Dr. Brown Answers Your Best Bible Questions

Let's do it. Phone lines are open. You've got questions, we've got answers.

It's time for the Line of Fire with your host. Activist, author, international speaker and theologian, Dr. Michael Brown. Your voice of moral, cultural and spiritual revolution. Michael Brown is the director of the Coalition of Conscience and President of Fire School of Ministry. Get into the line of fire now by calling eight six six, three, four. Drew, that's eight six six three four. True. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. Thanks for joining us on the line of fire.

This is Michael Brown. Eight six six three four truth eight six six three four eight seven eight eight four. Any question of any kind lady to any subject we ever cover here on the line of fire.

Phone lines are wide open. You've got questions. We've got answers. I normally don't watch speeches at the political conventions. I normally will read the transcripts afterwards. Just been my habit for many, many years. So I didn't watch the speeches at the Democratic Convention. And I don't plan on watching the speeches at the Republican convention. I'll read the transcripts after. And maybe if there's something especially valuable, I'll look at it. Listen, it would be amazing if Joe Biden could be a unifying force for America, would be amazing if he could bring a certain tone and attitude and stand for all the people. But based on his policies, I don't see it happening. I see some of the policies that are most important to him being quite quite contrary and opposite of where my views would stand. As for Donald Trump, I'm with him on the policies, but not with him on the personality. So the church must do its job. The church must do its job. It's six six, three, four. Truth. And we store it in Clarkston, Washington. Jonathan, welcome to the Line of Fire.

Yes. Oh, I had a good time. Yes. Hello, Michael Brown. I actually called a few weeks ago asking about Leviticus. The aliens did not eat my brains. By the way, I'm fine pets. I was. I had a question a few weeks ago. I was asking about what is the difference between the. I'm sorry. That wasn't my question. My question was, what was the DVD? Whatever it was the I was asking if it was a good idea at the by the laws in Leviticus into moral, civil and ritual. Right. But I am right.

One of the hits I said I had said that it's it's useful in terms of making distinctions from our vantage point, but would not have been internal within the Torah. So the same way God says I'm holy be holy in Leviticus for moral laws. He does also was dietary laws. So that was my point, that that would not be the division that would be natural from within the Torah itself. OK. So again today. Yep. Go ahead.

Oh, yes. OK. So a pilot teaching the but the Bible study on the a kiss. I did seem to under I realized that I didn't really understand what was really even the point of the ritualize. Why? What did God command us not to shave our beards or eat bacon or to even have animal sacrifices? And what does it mean when we say Jesus fulfilled those laws?

Right. Wonderful questions. So why did God put those in the Bible in the first place? And in what way did Jesus fulfill the law? So to answer them in the order you posed them, God was preparing Israel to receive the Messiah and to make him known to the world. And God was calling Israel to be separated from the other nations if they were not separated. They would have been swallowed up with the nations. So there were various reasons for various laws. Even the rabbis would say some of them called the Hulk or a car. A statute has no rational explanation. Just is because God said it. Well, let's take the throughout Israel. God was seeking to communicate truths to them so that when you went to the temple, the the holiest place of all the articles were made of gold. And then the next level out silver and then the next level out bronze the nation as a whole. Every individual Israelite was in the state of either ritual holiness or like a priest or they were clean or they were unclean when it came time for foods. There were some that could be set apart for ritual sacrifice. So holy. And then those that were clean, those that were unclean throughout everything. God was teaching them certain distinctions and keeping them separate from the other nations. To the extent you eat together, hang out together, do things together as families, as neighbors. You end up falling into ascend together. So certain laws were there to keep Israel separate. Certain laws were there to give them outward concepts of cleanliness so that they could then understand spiritual concepts of cleanliness, the animal sacrifices that was there to teach them the penalty of sin. The principle of substitution. The importance of blood. This was all to prepare Israel to be a priestly nation to whom the Messiah could come, and they would then understand who he was and declare that message to the world. So in what sense does he fulfill the laws? Everything having to do with our approach to God? So the atonement system, the priesthood, the temple, everything happening. Haven't you with a God he fulfills by dying on the cross for our sins, by making us into a spiritual temple, by being our great high priest. So he brings it to the fullest. Meaning, what does he do with the moral and ceremonial laws? Excuse me, the moral laws, the moral laws he now brings to a higher standard. So he fulfills them by saying, OK, adultery is not just the physical act, but the act of the heart. Murder is just not the physical act, but the act of the heart. So he brings them to their fullest, meaning the ceremonial laws. He would show what they were pointing to, such as dietary laws of separation and things like that, and then the biblical calendar he brings to its fullness and fulfillment by filling out the meaning of the Sabbath, by filling out the meaning of the Passover. When he returns, he'll fill out the meaning of the of the fall feasts. So that's how I understand those things. The question will be, how does he fulfill civil law? And I would look at that a little differently because the application of that was on a national level and he would just imbue each thing with a deeper meaning. And through that, we now try to live it out, the principle in our own society. So when I look at the fulfillment, I do break them down into different categories and then ultimately by living a perfectly righteous life. He now fulfills the goal and the object of the Torah. And now we can receive his righteousness. So that's how I look at those things. And I believe that's how Hebrews kind of reflects on that as well. So once you chew on that, Jonathan, and see how that sits in your ongoing study and teaching and feel like things are falling into place somewhat for you.

