Share This Episode
Line of Fire Dr. Michael Brown Logo

Dr. Brown Tackles Your Best Questions

Line of Fire / Dr. Michael Brown
The Truth Network Radio
October 23, 2020 4:30 pm

Dr. Brown Tackles Your Best Questions

Line of Fire / Dr. Michael Brown

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 1260 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.

October 23, 2020 4:30 pm

The Line of Fire Radio Broadcast for 10/23/20.

COVERED TOPICS / TAGS (Click to Search)
line of fire dr. michael brown
Line of Fire
Dr. Michael Brown
Line of Fire
Dr. Michael Brown
Line of Fire
Dr. Michael Brown
Line of Fire
Dr. Michael Brown
Line of Fire
Dr. Michael Brown
Line of Fire
Dr. Michael Brown

Phone lines are open to questions we got answers stage for the line of fire with your host activist and 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 866-34-TRUTH 866-34-TRUTH here again is Dr. Michael Brown.

Thanks so much for joining us on this Friday fire broadcast the questions we got answers phone lines are open, friends and foes alike. Phone lines are open to any question you have anything you want to probe with me anything when you challenge me on differ with me on phone lines open wide associate relates to any subject matter on the line of fire. I love to talk to 866-34-TRUTH 866-34-TRUTH 87884 with that we go straight to the phone because I for fast and we start with the Micah in St. Cloud, Florida. Walking to the line of fire. Are you doing very well thank you I want to ask your question about prompt and on LGBT issues on one, and even taking action against it hasn't really done anything that act out the legislation. On the other hand, have A larger group called pride in its campaign launched a memo taken by his record on a what are your thoughts so it's been a mix and I dressed and ready in 2016 and I dressed it in an article earlier this month that on the one hand you have numerous gay websites established activist website saying he is the worst anti-LGBT president in American history.

Then you have folks like former ambassador Richard Grenell and others with some gay Republican group saying that he's the most pro-LGBT president in American history. The latter group would be the minority, the former group would be the majority.

So what we make of it. It's different than his pro-life position which is not mixed in terms of he's been consistent in that from day one. But during the campaign he it to the primaries, he proudly held up a flag and LGBT for trump. He had Peter Teal speak at the Republican national convention is an openly gay man, cofounder of PayPal. He said if Bruce Caitlin Jenner came to Trump Towers that that he could use the ladies bathroom which Jenner subsequently did that's on the one hand, on the other hand, he has consistently stood against transgender activism. He has consistently put religious freedoms over the stealing of our freedoms by LGBT activists and the like, and the one policy considers pro-gay that he advocated is the decriminalizing of homosexuality worldwide, basically saying that you should be putting gaze to death for for practicing homosexuality, which I think most of the world would would agree with so it's it's a mixture. My take on it is this that on a personal level.

He's got no problem with people being gay marriage is not a oh that's repulsive to some is the matter with you, and probably for decades in New York from gay friends, business partners, celebrities. He was Ramos those communities and it was never an issue for him. So on a personal level I think is like hey everybody deserves an equal shot is about people to gauge. I got no problem with his marriage to another man said that, so I'm the one hand he's been consistent in that respect, say, a personal level got no issues you identify strands when he uses bathroom Glenn do it but what I can see is that when it comes to a battle between code, gay rights and conservative Christian convictions or quote gay rights and religious freedoms, then he's going to consistently side with us with belief attract. So, for example, under the Obama administration the understanding of of sex and title IX now was gender identity. So what was meant to help not discriminate against women say women sports and universities and colleges now was based on gender identity and not biological sex. While the truck administration push back against that and I Obama administration if your school district would not allow a 15-year-old boy to play on the girls softball team ensure the locker room with her. Then you would lose your federal funding will be the truck administration came against that.

So as far as actions that have been taken. Policies then they have been primarily against LGBT activism in terms of his own personal views who work with and put into various places.

