influence you. Look, if you and I are having lunch together, and we're sitting at a restaurant, and there's a window to my right and your left, and I want you to look to my right, I want you to look to your left, I point out the window and I say, what the heck is that? You turn your head and you're going to look. I've made you look, but I didn't violate your free will. You freely chose to look.

So don't think. I understand that. That makes sense.

That makes sense. Yeah, so don't think that God forces people. The Bible says in Proverbs 21, he moves the heart of the king where he wishes it to go.

He directs us. Our thoughts are ultimately under the control of God, and yet we're free. Jesus is God in flesh. God is free. Jesus is free. He has free will, and yet he chose to do only what the Father had him do. He freely submitted to the will of God.

He's completely free in that. That's what free will is. We all have it, but the unbeliever's free will is restricted to sinfulness.

The believer's free will is expanded to include non-sinfulness, though we can go back and forth between them. Okay? Okay. All right, buddy. Thank you.

It does clear things up. I might say struggle with free will, but I appreciate you. Thank you very much, Matt. Well, feel free to call up anytime. Okay, buddy? Okay.

I will, and I'll keep going to calm.org. I love this site. All right, guys. Love you. Bye. Okay. God bless, man. Thanks a lot.

All right. Let's get to Junior from California. Junior, welcome. You're on the air, buddy, or whoever. Hey, how's it going, Matt?

It's going. Can you hear me? Yes, I can. I can hear you fine. Okay.

All right, Matt. This question is regarding 1 Corinthians 15, 28. And basically it's the latter part where it says that God may be all in all. The way I'm interpreting it is basically at the end, at the conclusion, when I guess the Son subject himself to the Father, that the Father may be all in all. Does that mean that basically the focus will shift from Christ to the Father? Is that what that means?

Well, I've said this before over the year. I'm not exactly sure what that phrase, God may be all in all. I don't know what it exactly means.

But I can theorize by looking at the context. When all things are subjected to Him, to Jesus, then the Son Himself will also be subjected to the one who subjected all things to Him so that God may be all in all. In that context, it seems to me to hint towards the idea of the Trinity. Now you've got to understand, Jesus, second person of the Trinity, became man.

So He has two natures, the divine nature and human nature, called the hypostatic union. And in that status, He's under the law, Galatians 4, 4. Now He died, and when you've died, you're freed from the law, Romans 7, 4.

Now He's exalted and He's glorified. Well, with His death, there's a new covenant. The covenant, I won't get into it too much in Hebrews 8 and Hebrews 9, but in part of all of this, Jesus is forever going to be a man because under the old covenant, He had to be made a priest to be a high priest sacrifice. So in Hebrews 6, 27, 25, it says He's a high priest after the order of Melchizedek who forever lives to make intercession for us.

So when I read 1 Corinthians 15, 28, all this is in the back of my head. I'm thinking, all right, we know that everything's subjected to Christ because Christ, according to John 5, 20 through 23, has all authority been given to Him by the Father. Then the Son will be subjected to the one who subjected all things to Him. So what I think that means, or I suspect what it means, is that in His human state, which He will retain forever, and as the eternal high priest, He'll be in a place of subjection in that sense to the Father because before the foundation of the world, the Father was sending the Son, and all people are chosen in Christ.

So it's called eternal sonship, Ephesians 1, 4, and this is continuing on into the future as well because in the state of the sonship, we are redeemed as Christ is still a man and divine forever, according to the order of Melchizedek as a high priest, and I think that when it's subjected to God, I think somehow in there the phrase God, maybe all in all, means something related to all of that. I don't know if I cleared it up, but that's what I think. Oh yeah. I see.

Okay, you know what, I do have one more question. So basically, we know Jesus is at the right hand of the Father, but is He a spiritual being up there, you know, in the right hand of the Father, or is He physical? Jesus is physical right now.

His holes in His feet and His hands, beard plucked from His face, He'll retain His crucifixion wounds, He's both divine and human, and He'll be like that forever. Okay? All right, thank you so much.

All right, man, God bless. Hey, folks, two open lines, 877-207-2276. Be right back after these messages. All right, everyone, welcome back to the show. Let's see, the next longest waiting person is Jason from Iowa, whom we lost. And let's get over to Tony from Ohio.

Tony, welcome. You're on the air. Hey, Matt, how are you? I'm doing all right. Hanging in there. So what do you got, buddy? So, my question is centered around Acts 15.

Okay. And I'm wondering, do you think, so they have the Jerusalem council, right? Like there were some believers among the, among the Pharisees, and they were saying that you had to be circumcised physically in order to be saved. And the Gentiles, they're saying this to the Gentiles, of course, you need to be circumcised, you need to keep the walls of Moses. And then, um, the apostles and elders are gathered together and they debated it. And then Peter finally stood up and, um, was basically like, why are you putting a yoke on their neck? Like a burden that, uh, uh, that our ancestors, and we haven't been able to bear, uh, basically saying, you know, we, we believe that we're saved through grace by faith. Through Jesus. Right.