Yeah, yeah, I think that makes a lot of sense. Thank you very much.

You are. You are very welcome. Eight six six, three, four. Truth and trust me, I've spent endless hours contemplating these things, trying to work them through myself. Let us go to Philip in Savannah, Georgia. Welcome to the Line of Fire.

Happy Friday, Dr. Brown, how you doing? Doing well, thank you.

So I was doing what I really enjoy, which is perusing YouTube for apologetics and and doctrinal material. I love watching your stuff all the time. So I happened to come across a very prominent Catholic apologist who has a great YouTube channel. And so started getting exposed to some of his stuff. And there came up the issue, of course, as the debate of solar script toura. I looked up some material on that to see if I could look up some debate. And it seems that there might be a dearth of material on that. In fact, the main result that comes up is your your friend, Dr. James White, conducting a debate like 30 years ago with a Patrick Madrid. And you don't even have like a video that has audio only. So I guess I wanted to first ask you, have you ever considered or would you ever consider debating a Catholic theologian on the issue of Solar Scriptura?

So what I I'd be open to debating Catholic theologian on solar scootering, meaning that our faith is based exclusively on what is written in the word as opposed to what is written in the word, plus developing church tradition that would somehow carry equal weight or that that church tradition would be the authoritative interpreter of scripture. Yeah, I'd I'd be happy to to be candid. It would be the kind of debate that would take a little extra preparation on my part, meaning that the Catholic theologian would have specialized in this and focused on much more than I have in terms of a debate with Catholics. So I'd want to know more fully some of their arguments and key texts that they use.

But sure, I'd be happy to debate it. I believe Dr. White has done a number of debates on the subject. They may just not all be on YouTube or at a level. And I imagine others have done it as as well. But sure, I'd I'd be happy to. I think he would be an excellent learning experience for everyone. Sure.

Well, part of the reason I'm bringing up Dr. Run is I think that you have seen in some of your videos addressing Catholic doctrine is that you see some troubling parallels with that. I think I'm characterizing your position correctly between some of the problems of temple area Judaism and and then today's Judaism and some of the parallels with the rituals and the emphasis and the Catholic Church. So that was part of why I think your perspective would be highly valued. And yeah, you're right. I mean, there is almost like a false choice that up when the Catholic theologian is debating Dr. James White that you know. Well, you know, so the scripture I mean, there's no role for authorities. There's no role for the church fathers. There's no role for for, you know, a thirties and end tradition within the church. Or you have to go all in, what, the Catholic position. So I'm I would be very confident in you and in that position above to see if that happened today.

Yeah, absolutely. If someone approached me on it again, it has to be a qualified representative to be fair to the other side. You don't want to debate someone that's not qualified. It doesn't do any good. It's not a good learning experience for everyone. It doesn't fairly represent the other position. But I'm sure there are plenty of Catholic theologians and scripture scholars that would that would qualify and be happy to do it. Yes. So in traditional Judaism, there is the belief that God gave Moses the written law in Mount Sinai. So we agree with that. But then he also gave him the oral law, and the oral law consisted of explanations of some of the laws, principles of interpretation of the scripture, the principles of making legal legal decisions for future generations to the oral law. Theoretically, we keep growing and developing over the years. You know, Moses saw the whole of it, and now it develops in real life over the centuries. And what ultimately happens is that the tradition becomes more important in scripture. In other words, if the if the Bible says two plus two equals four. But the tradition says it really means five, then that becomes what's ultimately binding. So for me, that the simple test, Philip, would always be the same. You're exactly right. I look at that panel on say, OK, can I find things within authoritative Catholic tradition? That's just an opinion expressed similar, but something that is considered to be truth, Catholic truth and dogma that I find in direct contradiction with scripture. That's the case. Then I have to reject that other authority. And that's where really to me, the the key debate is right.