It's been what you could say friendly LGBT activism so somewhat of a mixture there. I would like there to be more consistency while still caring about everyone's humanity and honoring that I like to be more consistency but that's that's we've had from day one after You are very welcome. 866-34-TRUTH just checked my recent articles and Esther to and you will find one addressing this directly, let's go to Foley Alabama Brian walking to the line of fire that McCall question number for your market. Very sweet. I remember the name go ahead. Go back and rewrite equipment right McMahon Bruno Malik Evan accommodation and question came about the premeditated man and a faith, but they bank by the bank at the and our spot that would be me. We have to be a lot accountable only for no premeditated thing in FYI thing believe that differently from you know on a daily growth with no you believe that the bank believe that we can run out a great and my response would record here, like yeah but then again I don't think the man we willfully fan constantly.

I believe that, right yet no particular benefit of right solicitous in two different angles.

Brian the first the question. Premeditated sin versus spur of the moment sin, which we will, honest mistake was a spur of the moment sin and then the question of habitual sin. So the reason that premeditated sin is more severe and uglier and more dangerous than spur the moment sin is that premeditated sin, you have been sending out for that time you plan this until the time you do it another which you set your heart to do wrong and if the Holy Spirit is been convicting you. We've had opportunities to change your mind, you have continued to sin and therefore continue to harden your heart heart so you have been sent. Let's say three days in advance you plan your gonna attack some person to beat them up and so you get three days of of sinning leading up to the actual act and three days of hardening your heart on the on the flipside, if you get no argument with somebody lose your temper and beat the person up. Okay that's wrong also. But that was a spur of the moment thing that you're more likely to immediately repent of and Sam, so sorry I you know I blew it and pay if I could be arrested for this fight was the other thing you been planning it and calculating it so it involves sin over period of time.

It involves hardening of the heart over period of time and therefore is more serious in its nature now, the question of can you be a follower of Jesus and habitually sin without repentance.

The answer is no, either you were never born again and and this is the proof of it or you have willfully chosen to cast off the Lordship of Jesus. The New Testament is explicit that those who willfully practice sin do not belong to the Lord and will not inherit the kingdom of God. There are many verses that speak to that. So either that person was never truly born again or they have willfully chosen to forfeit their salvation by walking away from the Lord denying Jesus is Lord. They are an ongoing denial of his lordships and I will live my life the way I want and those who live like that.

The New Testament from Jesus to Paul to John explicitly say those who live like that will not inherit the kingdom of God. There's a difference between that and seeing God I'm so weak I keep blowing it. What's the matter with me. I keep watching porn. I keep losing my temper like I keep acting great Lord, I want to change help when you go to God with a sincere broken heart of repentance and desiring to do is write he's near to the broken hearted.

He'll help us. That's different than undo will want to do. Those who live like that refuse to repent. Do not belong to the Lord alright so three down 47 to go out right guy like you meant you and and of course you we have we have a limit of at least a couple weeks before someone can call in and noted to give space to others so well to couple years to get all the questions answered. At that pace. If he is able to cut through every couple weeks right 866-348-7884. Let's go to Jonathan and Clarkston, Washington. Thank you for calling the line of fire reading Dr. Brown reading I am. I had a question about Buddhism. The one of my better that that the a Christian and a polluted, though I was wondering if that even operable. Court of course not. So what he most likely means is that he holds to elements of what he believes are Christian teaching and Buddhist teaching and confines them in harmony. But it's impossible to be fully Christian and fully Buddhist. At the same time they they are going to be mutually contradictory example.

Buddhism does not believe in a personal God. The Christianity does. Buddhism does not believe in the need for atonement of sin or Jesus being the one who atones for a sin the same way that Christianity does Buddhist does not accept the authority of the Scriptures is the only word of God, etc. so there I I'm no expert on Buddhism by any means, but I know enough about it to understand that it's it's a totally different religion that when a Buddhist comes to faith. They leave their Buddhism and becomes become followers of Jesus, so if you press things with this professor, you find that what they hold to Christianity is sadly lacking that their views on what it really means to be a follower of Jesus are sadly lacking that their acceptance of the fundamentals of the gospel are sadly lacking. So if you say so you believe that Jesus died to atone for sins and outside of him.

There is no atonement you believe he rose from the dead is God's vindication that he is the only Savior that we can only come to God through him, and that the only authoritative revelation we have of God's nature will is found in the Bible.