And they sent, uh, the brothers out to Antioch and, and delivered that letter to the Gentiles. They're basically saying, um, stay away from idols, uh, sexual immorality, stay away from, uh, stuff that's been strangled and from drinking blood. Those were like the four big things that they said not to do.

So Mike, I'm sorry, I'm going on a tangent, but, uh, I'm sorry. Yeah. But long story short, my question is, do you think that that verse in itself nullifies the book of Leviticus?

No. Like all those laws that God gave. You can understand that there's different laws in the Old Testament. We have a three main categories of the law, civil judicial, which is civil judicial, the moral and the priestly. So we have the, the judicial stuff, um, where don't move the fence post this long, but move it over here.

Do that. Uh, and if someone does something wrong, you know, in that respect, uh, judicially, then judgments are made. There's a moral law.

Don't lie, don't steal. There's a priestly law. The high priest must cleanse himself before he enters the temple, et cetera.

Now the judicial law was under what's called a theocratic system. And you'll find in the, the, uh, Old Testament. And I have an article on this on Karm, uh, say to the sons of Israel, don't do this, this, and this, and then to everyone, this, this, and this. So even in some of the laws, they're broken up that are applied only to Israel and some to everyone else.

So the issues of the state of the sons of Israel, and I've, I forgot which exact references I could probably find it pretty quickly here, but, um, let's see if I can find something to say to the sons of Israel. Let's see if it can find it. If it comes up really quickly. Uh, no, I don't see it anyway. That is not finished with this real moral law.

There's, I just changed how I'm doing searches on a new setting. So it's not like what I thought it would be. Nevertheless, it doesn't matter. So the thing is that he'll say certain things that are only applicable to being under that law inside of Israel that are aimed only at Israel. Now, when the new Testament is, is recording, what it's recording, you gotta understand that Hebrews 8, 13, Hebrews 9, 15 through 16, it says that the new covenant is instituted with the death of the testator.

That's Christ. When Christ died, the old Testament covenant is done away with. Well, I can't say that it's not done away with because there are certain aspects of the covenant that, that remain to us now, but so much of what's in that old Testament covenant is abrogated by what's revealed in the new you have a new covenant. Now the moral law is still in effect and it's reiterated in the new Testament. All the 10 commandments are except for the Sabbath. Now, where does it say we have to keep the Sabbath in the new Testament. And so the priestly law is fulfilled in Christ.

So it's not necessary. And when it says, say to the sons of Israel, do this, this, and this, that's the nation of Israel doesn't apply to us. So in, in Acts 15, what's happening is they're trying to figure out something figure out some things. And it does say it seemed good to the Holy Spirit. Acts 15, 28.

They're trying to understand what is the right thing to do and say. And so they're not nullifying Leviticus because Leviticus has a lot of stuff in it. Not just the idea, Leviticus 17, 11, that the life is in the blood and it's given for sacrifice and Leviticus 17, 14, which says, don't, don't drink the blood. And it seems to be reiterated here in the new Testament in Acts 15. So there's some consistency with it, but they're not advocating priestly requirements. For example, in the sacrificial system, because they recognize that it's already been fulfilled in Christ. So some parts of Leviticus are abrogated, no longer needed because they're fulfilled in Christ.

And some are still valid to based on the moral law of God and the Jerusalem Council just made some decisions here about some behavior issues. Okay. All right.

Yeah, I'm falling. All right. Clear some stuff up and then that raises more questions. And honestly, if you let me, I could probably take up the entire time. Well, I'll tell you what, why don't you come back tomorrow and fire some of those questions because we've got a couple of callers waiting.

They've been waiting for a while. Seriously, get those questions, write them out and let's talk to tomorrow. You want to do that? Um, yeah, that sounds good to me.

I like these kind of questions and if I don't have an answer, I can say, Hey, I don't have an answer. Let me research it. Okay. Okay. One last question though. You said that the Sabbath was not reiterated in the New Testament.

That's right. What exactly do you mean by that? That we don't have to keep the Sabbath? Uh, we are not obligated to keep the seventh day, uh, Saturday as Sabbath. We're not obligated to, and you can go to Romans 14, one through, uh, 14, uh, to talk about one through 12, actually. But in particular, verse five, it says one man regards one day above another and other regards every day alike. Let each man be fully convinced in his own mind. So this is a, when it says every day, the Sabbath is logically included in every day. So therefore, uh, you know, if we're supposed to supposed to keep the Sabbath on Saturday, why would Paul say, let each person be fully convinced in his own mind about what day to worship on? Okay. So basically you don't have to do it on a Saturday as long as you do it at least one day out of the week. Well, that's yes and no to that. Every day. Yes.

See there you're on the right track. We always have that Sabbath. The Sabbath means rest and Christ is our rest. So we don't have to work to be saved. That's what this, the rest of Sabbath is multifaceted.