We'll be right back. Stay right here.

It's the line of fire with your host, Doctor Michael Brown. Get into the line of fire now by calling eight six six three four truth. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown.

Don't forget, friends, if you haven't heard the announcement. Well, what did it wait. I just contradicted myself.

Don't forget, if you haven't heard the announcement, if you haven't heard the announcement, then you're not forgetting. So if you have heard the announcement, don't forget.

If you haven't heard the announcement, let me remind you of what we've been saying for weeks now. Let's do it again, OK? Anyway, our Israel trip, that was originally in May of this year, then got bumped to October. Then to be safe, we bumped it to March, has seats available. So you can come in. If you're a monthly support of your torchbearer, then you're going as an individual or you and B, have your family. If the family's going use an individual, get 10 percent off on the ticket. So which you're given a year, you basically get put right back in your pocket. It's one per family. So go the website. Esther Brown dot org. Find out about the trip. It really is the trip of a lifetime. I still am blown away every time we do it by the impact it has on the people that go with the ones. I'll see him on the road. Oh, Josh Brown, we're hoping to go on your next trips. Like, can you go? Oh, yeah, we went before, but we can't wait to go again. So just amazing. OK. Eight, six, six, three, four. Truth the number to call. Let's go to Eugene in Fort Sill, Oklahoma. Welcome to the Line of Fire.

God bless you, Dr. Brown. Have you been there? Doing just fine, thank you.

Hey, man, that's wonderful. So, sir, my question, I think it's really practical about life. But I would like to hear what she has to say. I just considering going for a bachelors and just some type of program that would make me marketable once I get out the army. I wake up around four forty five every morning that exercise that I'm just doing a lot of extra activity outside of work, which is already demanding. But there's been pieces of my life where I spent literally hours in prayer and reading the Bible and fellowshipping with the Holy Spirit. And there's just such a depth of what it means to love thy loved by God. And it it you know, the highlight of my life, honestly, is spending time with him. And I feel like ever since I started doing everything, not because I want to, but because time is so short. I spend far less time in my work and I feel like I know I still love the Lord, of course, but. I just don't really know where that line is.

Am I putting God, you know, before something Mike prettying got back on after something wrong or am I just having a healthy balance in my life, doing what's necessary? And I'm just kind of want to hear what you have to say about living life and meeting the demands of life while putting up first.

Yeah. How do we live in this world and seek first the kingdom of God in this righteousness? So there are two simple possibilities. But I'll give you the solution. The one possibility is that you are not putting God first as you could. The other possibility is that it's a different season in life, that you are honoring the Lord but don't have the same time that you used to. So I give you what my counsel would be. But when bone test bone up, by the time I was saved about a year, I averaged six or seven hours along with God in the word and prayer every day without fail. And that stretch went on a good six months that have been growing, growing, growing, growing. And then got to that point before I started a full time job. So I would read the word two hours every day. I would memorize scripture for one hour every day. And I and I could memorize 20 versus a day in an hour. I would I would pray at least three hours, including an hour praying in the spirit pit, pray at least three hours every day. And that was the pattern of life for me. Share the gospel with a new person every day and went to probably five church services a week. At that point or close to it. So. And then did outreach on other days. That's the way I lived. And then I started a full time job and maybe I had three hours a day that I could spend with the Lord, which for most would be amazing if that was the pattern of my life. Now would be wonderful, but I felt like I wasn't doing enough all the time. I felt like I'm just I'm not earnestly seeking the Lord. And and that hung over me. And it was kind of a cloud and it was very negative. So I don't know what season of life you're in. And you can't compare when maybe you had a free schedule, maybe like someone newly married, a mom, newly married just after work and just have a baby and she's got hours with the Lord every day. That seven, she has twins and then two years later, another baby. And so life changes and we don't have the same opportunities. But here's what you can do, Eugene. And this would be my counsel to that. The the choices you can make outside of the essential Work Choices put God first. In other words, if you get up for 45 to exercise and do other things that are not mandatory. No, it's not the hours you have to put in in your job assignment.