I doubt that he would affirm any of those because if he did then he would also hold to Buddhism if he said you know they're there. Interesting thoughts and Buddhism and interesting approaches to the problem of suffering and interesting ideas about meditation I been able learn from that incorporate that in my Christian faith. That's a stretch that you say one thing, but I doubt that he saying that so just find out more thoroughly what it means what Chris that I think everything will feel like their boyfriends will be right back 866-3487 80 error on the line of fire with your host Dr. Michael Brown. Your voice is more cultural and spiritual revolution. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown dove TV or you listen to a podcast a few days later, or you're watching on YouTube or Facebook. A few days later and you say, but I would I'd love to weigh-in but I'm not watching live and not listening live what we give you phone them, you can't leave a question we can leave a question, but will be responding to questions on this number but if you want to sound off on something if you have a testimony of how her ministry is been a help to you if you want to differ with me and give me a piece of your mind for some to call you ready 1-800-618-8481 800-618-8480. That's not to get on that the air live now, that's if you want to call. Subsequent to the live show me a piece.

Your mind share your thoughts.

Let us know how we been a blessing or help to you.

We love to hear from you and we may even play some of the clips on the keep it under two minutes if you can all right 866-34-TRUTH 784 that's number to call to get a live with several phone line open.

Also 55 minutes from now roughly, so about 415 Eastern time.

So less than an hour from now will be back on YouTube on the Esther Gibran YouTube channel doing our exclusive weekly Q&A chat so if you can't get through. Now, or if you are unable to call you just have to type to be able to do that little less than an hour from now in our exclusive weekly YouTube chat on the Esther to Brown YouTube channel. All right let us go to Jay in Boise, Idaho. Thanks for calling the line of fire. Michael, you're welcome to the briefing on the contract.

I recently had the honor of hosting the first English-language debate on a topic of was William Branham, a prophet of God and it was Jesse Smith and Rod Bergen is a very interesting conversation. The thing that was somewhat troubling to me, though, that it was indeed the first conversation, the voice of God according which is probably only have to 1/3 of actual message believers which is what people believe William Brennan was a private profit. Columns all right.

They claim 2 million adherents, which is greater than Black Hebrew Israelites and NIF. The same as Orthodox Jews in the world, and yet it seems to be a complete and total afterthought in Christian apologetics. This question of William Brenneman is profit met and I guess my question is kind of why and not so much.

Just why with him but a few others as well. W really addresses don't you white very much the people address Jehovah's Witnesses, but I rarely hear them address the profit of Jehovah's Witnesses, and I'm back.

I don't know the name you know that and I don't like what why is it that we seem to be ignoring these groups of what are probably a lot of time. You potentially professing believers Brenneman in general, to the doctors. The people even know I mean I know in the case of message believers and Seventh-day Adventist. Found Orthodox in virtually every way except for a few things that you kinda just pick up every now and the area is insolently break break the steps we do recognize Jehovah's Witnesses as occult that's been something that apologists have dealt with for decades and decades even when I first came to faith and 71 and started sharing the gospel is Jehovah's Witnesses that meet my neighborhood and elsewhere. I found that there were books available testimonies of people who'd been in the watchtower and part of that citizen consciousness of the and the founders of that we look at Morse false teachers than anything else and and there were several along the way. But ultimately it's the ongoing doctrine I think were sensitive to that Seventh-day Adventist is more of a mixture there is the question of the of the claim of Ellen wiping up up of prophetess and therefore bringing modern-day revelation that, in some way tells you how to understand the Bible supplements the Bible so the focus is not been on her as much as it is, as it could and should be because of of her errors and because of the fact that she was, not a prophetess obviously bringing this new revelation was Seventh-day Adventist. There many things that they hold to the that we hold his believers and I've met born-again Seventh-day Adventist on a question that along with their born-again and many other viewpoints evangelical and then there'd be a couple of key points we have strong differences and the ones who are militant Seventh-day Adventist are deftly cultlike and in their views when it comes to Branham boy in my entire believing life and I spent a lot of it traveling in Pentecostal charismatic circles. I met face-to-face one Branham might in my entire life and every so often will see them commenting on my YouTube page or something like that so dear that there 2 million of them. Boy, that seems like a stretch, sir. I mean if it's that many then you're absolutely right that were negligent in not addressing it. My understanding of Branham having read some of his biography having read things of people that that were part of his ministry or knew him is that he was a sincere believer that he may have had some confusion at times in terms of his understanding of the Godhead been around oneness people before Trinitarian's but that he was a sincere believer that had a genuine gift in terms of God revealing things you no words of knowledge and things like that for the healing of the sick and for prophetic words but that he fell into serious error when he believed that he was the end time profit that he had the authority to make pronouncements for God, for the entire church that he was modern-day Elijah and that he got off track and and died before his time because of it just seems with John Alexander Dowie minute was used by God. The thought that he was alive to the profit and leaving the unit leading this final remnant movement and he got off before he died as well is very different than the role of New Testament prophets.