It was for the purpose of, well, a human body needs rest, but it's also prophetic in that it's pointing to the rest that we have in Christ. No longer any works are necessary. Six days you work. Six is the number of the day that man was created on the sixth day.

The number of the Antichrist is he's a man, 666. So six days you work and after the sixth day you rest, which is the Sabbath. But that Sabbath is fulfilled in Christ. So we don't have to worry about working for salvation because Jesus is our rest because that's what it ultimately is.

When Jesus says in Matthew 11 28, come to me all who are heavy laden and I will give you rest because he's talking about resting in him and this is where salvation is found. This is why the Saturday Sabbath is not necessary. You can worship on Sunday, on any day, and it's good to have a day of rest because it's good for you, but what would happen if you and I were on a plane and it crashed out in the ocean and we're in a raft for, uh, we have enough supplies. We do okay. We're, we're out there for weeks and we forget what day it is. We lose track and we, we wash up on an Island and we want to worship God on, on, let's just say Sunday. But what day is it? Don't know if one in seven chance of getting it right.

The odds are not for us is God going to penalize us? No. And if we say, no, let's on this day, we'll just call this the Sabbath. They will rest. Okay.

And you know, watch the waves and throw rocks at, uh, at seagulls, you know, stuff like that. Okay. Makes sense. Yeah. Okay. All right, buddy. Call back tomorrow with more questions. Call back tomorrow with more questions. All right.

I sure will. Thanks, Matt. All right, man. God bless.

Okay. Let's get to David from North Carolina. Dave, welcome. You're on the air. I'm Matt. Can you hear me? Yes, I can.

I can hear you fine. So what do you got? It's sort of strange that you just had that question. I guess Providence might say, uh, I have a question also from act 15 and 16 concerning circumcision, um, the council. And he kind of led up to it and did the lead in for me.

So it'll save me some time. Council came up with those requirements and nothing more as far as the believers. Why then would shortly after that would Paul take Timothy and circumcise him?

That's in act 16, three. And the general response is so that the others would not be stumbled. And so it was a means of trying to be accepted by that group in order to witness to them and be an example to them. That's the general idea. We become all things to all men.

So if, you know, if an anthropologist wants to live with a certain set of villagers, he's going to adopt a lot of their cultural norms as he learns their culture to write about him and things like that. And this seems to be what, what, uh, it is. Cause it says because of the Jews. That they had just, um, just have the, they held the council and it seems like when they said it seemed good to us in the Holy spirit, that why then would, you know, Paul turn around and seemingly contradict with the council just had, you know, agreed upon. And then in Galatians chapter two, I think Paul, I don't have it in front of me, forgive me, but in Galatians chapter two, Paul mentions that he did not, Titus did not feel that he needed to be circumcised and so Paul didn't do it. So there seems to be a twist there.

Yeah. Like I said, that the context seems to be, there were some certain situation where the circumcision is you can be circumcised or not circumcised. It doesn't matter, but he's not circumcising him for the purpose of salvation and keeping the law in order to be justified. It certainly would not be the case, but he could circumcise him so that the Jews then would hear him and accept him as a speaker because he's showing respect to the law. That would be an okay reason to get circumcised. It's not for salvation, not for keeping the law. As, as an aside, and I understand, um, all things to all men, but it seems rather, I mean, I'm putting myself sort of in Timothy's place. Um, you know, to not eat certain things is one thing to not go a certain place, you know, the faith of a weaker brother and not to abstain from things is one thing and to do things.

I get that. Um, but the circumcision was a rather, rather large step. Timothy was not a young child, you know? So it just seemed that that was a little bit of a, I mean, you know, a little bit of a twist there that they, they went through the trouble of laying it before the Lord and praying in the, in the council. And obviously I'm assuming they thought God's will concerning things that, you know, around salvation concerning the missionary journey Paul was going to be on. And then he takes Timothy and seems to say, okay, nothing like that doesn't matter now.

This let's just do this. No, he's not saying it doesn't matter. No, no, no, no, no. You can't say it doesn't matter.

But he went totally like it. You're right. But it seems as though in the flow of it, it's like the council was held.

They prayed it seemed good to us and the Holy Spirit laid nothing else on them, but thee. And then all of a sudden, Timmy, there's one more thing for us to be ministry. You're going to have to do this too. And it just seems a little. No, no, no, no, no, no, no. You're, you're, wait, wait, you're adding stuff that's not there in order to do ministry. That's not what it says. It looks like it's, hold on, hold on, hold on, hold on, hold on, hold on, hold on.

It's a particular context in which it was done. Not so that ministry overall could be permitted. That's the issue. We're out of time.

Got to call back tomorrow. Okay. Sorry about that, folks. Right of time.

And sorry about that, Renia. I want to hear what you had to say. Whistleblower topic. I'm very interested in that. Chris from Indiana. First on 4-17. Call back tomorrow and we'll talk then. May the Lord bless you all by his grace. We'll talk to you then. See you. God bless. Bye. Another program powered by the truth network.