I would instead get up and pray first or getting the word first. And when I feel OK, I've done that adequately. If I have time to exercise. Great. There was I would just make a choice to put the spiritual pursuit first. And then as you do that, you'd be amazed how your days seem to change, how God seems to open up other hours or you get things done more quickly. We have more energy and you get to the other things as well.

I remember when I was in grad school and working on all my languages studying and then after that late night research and and I'd work on my language stuff. And then it's like, all right, time to read the Bible. And I read the Bible. So I started to fall asleep and kind of changed position. I was in read. It's more than okay, I'm a sleep in and out. All right. Texaco's go ahead now. You know, I just fell asleep with a chair on my knees, whatever. And a friend said, we will want to show you the language stuff after was watching. Once you pray first, get the word first. And then when you're done with that, you'll come down with that. You have energy left, you know, work on my Babylonian or my Arabic or something like that. So that that would be the counsel I give. And as you do that, God will honor it. Not the legalistic way, but in a heart. God, first way. Hey, God bless you in your ongoing pursuit of the Lord. Eight, six, six, three, four. Truth. Let's go to Ike in Temecula, California. Welcome to the Line of Fire.

I bet the bra. How are you doing?

I'm doing just fine, thanks.

Thank you for what you do and I would have loved this. Thank you. All right. You have two questions. The first one is the bar. When Jesus said in John Chapter Twelve people, even me, do the work that I do. You should do greater work than these. You do because I got my father. Oh, why? What works with Jesus referring to I mean, if he's talking about the miracle, why do you think we don't eat those miracles anymore as much as we should now?

Yes, it's a great question, John. 14 12. Is that a universal promise? And was Jesus talking about miracles? Yes, it was a universal promise. That exact phrase in Greek, the one who believes in me a curse about a half dozen times in John's gospel. And then there's some even Mauric expand. It is the one who believes or whoever believes. So it's a repeated phrase in John's gospel. And it's definitely universal was not just for the apostles. It was definitely universal. And it's just like whoever believes in me will never hunger. You know, just whoever believes in me will have eternal life. It is it is an absolute promise for all. That's number one. Number two, in context, it's clearly talking about miracles. And when Jesus points to the tenth chapter, to the miracles he's doing and it's the father working in me said that in John 14 that is producing these works. So clearly, speaking of miracles, now we know that not every miracle is done by the apostles. In other words, there's no record of them turning water into wine. There's no record of of any way except for Peter briefly walking on on water.

It's not to say that all of us will do everything he did, but that we should see the evidence of the miraculous in our lives. And that to me, something is missing. In other words, it is a clear promise.

And I determined many years ago when I was writing my doctoral dissertation on healing the Hebrew word for healing and trying to wrestle through the many, many questions I had. And to this day. You know, people I pray for with cancer, the vast majority were not healed. And I prayed and prayed for a lot of blind people, but none of them were were healed. Maybe one guy got an improvement. We could see a little. But, you know, not not the words that Jesus did. I have seen other things. I have seen outright miracles, but a fraction of what I believe I should see.

But to me, this is something I will continue to confess because I am a believer, because I do love the Lord and I put my trust in him, that I therefore expect to see the same works done through me. Now, here's the other thing that even though it's an individual promise, is a promise made to several billion people that profess to be followers of Jesus. And throughout the body, amazing things are happening. Just average people with who don't have a pulpit and aren't known. They're praying for the sick and the sick or being healed. And things are happening. It's just not as much as we should see. That's why I wrote the book in 91. Whatever happened to the power of God that God is moving. But we want to see more. But let me ask you this question. And you have to respond. Just put this out for you. Isn't it the same in other areas as well? No, it's what the Bible promises in terms of victory over sin or the power of our witness. We see God moving. But we know there must be more. And to me, God is honored as we go to him asking for more. All right. Real quick, your second question, sir.

So my second question is, John, look, six thirty eight. Yeah. Jesus was talking about give and he should be given unto you. Pressed down, shaken up our man. Give to you. Buzzin. Now, majority of time when I've heard that scripture being used in a sermon, is it kind of links to money or some somehow to find it? When I read the contest in January, it seemed like this is talking more about forgiveness, not judge and be merciful. And I have to say that when Jesus was saying give it was talking about given in terms of forgiveness and being merciful, not judging. Is that what Jesus was referring to, that when he said give or are you talking about money? Yes.

So is Luke's 638 used rightly, when preachers and teachers will encourage us to give give money based on Luke 638, give to the gospel, give to the poor. And as you do, it will be richly given back to you. Or was it in the context of extending mercy?