As I understand it, who are continually minister in many different ways and hopefully many local churches.

The idea of being the at the end time profit or the modern Elijah or someone who can bring authoritative pronouncements to the whole church that that we categorically reject his error and needs to be addressed and ended by maybe this is the reason I've actually wanted to get out. I know it sounds very unbelievable. Having been in message circled my entire life. I can assure you it is definitely at least double that number and the reason I know that is because there is winters within the message west of this group both voice of God the claim.

2 million adherents. They are the head of the Branham tabernacle where the way Brenneman actually counted himself writes since taught it how did you come out of the movement well so I can't definitively say I have I'll be completely honest I have II started listening to this will be think David would actually and my biggest criticism of Branham now has been I and a lot of parallels between him and Mohammed that I think are very like debate have shaken me to a point where I think I can almost definitively say I do not believe it.

At the same time, there has been some of the questions I've had.

I find people who do address it to be incredibly hostile and not typically actual apologists as part of the reason I reached out to Dr. Jim Glidewell to see if if you could potentially address the issue and spent the thing is dark brown went when we when we say 2 million would be the voice of God, got right in voice of God. Guys are so difficult and rigid in their ideology. The man I actually had representing the method and debate, whose name is Jesse Smith. He has about 11,000 drivers on YouTube. All of which would call voice of God. Heretical right at that level of split the when they claim, 2 million. I can think of a surety is more than that. Dottie Reagan's church of thousands of people in it by itself and they don't agree with what God awareness. The key thing is no Branham died. What was it in the mid 60s some summer around there. But you can highlight what I think will help you sort this out is that the man having a gift from God that the Holy Spirit did reveal things to him as happens ongoing way in the New Testament, dreams, visions, revelation, these gifts or are here until Jesus returns. Please New Testament this is quite clear on that.

But that either by being in the wrong circles or by pride entering his life for some of the secret sin that only God would know about. He got off track and the idea that any human being on the planet can make pronouncements for the entire church the Lord has said this on any given subject outside of the Bible outside of say he go back to the Bible we need to go back and recover this from Scripture you didn't anyone has that role is is a very serious error.

He's not the first to believe that he was Elijah, but he won't be the first also to fall into serious error by believing that and it's totally different than them. The ministry of prophets in the New Testament and the Lord speaking something so we can be forewarned we can be helped a local body could could uncover some some simple rouge or someone that that doesn't know the Lord can have a word spoken to them that bring them to repentance and salvation.

The Lord's doing that probably thousands of times around the world. Maybe millions of times using these gifts all the time, but again it is the wrong view of oneself.

That's what you could say a God, God deftly used him from what we can tell people were saved and healed through his ministry and it does seem a supernatural gift operated through him, then you have to separate that from the myth about all the other miracles that sanction him as the prophet and all the circuits while the Apocrypha of full stuff that comes in afterwards. You don't have to throw out prophetic ministry today. You just have to embrace it for God's purpose is not what it ended up with William Brenneman and those that are in this group. God knows whether they're saved or not, but I'd be gravely concerned over their own lives in God because it's Jesus and Branham increased to 70 Jesus.

Only Jesus and Branham were Jesus and some of the first thank you for the call center for plan by the Expo line of fire with your host Dr. Michael Brown of your voice and more cultural and spiritual revolution.