Forgiveness. We'll take a look at loose sex. We come back. Stay right here.

Right. It's the line of fire with your host, Doctor Michael Brown. Your voice of moral, cultural and spiritual revolution. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. Welcome back, friends, to the line of Fire. Eight six six, three, four, truth.

This is Michael Brown, although not even 45 minutes from now, 415 Eastern Time. So barely forty two minutes from now. We'll be back on YouTube on the Esoterica Brown YouTube channel for our weekly exclusive YouTube chat. Yeah, we'll be here. So join us, especially if he can't get through. Get your question answered. We'll be taking all kinds of questions. So back at 415 Eastern Standard Time. All right.

Back to the phones. So I had a question about Luke 638, which says, given that will be given to good measure, pressed down, running over, will will men give in to into your lap four in the same way that you give it will be given back to you? Is that financial or is that too much mercy? Compassion? Well, the principle applies. That is, you treat others a certain way. You will be treated that way as you judge others. Certainly you'll be judged accordingly. That's found in another passages. And it's also a biblical principle that as we honor the Lord and give that there is proportional blessing. And Paul lays this out. Those who sell little reap little. Right. So if if I honor the Lord and give sacrificially and in faith in different ways, God will pour back into my life, sometimes received financially. Sometimes we see in other ways. And this ultimately treasury in heaven. What about Luke 638? If you start back in verse 30. All right. There's no question that that Jesus is talking here in in financial terms as well. Give to everyone who asks you and who takes your things. Don't ask for them back. This could have been in a seventh year cycle or even a jubilee cycle where if you give you know, you're not going to get the money back and you say, no, no, don't give. So it is a financial context, just as you want others to do for you. Do the same for them that he was on. If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? If you do good to those who are good to you, a credit is that you if you lend to those whom you expect to receive what credit credits that you just mean normal transactions with here in Jewish law. Right. If if I give you a loan, a loan, you five hundred dollars. And next year is the year when loans are canceled. I'm thinking I'm I'm going to get that back. If I look at you in the first year, you're going to pay me back, you know, thirty dollars year. Fifty dollars a year until. Okay. Oh, good. We're pretty close to getting paid back in the seventh year. But if I'm if it's like towards the end of the sixth year and I am loaning you this money, next year is a sabbatical year. I'm not going to get it back. I'm not going to do it. And a contemporary rabbi, an older contemporary of Jesus, Rabbi Hillel came up with it wasn't technically called rabbi for the record, but came up with a a loophole and and it was called the principle and based on the Greek word. And it's something before the council. That's what it meant. And it was it was a loophole saying, OK, listen, if I loan you money, you don't owe it to me. You owe to the court and money owed to the court is not canceled. And sabbatical year this way to keep the loans going, to keep the rich. Say, OK, I'll help the poor because I know I'll get the money back anyway. And Jesus is saying, don't even think about that. So it's a financial context here, but it's a context of mercy, Grace. That's what he does. Says Love your enemies. Be merciful just as your father's merciful. Don't judge given that will be given you so he that the whole context starts versus earlier. So I go back. I could ask the question, go back to verse 30 when you go back to verse 30 and start reading from there. You see. Absolutely. There is financial application here as well. It's a good biblical principle that generosity begets generosity. It's six, three, four truth. We go to Chattanooga, Tennessee. Bob, welcome to the Line of Fire.

Hey, thank you, Dr. Brown. I was I have a problem with the L. A. to look and limited atonement was the Calvinist.

Yes, sir.

And especially I mean, I could give you look like we could give a dozen verses on the sovereignty of God and also on the free will of man. I want to make it clear that I do believe in the sovereignty of God. But I believe also in a way that we haven't been told, like Deuteronomy. Twenty nine. Twenty nine would tell us. We don't know everything. I may a parallel track. You our free will and God Chavez. We somehow, in a way we don't know, work together. But I want to ask you about this one particular version. Second, Peter, three nine. Why would Peter make such a statement about why the Lord is slack and he's coming back because he wants to give you no more time for more people to repent and come to Christ if it's already been. Predestiny did an elected and so forth. Why would he make even such a statement or do you see any connection to what I'm trying to get it right?