Here again is Dr. Michael Brown makes got answers.

Let's go straight to the phone with Carrie in Boone, North Carolina walking to the line of fire around like so much for taking my call. Like like many Americans last night watch the debates and and subsequently read John Piper's article after the debate and that and obviously had a ton of thoughts on it for smaller say very grateful for desiring God. John Piper during portable life and their import from a ministry, but I like many, I was personally disappointed on the content of the article. I have thought wanted to share just a few with you first of all, I emailed your show this morning asking for your response, and got a great response from your team really appreciated that enough something that you all you have indeed addressed in that article will be coming out later tonight but but the big thing for me is you may agree or disagree with me on this, but I don't know more pro-life president than we have in Donald Trump right now and I do believe that John Piper is passionately pro-life. I think you failed to address that in the article, and then another thought was imagining Andrew Bronson reading that article and and and I just appreciate what you said in your article recently about you know why many Evangelicals are supporting usually wanted to gather just could you give us just a brief preview of what your articles go look like in your thoughtfully article exactly the article is now up on the stream so you can I call you and everybody that's watching on Facebook I just posted a link in Facebook and Chris if you can grab it and posted over four YouTube followers as well. It just went live on the stream so those who haven't read the article pastor Piper basically said that from his viewpoint. Barring something unforeseen the next few days. He's not can be voting for either presidential candidate and wants it once come to their own conclusions, but what he saying is that you have the sins of Donald Trump being so egregious divisiveness, boastfulness, sexual morality fax business that they are so deadly in this world and the world to come, that the think that we can support him in the name of pro-life is a big mistake and that we don't realize that the damage he's doing is is is going to undo the good of having better justices in the courts and things like that so in my article III first give my points of affirmation, so first essay I wholeheartedly agree with pastor Piper that the foremost calling of a minister of the gospel's quote to lead people see Jesus Christ trust is forgiveness for sins treasure him above everything else in this world live in a way that shows us all satisfying value and help them to make it have with love and holiness in the second. I deeply share is concerned that many pastors who fail to basically radical Christians are willing to die for Jesus. Third, I agree with him that her obsession with the elections and the well-being of America undermines the reality that we citizens of a higher kingdom which is passing through this world.

Fourth, I concur with him that the character flaws of the present be very damaging.

Piper wrote when a leader model, self absorbed, self exalting boastfulness models most deadly behavior in the world. He points his nation to destruction. Destruction of more constant, we can imagine fifth. I've no problem with a Christian saying that they can't vote. I've amassed a problem saying on pro-life, pro-Bible, and voting for Biden, but I I do respect if someone comes to his conclusion, I differ with you because ultimately you're saying I'm gonna leave the results of the election to others entirely and I'm going to choose have no influence. Either way, I respect humility with which he posted things and I agree with him that whatever path we take must enhance not detract from a witness for Jesus was with seven points of agreement.

As I mentioned, if you've read Evangelicals at the crossroads by recent book on the subject. You know, I've made many similar points of he says I remain baffled that some Christians consider the sins of an unrepentant sexual of unrepentant sexual morality, unrepentant boastfulness, unrepentant vulgarity, group infectiousness, and the like to be only toxic for a nation while policies and respray becoming sick switching freedom, limiting and socialistic overreach are viewed as deadly. So here's my fundamentally different number one you have the character of the Pres. itself which we can say we don't follow. We don't model we don't exalt. We don't defend versus policies that will affect everyday life versus policies that will enshrine the killing of the unborn versus policies that will take where religious freedoms versus the seas that will allow tyrannical regimes in other nations turned to run rampant that's that's a big big difference there and and then so it's it's one thing to say I'm voting for someone who's boastful and divisive, but I'm not empowering a party that's going to to bring about policies that can be destructive to art to our nation in many ways and and for generations already at end again. Trump is one man is a point out, as I wrote in his destructive is his words and conduct can be just look at the ones and proffers about foolish kings we can vote for by the millions bought the same time modeling Gaultier conduct was weak. That's okay. That's how he asked. But that's how we act. When I was apologist writers defenders. We voted for them for XYZ reasons but we don't defend this or that and remodeling something very different versus here's a party that is now going to put certain things into practice that are downright evil so right is a road of voting for a boastful man can potentially save millions of babies lives and that'll be justified if voting for mail of the section past give support to persecuted minorities in China connect will be justified if voting for a man who often lies and exaggerates can stop the rise of anti-got socialism and that'll be justified so as again I been shelling for years.

We can't be as apologist that's that's a big issue when I call you and I don't think anything.I was not expecting an endorsement at all. I just I think I just did. I just think there's a different way to look at. Yes and I just ate everything you said about platform and policy it's it's just ate it felt off.

When I read it and I just don't like it missed the issues that picked it even joke about myself young pastor like myself meant white. That's one issue, but that's what it did for me and right and again one from God's perspective, yes, will deal with pride and individual but we don't have to follow that individual.

But if were voting for or not voting against sanctioning the sword of the unborn is more serious think that one of my colleagues evangelical friend wrote to me last week and he said the gospel witness is been destroyed, especially among the younger generations. The final straw was the support of Donald Trump by these groups, the nonbelieving world was appalled by the hypocrisy.

The only folks who don't see it or most of the evangelical world. My issue with that is yet is been hypocrisy when we preach Trump rather than Jesus. When we exalt him and defend him as a post-assembly voted for him, but we preach Jesus and live Jesus, but let's be frank, love the younger generation turned against us because we we rejected homosexual activism, we retry pro-choice position exactly that rejection has is been there anyway, and I close out the article saying I wonder if future generations would understandably explain the loss of our freedoms in the slaughter of millions of more babies by St. yes one party espouse these terrible policies, but we can vote for the man whose party oppose them because he was too boastful and divisive, so as far as our own lives.

Let's be idealistic and strive in every way, to be like Jesus and throughout voting.

Let's be pragmatic. That's where the combination is not supporting truck issue is standing on biblical convictions and were not moving right out yesterday really good with the unbelieving breath appreciate your time thank you much what you're doing that, so Carrie go to get the article, share it with your flock and let people pray and vote accordingly. 866-34-TRUTH will also in terms of state torment unrepentant sexual morality as far as I know Trump has not continued to practice sexual morality not been caught in a scandal since he's running. Beginning in 2015.

I don't think he's modeling sexual immorality now and he has expressed regret for some of the past things that he did and there's the good character is much as I grieve over the bad character there's the good character of keeping his promises in his word standing for important principles all right.

Let us go over to Eugene and Fort sill, Oklahoma how you doing today. Things are happening, record as a member inquired where Kurt ate a political by agreement. Really, really think yes there and just as far as my question no back question in a similar way but little different this time. I enjoy change my, aren't there a washer like her right and I enjoy that will camp by their theology, regarding the depravity of man and what the right very different. I came from a church background where he would bikini me now teacher no longer dinner get a ride to the right that it did not. The language I hear a lot. You build the day. I might be like a horrible thinners, you know, our hearts are craving evil Jeremiah 79 and a little confusing because not when I read the tag eat or talk about putting on the nature from 11 considered dead and alive to God in Christ gave the empty I don't really know how to yes so that the two separate things.

Eugene one is the teaching total depravity outside of Christ, so that human beings are hopelessly lost and cannot save themselves while we agree on that. Otherwise we wouldn't preach Jesus as Savior we to say going better your life become better and save yourself. So while human beings are capable of doing good and making moral choices in many ways because of the image of God within us and influence of of of the conscience and things like that. We are hopelessly lost outside of the Savior cannot save ourselves cannot even make an effort to come to God without God drawing us so in that sense, I agree with my Calvinistic friends. Although they may sometimes overstate things in my view. But as far as us as believers know we don't have depraved hearts that we are new creations in the Messiah.

That's why the New Testament addresses us a sense, so do a little study go through Psalms go through Proverbs look at every time it talks about the righteous as opposed to the wicked, the ungodly sinners and ask which side we once the righteous this week someone uses is that someone verse one who are or the whole song which ones are we where the righteous with the same dwindling. So while we are still in this world and we still have to renew our minds and's and subdue the body. We are new creations. We are to identify as new creations. Yes, you could say their sinful tendencies that are still in us understand it, and there is ongoing battle, which is what you must consider ourselves dead to sin and alive to God, Messiah, Jesus.