So Calvinists believe in what's called limited atonement or a specific atonement that Jesus dies specifically for the sins of the elect and by dying for them, perfectly redeems them as opposed to by dying on the cross, make salvation possible for all men. When when I was a Calvinist for five years, 77 to 82, when I held to that position second Peter three nine was often raised. So the Lord is not slack in his promise to some count slightness, but his long suffering towards us, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. So the Calvinistic answer, Bob, is that he is long suffering toward us, meaning the elect. So he is waiting until all the elect come in. That's the Calvinist answer to that verse. The problem with that, even if you think he can work for that verse, is you you you have elsewhere God's saying in every other way possible that Jesus died for everyone. So God gave his son for the world, not just for us, but for the whole world, for Jew and Gentile, for every person, for all men. So you think how else could God have possibly said that Jesus is dying for the sins of all human beings? And in doing so, he makes salvation possible to all people, and he infallibly secures the salvation of those who put their trust in him. So I can look anyone in the eyes and tell them Jesus died for you. A Calvinist could say, if you'll turn to God, cry out to him for mercy, asking for forgiveness, look to the cross. You can be forgiven and start a new life. But I would say while in reality that's not true, because if Jesus didn't die for that person, even if they could believe, they'd be believing in vain. So there is a communistic answer for second, Peter. Three nine. These long suffering toward us does what any of us to perish. So he is waiting. But when you look at all the other verses that from every different angle, speak about all. Every each. The whole world. Again, God expressing it every way he knows how that I have to say no. Limited atonement is not true. Dr. White and I did a focused debate on that in England. Not a full blown debate, but one one made for TV that that I think is fruitful. You'll get to hear us both present our views. So if you check my YouTube channel, ask Dr. Brown, ask your Brown and just type in brown white. On that not exciting colors, but just brown. White. You'll see. Predestination debate. Also limited atonement debate as well. And Bob, I'm with you in Deuteronomy. Twenty nine. Twenty nine. The secret things belong to the Lord, our God. That which is open reveal belongs to us, to our children to obey all the words of this Torah. So to me, there are mysteries in terms of how everything works together that transcend our understanding. That's why we bowed out and worship God as God and then take responsibility for actions. And I'm sure my Calvinist friends would agree with that last statement. Hey, thank you for the question. Eight six six three four truth. Let's go to Stevin in central New York.

Welcome to the Line of Fire. Hello, Dr. Brown. I appreciate you taking my call. Sure thing.

I get into debates every now and then with people. I try to have responses to different to to various things they may say against the faith and in any way. I was just wondering how you would you would respond to something like death. A couple of months ago, Don Lemon on CNN ignorantly said that Jesus was not perfect. Now, I believe that he was. But if you are talking to him or someone like him and you were to ask Don. In what ways was Jesus not perfect?

And if if he were to say, well, Jesus called a woman a dog. I'm just wondering, how would you respond? You know, if somebody said that, said that as an argument against Jesus.

So how do how do we respond to Jesus seemingly speaking in a derogatory way to the candidate? We're on the Sarah Phoenician woman. And Matthew fifteen. And Mark seven. And the answer is that first he did not call her a dog. But second, and more importantly, when you look at the accounts, he goes on a round trip journey by foot of at least 60 miles round trip. You might argue it's longer and the only thing he does when he gets to the place is here, this woman's daughter, and then come back. OK. So there's a bigger picture here going on.

And and.

What Jesus is doing is drawing faith out of a cane and a woman who, in the eyes of the Israelites, would have been looked at as as an outsider or a lowly person or even a dog. As someone who didn't deserve what the Jewish people got and when, remember, he goes there just for her. This is what we see in God's perspective and comes back because he wants to heal her and he wants to make a point that the Gentiles are not unclean. And it's right after he is declared all foods clean, meaning that not you go out and eat pork, but that what you eat doesn't defile you. So he's making a a statement, an action to back what he just taught in March seven. And Matthew. Fifteen and going this tremendous distance with the goal of touching this one woman as an object lesson and as a compassionate act when the disciples are trying to silence her, you know, send her away. OK, she's persisting. He's drawing something out of her. And he is now bringing her into a status where as an outsider, she can receive the same grace that Israel does. So it's an object lesson and it's it's a way of putting her off, putting her off to bring her to a greater place of faith so that they can heal and work a miracle. The other question to ask is, why would the gospel authors present this when they are glorifying Jesus and pointing to his compassion and his healing power, putting the story that would seem derogatory to the contrary? It is to lift her up and to bring her to a higher status. And then again, it's in the context of the food laws and it's in the context of him making this whole trip just for her. Also, check this out on another level, Don Lemon's history lesson failed. Jesus, admittedly not perfect. So just check out my Web site. Little rant I did on that.

Dr. Brian, ask D.R Brown dot org, this type and Don Lemon and watch that. And may the Lord touched on and saved him. We'll be right back.

It's the line of fire with your host, activist, author, international speaker and theologian, Dr. Michael Brown. Your voice of more cultural and spiritual revolution. Get into the line of fire. Now, by calling eight six six freeboard. True. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown.

Chris, I received a really kind note from ministry school grad sits me. I thank God for giving you the platform you have.

And thank you for sticking your neck out always and speaking truth. You were the voice many of us wish we had because many of us feel pretty powerless friends. I take that as a sacred responsibility to be your voice, to use the great platforms God's given us on radio and TV and online and other means to get the message out and to to speak out the things that burden concern you, that concern me as wallet and off when I'm writing my latest article about outreach for the children, the assault on our children's innocence just last night struck. Do I write it or not? I want to get this out right now. So I have to feel like I'm doing it as your voice. I'm doing it for the Lord. I'm doing it to express what's in your hearts as well. So thank you for your partnership, teamwork to join together with us. If you're watching on our Facebook page, ask Dr. Brown you can just click on the dollar sign. And your gift of any size really helps us to continue doing what we're doing and to expand, to reach even more to watch on YouTube. There's little dollar sign under the chat box. You can click on that and donate or go to our website, ask Dr. Brown, ask Deeyah Brown dot org and just click donate there. Thanks again for partnering together with us. It's six six three for truth. We go to Albany, New York. Jonathan, welcome to the Line of Fire.

Hello, Dr. Brown. Thank you for taking my call. I appreciate your ministry. Thank you, sir.

So my question is, it's actually interesting, that gentleman right in front of me, I asked a question about the perfection of Jesus. Yeah. And I I've got a question that's not nagged at me in any significant way, but I've had on and off over the years, someone raised this to me about Jesus and John Heaven when he tells his disciples that he wasn't going up to the feast of birth. And John H. And then in the following verses that says that he went up in private after telling them he wasn't. And I was just curious what your take on that was. I've heard it level, but that was dishonesty. And I'm just I'm just curious what you think.

Yeah. It could seem in John's seven that Jesus is being dishonest. He's telling his brothers, hey, I'm not going. It's not time. And then secretly goes. So, John, seven, verse one after this. Jesus traveled in Galilee since he did not want to travel in Judea because the Jews were trying to kill him. The Jewish Festival of Tabernacles was near, so his brothers said to him. So here it doesn't seem to be his disciples, but his own earthly brothers. His brother said to leave here and go to Judaism. You disciples can see your works that you're doing for no one who does anything. No one does anything in secret. All these seeking public recognition. If you do these things, show yourself to the role. For not even his brothers believed in him. So, like, OK, you're this miracle worker. Go ahead. Your brother Jesus. Right. You're the miracle worker, big brother. Go ahead. You want to be famous? Go to Jerusalem. So their attitude and their tone is completely wrong. OK, and he said, my time has not yet arrived, but your time is always at hand. The world cannot hate you, but it does hate me because I testify about its deeds are evil. Go to the festival yourselves. I'm not going into the festival yet because my time has not yet fully can't come after he said these things to stay in Galilee after his brothers had gone up to the festival. He also went up not openly, but secretly. So here's the key thing. Is there a justification for the word yet in verse eight?

And that would be the bottom line.

If there is if there is not justification for saying yet or if he's saying, hey, I'm I'm not going up in the way that you think I'm going. Then he would have been dishonest if he meant, hey, you go, I'm not going now. And then he waits and then he goes secretly and then at a certain point begins to speak. Then that would be fine. He doesn't go when they go. He delays going. He goes differently. And his point was, I'm not going yet. So that's certainly what he means and what we understand in context. And it just so happened I had the CSB on my screen. That's the way that reads. So that's how we have to interpret it. And that's why it's really it's not raised that much as a major objection, because that's how it's pretty much understood. And again, the question is when the gospel authors are seeking to present him like John, like the word made flesh, displaying the beauty and glory of the father. And as someone who is sinless, you know, what have I done? Jesus asked them, what have I done? Show me some who are broken your laws. Show me where I'm guilty. They can't do it. That they would not present him as a liar. So the understanding is that he's not going up yet. And even when he goes, he's going secretly. And then at a certain point, he he does speak. You know, the end of John seven, if anyone's thirsty, let him come to me and drink. But even in that context, there's no account of him going around with a public demonstration of miracles, doing what the brothers say. So that's hard to understand at the timing and the manner or or exactly what he said. And as opposed to I'm not going at all under any circumstance.

And what I would do is just dig to see on what basis is the word. Yet here, the Syriac the ancient spirit goes to this priest. I will not go up to this feast now because my time is still unfinished was simply a matter of of delaying complete Jewish Bible. You go up to the festival. As for me, I am not going up to this festival now because the right time for me is not yet come. And that is the right time. He went. Same with Lazarus. He waits, says that he's actually dead before he goes. We can raise him from the dead because that would bring God greater glory. So that's simple. And I think the translations do it justice by saying I'm not going up now as opposed to not at all.

All right. Yes, sir. Thank you. I think the reason that I have the question is because when I looked at it in my Bible and granted it's not a verse of the Bible that I prefer the NIV, it did have a an asterisk at the bottom that said that many early manuscripts don't include the word yet. So I was just curious whether there is support for that word being there as well.

Yeah. So so there is a you have to look in textual criticism and it's a science. In other words, OK, what manuscript. Say what, what's the evidence. You actually weigh it. You know, they grade it, you know, it would be like a screening. So they one to ten things I actually graded by the scholars. And then what's more likely that the word yet was added in for clarity or the word was dropped because of where it is in a sentence. So it all has to be evaluated. But bear in mind that the gospel authors. We are presenting a glorified especially John here. He used the word made flesh, and he is without sin. He is the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. So would they likely present an account? Because remember, we're asking, what did they write? I'm asking what happened here. But what did John Wright what he writes something to portray Jesus as less than perfect. No, if it's as simple as a now or yet. That makes perfect sense. And in context, that's what happens. I mean, you could really what happened? He waits and he goes secretly. Hey, thank you for the call. All right. Have time for one more. Let's try this out. C.J.. Well, in Columbus, Ohio, you are on the line of fire, dove. Right answer.

Hi, Dr. Brown. I just wanted to ask a question about second is 12 for seven. Pertaining to Paul Stone? Not necessarily what it was, but whose idea it was. Was it was a guy's idea or was it was it a devil's idea to attack Paul or to have him experience this? This Paul is referring to the thought.

Yeah. The language. So Paul's thought, aside from the question, the thorny question of what it was, who originated, the idea that God originated when it's Satan originated. Obviously, God is always infinitely ahead of Satan and all of us and demons and angels. And because he's God and he inhabits eternity and he sees the end from the beginning. So in the Book of Job, Satan is absolutely the instigator. The idea of the attack, the malicious attack on Joe, who doesn't deserve it, is definitely instigated by the devil. No question about it. However, it is something in the plan of God that God was going to use this. Paul uses language that is very ambiguous. A thorn in the flesh was given to me and he doesn't eat. He doesn't attribute a God sent this, but it was given to me. But the Lord refuses to take it away. My way of viewing it would be similar to the Book of Job that God, in his wisdom and love, knew that Satan would attack in this way and that he would now the Lord would now use this for his purpose. So he's going to let the devil do what he does. Just like the Book of Acts says that that Jesus was crucified with the help of wicked men. So God did not instigate these men doing this. Rather, he used the acts of wicked men, just like Joseph's brothers. They instigated the plan to sell them into slavery. God, God, did that instigate that in their hearts? But God had planned it in advance to use their evil deeds to accomplish this. So in my mind, God has foreseen this and for knowing it and knew that the enemy with instigate this attack against Satan and God was going to now use it for his glory. So I don't think that now it could be the Lord instigated it. It's possible that the Lord said, OK, I want this done and prompts Satan and Satan goes and does it thinks it's his own idea. But in my mind, God, knowing who Satan was, what he would do, allow this to happen for a specific purpose. So he did not need to instigate the thorn. He knew that Satan would do it, but he chose not to remove it for divine purposes. Hey, friends, thank you for the question, C.J.. Appreciate it. Join us in 15 minutes. Fifteen minutes. Over at Starcher Brown on YouTube. Ask D-R Brown on YouTube. We're gonna have a.. Forty 45 minutes, maybe even an hour of ongoing YouTube chat.

More. Your question is that. And then back with you. On Monday. Be sure to go to the Web site. Ask Dr. Brown dot org. Check out the latest articles and the latest videos and have a plus weekend.