But without question New Testament addresses this is same sense. In other words, holy ones, to behold. That's how we can see ourselves holy, set apart for God in the South by his grace falling short meeting washing, nonetheless creations do not identify as an ongoing center site. It's the line of fire with your host activist, author, international speaker and theologian Dr. Michael Brown voice of more cultural and spiritual revolution get into the line of fire now by calling 66343 here again is Dr. Michael Brown is going us your brown over on YouTube with our exclusive weekly YouTube chat so be sure to join me for that. All right we go over to New York City. Rick, thanks for holding welcome to line of fire heart Dr. Bernhardt. I was wondering if you could expound on the proper food in the Bible that started the fire have to come before the destruction of the second Temple. Are you often talked about that. I just thought that was really interesting character will really sort of smoking on my current work for a position as and also I guess I just want variance is interesting how the Jewish interpretation understands that there has to be some anointed one can before their time to talk about the one who was cut off on another brushstroke that this was Herod Agrippa and other Jewish commenters are so that there was someone but they just don't believe it, to respect and alter your instructor but I just wanted to ask if you would ever consider having Barry Schwartz on your show. He talks about the shroud of Turin will interesting to have them on. If you ever consider that and click your instructor thank you so much yet. Thanks Dick thank you for the question number two yell would love to do it. There is someone who is very actively supporting the authenticity of the shroud of Turin. I've been given scientific data by learning people really studied it, looked into it for years.

I find it to be very very interesting and definitely would love to have them on and and we will make a note to to pursue that. In fact, a colleague, a Jewish bleeding colleague works with him. I believe and it's a boy got it got to discuss this with them so we will definitely deftly pursue that. Okay so why do I say that the Messiah must come before the destruction of the second Temple II find a threefold cord with witness in the Hebrew Scriptures. One is in Daniel 924 to 27 when Daniel is in exile praying about the seven years of Daniel being fulfilled seven years of Jeremiah being fulfilled and it's time for the exiles to return home as Jeremiah prophesied in Jeremiah 25 Jeremiah 29 time for the exiles to come home and God's sister and the angel Gabriel comes as well.

Let me talk about 707.

490 years and what's clear in the prophecy is that you have the terms are quote the. The point from which it begins in the German side clam the point up to which it runs and what's very clear is that it it and's with the destruction of the second Temple in Jerusalem, which took place in your 70 and it mentions either an anointed one or two anointed ones. One is cut off, let anything we can debate the meaning of that is being spoken of, but there are six things listed that have to happen, including atonement for sin, being made in everlasting righteousness being brought in, among others, and and the question is did that happen or not.

It didn't happen then it's a false prophecy from Gabriel to Daniel. If it did happen. How was it have to do with the significance of the anointed one being cut off.

Then we go to Haggai. The second chapter where we are told that the glory of the second Temple would be greater than the glory of the first Temple, and the God would fill the place with his glory and appoint peace. There now, you might see it system of silver and gold and Herod beautify the temple so is even greater than Solomon's Temple.

The problem is the phrase filled with glory.

In the Hebrew Bible always refers to that the manifest presence of God the glory cloud the districting presence of God and in a tangible way not not silver and gold so somehow the glory of the second Temple is be greater than Gore the first Temple, but as the Talmudic rabbis recognize his big problem because there was no pillar of cloud pillar fire fired and fall from heaven consumer sacrifices is happen with the first Temple of the tabernacle, the DRM and the two men and the the the tablets the commandments. They were not there in the second Temple.

So how was the glory of the second Temple greater than Gore the first Temple and what since he got appoint peace there and then lastly, Malachi 3 that the Lord tells his people how dome the Lord you are seeking, which is God will sell the country's Temple and will bring purification and refining to specially the priests and the Levites in the PN and the people of Judah, so did that happen or not will we have an easy answer yes it happen, the Messiah, the anointed one came within that timeframe he died for since he brought everlasting righteousness he brought to the full human sin and rebellion and it's in its crucifixion of the son of God and sealed up the vision and prophecy that come predicting missile. Yes, those things happen before the destruction of the second Temple.

If it's not Jesus.

That never happened.

Press never came to pass. How did God make Gore the second Temple greater than the glory of the first on the silver and gold. No by the presence of God by the miracles that Jesus brought by the Messiah himself visiting and by the outpouring spirit shovel at Pentecost with the spirit was poured out on thousands of people.

First, 120, but then thousands were baptized as an unprecedented thing that took place in serving the Lord himself visited the temple was have that happen when did it happen though there was a divine visitation know it's interesting is there's Talmudic tradition that says that the earth will last for 6000 years 2000 years of chaos. 2000 years of Cheraw 2000 years of the Messiah and that the first 2000 years were from Adam to Abraham with the law had not been revealed to all God's teaching adopted fully revealed.

But Jewish tradition says it was revealed orally to Abraham and then later to the nation as a whole, through Moses, so the 2000 years of Torah from Abraham until the Messiah, and when did Abraham live about 2000 years before Jesus and then what should have been basically the last 2000 years should been the messianic era was Thomas a but because our sins were many, it didn't happen the right way to look at it is what God promised in the profits he did because were sins or sins were many we missed it.

But the prophets also said that to that we would mistake what was happening. We would think Jesus was dying for his sins, not for ours and that only later would recognize that he he died for us. The one to become a light to the nations that we rejected 60 Messiah I get into this in volume 1 of my series answering Jewish objections to Jesus. Objection 2.1 if I remember correctly, all right.

We got time for another call or two.

Let us go to Bruce in Belgrade, Montana.

Welcome to the line of fire you for taking my call.

Dr. Brown I have a question about Hebrew root words trying to study Hebrew and I ran across some the other day. My understanding is that most if not all Hebrew words come from a verbal root, but I was listening to someone the other day and I don't know if this is accurate.

They were specifically talking about the first chapter of Genesis per sheet Barack etc. and they were saying that the worker she comes from a verbal root everything I've searched in my lexicon's seems to indicate that it comes from the noun root Roche and then, in addition to that, they were also saying that the word Elohim is not a plural form of the word L but that it also comes from a verbal root and I can't remember what the root words were that they were the thing where you getting this from well it was gentleman on the Internet.

Bill Bullock, who is a I guess you would call him a a messianic/Hebrew roots teacher and I don't know anything about is financial thing you number anything MS can rudely interrupt him so I can answer the rescue question, but but thank you thank you I on the who that individual is I was just wondering where you got it from Kate number one. The vast majority of Hebrew words come from roots, but not all verbal roots.

Okay, that's the first thing so you have your entry interjections. You know, words like oily or or in a hallway or things like that that do not come from roots there just interjections. Some of them are onomatopoeic you know that it reflects the way something was said is just smoke and then obviously prepositions and things like that don't come running roots, but your hundred percent right that Ray sheet so brace sheet is the preposition bear the spreadsheet that comes from Roche's head does not come from a verbal root.

There are did nominative verbs, meaning verbs that come from nominal roots sold in English if we have the right hand right now. It did nominative firm would be handed over handed over right or you have paint physical paint that will get a paint room so the physical, the noun comes first and then the verb comes from that.

So it's the same thing in Hebrew. Your what came first the name the Mela King, from which we get melodic rain or did molluscum first and from that we get Mela King that's that's really not a major debate know there was a can go either way with some, but others we know that Ray sheet derived ultimately from Roche. So head that which is on top that which comes first. Hence, Ray sheet beginning that which comes first, etc. the same with author REIT. It comes from a root having to do with back or hinder parts artery is that which comes after it's the outbreak you have Ray sheet of her REIT those opposites is for Elohim.

That's the plural form of the law so it it it it and ale it self to have AL God, a Lim God's and normal use of idols.

AL may come from root having to do with power might strength you may make that argument, but it is is it a verbal root first know seems to be inoperable. In any case law is the noun God than Elohim God in in is the plural God's or the one true God. So you are right.

And if you rightly represented with that individual is saying that website saying that is wrong.

I friends right time 15 minutes from now.

Join me to cattle*run SK DR Brown that there check out my latest article and go to the stream and read my latest article, responding

Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime