Dr. Brown Tackles Your Best Questions

The following program is recorded content created by the Truth Network. We're back in the studio. We're live. You've got questions. We've got answers.

Let's do it. 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 866-34-TRUTH.

That's 866-34-TRUTH. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. Welcome to The Line of Fire today. Boy, it's been a while. It's been since last Friday that we were live with you. I hope you enjoyed the shows that we specially recorded, put some extra time and effort into those, praying and hoping they'd be a real blessing to you. Based on feedback we're seeing online, they were, but it's always wonderful to be live. Nothing like it.

That's our preference day in, day out. Welcome to the broadcast. Michael Brown, delighted to be back and had a very, very fruitful time of ministry and interaction in these recent days.

So again, keeping busy but missing being with you live. So the phone lines are open. Any question of any kind that relates in any way to any material that we cover on The Line of Fire that I've written about, spoken about, anything that intersects with my life, our ministry in any way, give me a call. We actually have a couple lines open, which we often don't at the beginning of the show. So give us a call now to get on The Line of Fire, 866-348-7884. With that, we start off in Mobile, Alabama. Brian, welcome to The Line of Fire. Hi, Dr. Brown.

Thank you for taking my call, man. So I got two questions if I could. One question being about the Trinity. Now, I believe in the Trinity, but it's just I get confused when we say that they are one, because it stands as if the Bible and Daniel and Revelation, it stands as if the Bible, I mean, says that, you know, from the eye perspective, if we were to see God and Jesus, when we get up to heaven, it says that God sits on the throne and the Son of Man came to present something. It seems as if those are two beings. So that's where I get the confusion from, from the Trinity.

I mean, I believe that they are one, but how is it they're like absolute one from the eye if it takes the picture as if, you know, both of them, you know, it's two of them? Yeah, so Brian, it's a perfectly legitimate question, and you're one of countless millions of people that's asked it, because God's nature does transcend our understanding. And I'm going to give you a very interesting text, actually two very interesting texts in a moment, okay? But I know for a fact, based on reason and based on scripture, that God always existed and has no beginning. And yet my brain can't wrap around that. You know, as a kid, when you find out God made everything, you ask your parents, but who made God? So something's telling you something had to start, but it's like, how could you always exist? So I know it's true, but it transcends my understanding. So we know that there is one God and one God only. We know that we know him as Father, Son, and Spirit. So the Son makes the Father known.

The Spirit draws attention to the Son. So it's just this wonderful cycle of life. But look at these two passages. I'm first going to read to you from 1 Corinthians 15. And look at what's written there. Oops, I typed it in incorrectly. Let me get it right.

There we go. Okay, so Paul says this. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive, but each in his own order.

And he goes on from that. Jesus must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet, the last enemy to be destroyed is death. For God has put all things in subjection under his feet, but when it says all things are put in subjection, it is plain that he is accepted who put all things in subjection under him. So in other words, the Father puts all things in subjection under the Son, but the Father is not in subjection to the Son. Then look at this, verse 28. When all things are subjected to him, meaning the Father, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection under him that God may be all in all.

So the Son's subjection to the Father and now just one God all in all. Now the one that's even more interesting is in Revelation chapter 22. Revelation 22, and it says this. Okay, let me get you the key verses here.

Here we go. The angel is showing John the water of life, brightest crystal, etc. through the middle of the street of the city also on either side of the river, the tree of life. Then verse 3, Revelation 22, 3. No longer will there be anything accursed, but the throne of God and of the Lamb will be in it.

Okay? So it starts off by talking about the throne of God and of the Lamb. So it's one throne of God and the Lamb.

The throne of God and of the Lamb will be in the city and his servants will serve him. Who's him? God and the Lamb.

They will see his face. Who's his? God and the Lamb. And his name?

Who is his? God and the Lamb will be on their foreheads. So ultimately, the fullness of the Revelation is there is one God and we see him versus seeing them. So how it works out exactly is God's business, but ultimately we'll recognize there is one God. And yes, there's reference to Jesus and being with Jesus forever. Will we see the Holy Spirit as a distinct person or is the Holy Spirit always involved in destroying attention to the Son, to the Father? We can't answer those questions. But when it does talk about seeing him, it just talks about seeing him, not seeing them.

So it's mysterious, but that's the ultimate revelation. Okay. Thanks for giving me the passage. Yeah, you just chew on those. I don't expect you to say, got it, got it.

Chew on those. Okay, the other question? Yeah, okay. So yeah, real quick, it's about the Old Testament, us living, not under the Old Testament, but the New Testament standards. I know you've answered the question a billion times, but what's a good reference? Like, what's a good book I could read explaining that? Because, you know, sometimes when I read, I get confused.

Because, you know, you'll hear Jesus saying something about the old commandments and old laws. You know, it's almost overwhelming. Right, right. Yeah, first, a simple thing, and again, Brian, I've answered it millions of times because millions of people have the questions.

And I've rested with them many times over the years, too. So your questions are very legitimate, sir. So the first thing is, if you just remember that everything that came before Jesus is building to him, right? And think of all the laws and the calendar, everything is kind of like the scaffolding of a building.

And when the building is done, the scaffolding is taken down because the building stands on its own. So that which is central is built on the foundation of Old Testament revelation, but it finds its fullness in New Testament. So you go by what's taught there for your life as a follower of Jesus. But if you get my book, Sixty Questions Christians Ask About Jewish Beliefs and Practices, Sixty Questions Christians Ask About Jewish Beliefs and Practices, you can get it on our website, sdrbrown.org, or you can just get online, review, order your books, and get it, Sixty Questions Christians Ask About Jewish Beliefs and Practices. The last quarter of the book deals with these questions, believers in the law, how do these things apply to us today. So that should be very helpful.

And it's written in a way that should be understandable and edifying. Hey, God bless. Thank you for the questions. 866-348-7884. Let us go to John in Drury, Missouri. Welcome to the line of fire.

Yes, well, thank you, Dr. Brown. I have a question about Mark 1-2, the textual variances between in Isaiah the prophet and in the prophet, and from what I can learn from online, Isaiah the prophet is the oldest version, or at least it says it's from the oldest and best manuscripts, but I know that verse goes to Malachi and Isaiah, so my question is, is there a tradition when referring to the prophet that you would name the most recognized prophet, or what is the discrepancy between those two? Yes, so for everyone that doesn't follow the question, Mark 1-2, you'll see in almost all of our Bibles, is it's written in Isaiah the prophet, and then it quotes Malachi 3, then it quotes Isaiah 40. There are variants that say written in the prophets, plural, but that is not as common.

You won't see that normally. So the normal explanation is exactly what you said, that if you're citing a couple of different prophetic books, that you simply reference the more major one, the better known one, and then with that people will get whatever comes afterwards. So if I'm quoting Charles Spurgeon and somebody else that lived in his day, and I quote a few of them under Spurgeon, that's how it would work. So that's one explanation, and some say that's perfectly legitimate, and an ancient reader would understand that.

You quote the best known one, and then the lesser known one falls under that. A second argument, which is possible, but there's no specific proof for this, is that if you were, let's say you were having a scroll, like the 12 minor prophets were put together in a scroll, you had the full scroll of the book of Isaiah and the Dead Sea Scrolls, there's some thoughts that you might have had a shorter book added to the end of a scroll of another. So if you're quoting from the scroll of Isaiah and it's also got Malachi at the end, then you could add that in. And the explanation for the variants would be that when scribes realize, wait, it says Isaiah, but it's really quoting Malachi also, then let's correct that and just say in the prophets. But it's the less likely reading, and that's why virtually all will say Isaiah. And again, Mark took a lot of time to write his gospel, and it's not like he was ignorant of where these came from, so the best explanation is the one that you suggested. We can't say it with 100% proof, but feel pretty confident that that's the case, that you're quoting a better-known prophet and a lesser-known prophet, a larger book and the smaller book, so you just mention the one and include other prophetic words with it, after all recognizing it's the same Holy Spirit speaking through them. So that's the best explanation, and common sense would tell you that Mark is not going to spend all this time putting together a gospel, getting his sources in order, telling the story the way he feels best, and like, oh, I had no idea those were two different books.

If you knew it, he certainly knew it. So that's the best explanation. Thank you for the question. We'll be right back. Hey, we've got a phone line open.

866-348-7884. Dr. Michael Brown. Welcome, welcome to The Line of Fire. Right before I started the show, I saw the announcement that the jury in Kenosha, Wisconsin, found Kyle Rittenhouse guilty of all charges. As I saw the case and followed it, that seemed to be the right decision based on the charges brought about him. Should he have ever been there with a gun in the first place is a whole other issue. Was it a race thing? Not my view. No, not my view.

He was going there to help and protect businesses that were also largely owned by African-Americans. And the people he shot were, yeah, I said guilty. I said guilty. Sorry, not guilty. Thank you, guys.

I forget my back there. Not guilty. Not guilty of all charges. But the way he was portrayed as a white supremacist, and so he didn't kill African-Americans, the people he killed and the jury found in self-defense were not African-Americans. Again, businesses that were being destroyed there, some of them were owned by African-Americans. So I never saw this as race issues, as other issues.

If it had been my son or grandson, but I've wanted him there with a gun, of course not. Absolutely not. Absolutely, categorically not. Was he not guilty of the charges against him?

As far as I can tell, yes, he was not guilty. As far as I can tell, this wasn't race issues. And the Antifa people protesting and rioting in the streets, to me, they were hurting race issues more than anything. Burning businesses down and all of this.

Not helping the local community at all. Anyway, just feel free to differ with me or agree with me. 866-34-TRUTH. Let's go to John in Williamson, North Carolina. Thanks for calling the line of fire. Hey Dr. Brown, just want to say I really appreciate you and your ministry, love you. You've had a major impact on me as a young pastor, and just look to you for all sorts of wisdom. The verses I was calling about was 1 Peter 3, really verses 18-20, for Christ also suffered once for sin, to the righteous, for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the Spirit. Verse 19, in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, because they formerly did not obey when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, while the heart was being prepared, and so on. What is Peter referencing here?

I've listened to Mike Wingard, John MacArthur, a lot of different guys. They tend to say, well this is referencing Genesis 6, the sons of God had relations with the daughters of men, and I believe you tend to go along the train of thought that the sons of God are the godly line of Seth, and they're not fallen angels that possessed men and had relations with women and produced the Nephilim. Is that correct? No, actually my view is similar to others in that it is fallen angels that possessed men or took on human form, that had to be able to procreate, so that they somehow take on human form. I don't accept the godly line of Seth. The distinction between sons of God and daughters of men, that early in Genesis, I don't believe you can make an argument that it's talking about the godly line versus the ungodly line. And then Seth versus men, that's not even a right contrast there. If you had Seth versus Cain or something like that, you know, the sons of Seth versus the daughters of Cain, that would have been a way to say it potentially. But no, I take it as fallen angels.

So for sure, this is not a second chance issue. We know clearly from scripture that Jesus descends into the netherworld after death. Is it immediately after death and before the final ascension to heaven, you know, the order of things? That seems to be the case.

Obviously there's great mystery with this. But he does descend into the netherworld. As you know from the Greek, it doesn't say that he preaches the gospel, but that he makes declaration.

And my understanding is it is done. You're just as he says on the cross, it is finished because he's fulfilled everything the father gave him to do in the relevant prophecies. He descends into the netherworld to say that it is finished, that Satan is defeated utterly and finally, you know, whatever the declaration is. And Ephesians 4, which references him leading captives captive, could well be, Colossians 2 references a public display in the heavenlies, that he actually in some level parades these fallen spirits as defeated for the spiritual world to see, for the angelic host to see. Somehow he makes a public display of them or public showing of them, and that could be the leading captivity captive.

But that's my understanding. It's the spirits that fell in the days of Noah. Now, it could just be other fallen angels, but the best case would be, especially when it was so widely believed in the ancient Jewish world reflected in Enoch and things like that, that that is what took place. That is the proclamation.

Your fate is sealed, public display made, and then Jesus ascends to heaven and cleanses the heavenly things with his blood. You know, again, whatever the order is, or is it a physical ascension later, that can all be argued. But yeah, that's how I'd read it. So I don't know what Pastor MacArthur teaches on it.

I just talked to Mike Winger the other day, but don't know what he teaches, but could be we all say the same thing on that. Yeah, you do, and I don't know why I thought for some reason, because I was kind of up in the air, really leaning heavy into what you were saying. I don't know where I got thinking you held to the other view, but to me, what you're saying, it fits in with the context, and with 2 Peter 2.4, and then back with Genesis, and going through it like you were explaining. I think it fits better.

Yeah, it definitely does. Hey, and thank you for the kind words. We're here to be a help to you and strengthen you in your ministry work. So come to us whenever you need help.

We're here. Amen. Thank you.

I appreciate it. God bless. And here's something sweet, Pastor MacArthur and I see the passage the same way.

I'm sure there's much more we agree on than differ on. God bless them in this ministry. Thank you, John, for the call. 866-34-TRUTH. Let's go to Mark in Fort Mill, South Carolina. Welcome to the line of fire. Hi, Dr. Brown. Thanks for taking my call.

You bet. I had a question about a post from Oscar Amachina on the Christian Post website last week. From what I understand, he is a frontline missionary in Africa, and he goes into very dangerous areas, and witnesses there, and he posted an article where he was really concerned about Matthew 7, 21-23, where Jesus said, Depart from me, I never knew you. And when I read this article, I was really disturbed because, you know, he's out there on the front lines in really dangerous places, and if he's worried about Jesus rejecting him, what hope do the rest of us have? Right, so, because Jesus said many will say, look, we did all these miracles in your name, we drove out demons, we prophesied, and he'll say, Depart from me, you workers of law, this is, I never knew you. And he starts with saying, Matthew 7, 21, Not everyone who says to me, Lord, Lord, will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only those who do the will of my Father.

Let me answer this on a couple different levels. First, sometimes there are men of God, women of God, who are acutely aware of their own weakness, and come under the fear of God, and say, I don't want to fall short, but I dread falling short. If that's their own heart or their own humility, God bless them, but don't let that rattle your own security, because unless we are living in lawlessness, and living in rebellion and wickedness, and actively rejecting God's grace, we should rest in the assurance that we belong to the Lord. We should rest in the confidence that he's our Savior, that his blood paid for our sins, that he's our advocate, that he's standing up on our behalf and appealing to the Father on our behalf.

In other words, he's got our back, to understate it dramatically. So we should rest in that deep assurance of knowing that we know that we know that we're saved, that we're forgiven, that if we were to die at this moment, we'd be in the Father's presence. However, there is a very strong warning for those who have simply made a profession of faith, or call him Lord, and live however they want to live.

They should be very concerned. And those who maybe once were used in the power of the Spirit and charismatic gifts, but have fallen away, they can put zero confidence in the fact that they were used to bring miracles before if they're living in rebellion today. Or, worse still, if somehow these gifts still operate in them, an anointing still works in them based on the principle of Romans 11 29 for the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable in context about Israel, but perhaps can be applied to spiritual gifts as well. If they are not living right, and yet being used miraculously, that passage should terrify them. When Jesus said, I never knew you, it could mean straightforward, you've never been mine, I never knew you. Or, it could be in keeping with the Jewish formula of excommunication that was widely used at that time from what we know, where when you were excommunicating someone, you would say, I never knew you.

Just complete rejection. But either way, if this brother is writing with great humility and saying, no matter what signs and wonders we see, I'm concerned about my own life, will God say that to me on that day, maybe the Lord's doing something in him or purging him or bringing him deeper, but don't let that mess with you at all. On the other hand, don't put confidence in the fact, well, God used me to heal the sick, well, I speak in tongues, well, I had an accurate prophecy. No, no, no, your assurance does not lie in that. Your assurance relies first and foremost in the blood of the cross and the resurrection of Jesus, and in harmony with that, a life that seeks to honor and please the Lord. When you have that, be assured, walk in peace, and with that, there's a further incentive to love God and serve him. But God forbid the day that a believer says, well, I'm just going to do what I want to do, and I don't care what Jesus has to say about this, you know, I'm going to do what I want to do. You better be afraid, you better be terrified, because God gives no promises to the rebels, none other than if you repent, I'll forgive you.

But he gives no assurance of blessing or salvation to someone in open rebellion and denial of the Son of God. We'll be right back. Dr. Michael Brown.

Thanks for joining us on the line of fire, Michael Brown, delighted to be back live in the studio. You've got questions, we've got answers. Hey, being away for a few days, I got back to the office, and there was my latest shipment of my Stengler Health supplements.

Yeah, there are a few different ones I take, and with my healthy diet and these supplements, it's been a real blessing to me. That's why we're passing it on to you. Remember, if you go to vitaminmission.com, vitaminmission.com for yourself, for loved ones, still time to order holiday gifts. You want to help people get healthier, strengthen your immune system, all these critically important things.

Check out what's available, use the special Dr. Brown code. You'll get a discount, and then with every order, Dr. Stengler turns around and blesses us with a donation to our ministry. So, you're helping yourself, and you're helping us reach more people. 866-3-4-TRUTH, again, that's vitaminmission.com. Okay, let's see where we're going next.

All right, we go to Sam in Raleigh, North Carolina. Welcome to the line of fire. Well, thank you, Dr. Brown. I really appreciate all that you're doing, bringing God's Word and clarity to the church, and all the great work that you're doing. Thank you, thank you.

Yeah, go ahead. So, I'm calling about this new book, or this book's been around for a while, by Robert Henderson called Operating in the Courts of Heaven. Are you familiar with that? Okay, I'm super familiar with the fact that it's a really, really well-known book in recent years, that it's become kind of a charismatic bestseller, and that Robert Henderson is really well-known for teaching on it.

I've never read the book or heard his—I've heard people describe the teaching, but I've never actually heard him teach it. So, I'm familiar, but not intimately familiar. Okay. All right. Well, I was hoping to bring some clarity to it. Okay, yeah, so specifically—okay, here's the deal. I want to be fair, having not read things. So, I want to ask you a specific question in a moment.

Yes, go ahead. As far as I can tell, there are no secrets that when you learn the secret, everything changes, as far as I can tell. Right. So, I mean, there are things I can pass along I've learned over the years, but it's not so much a secret. It's kind of like, okay, when you put the hands together like this, you know, they clasp, but when you put them together like knuckle to knuckle, they don't clasp. It's not like a secret. It's just like, oh, I didn't realize that, like simple common sense or an insight. So, if the book gives you some good spiritual insights, that's one thing. If it is, here's a secret. When you learn this secret, then your prayer has a special power.

Those things are always questioned, you know, in terms like the magical shortcut. What is it about the book that has raised a question for you? Well, you know, my wife, I haven't read the book. I've heard some of his YouTube videos, and she listens to them all day long. And he says, well, you know, God can't answer your prayer unless you please your case before him, because Satan's basically holding up your prayer unless you please your case before God in the courts of heaven.

And it kind of gets weirder from there. Okay, so I want to be totally fair to Robert Henderson, who I don't know personally at all. If you represented things accurately, I totally disagree with that. So, again, I'm not saying you haven't, but you understand I have to be fair, because I didn't hear it myself. Yeah, no, I appreciate that. Right.

So, again, I've heard other people talk about it, but I never got it straight from the horse's mouth. Here, God's looking at our heart more than anything, right? And if, in sincerity of heart, you are pouring out your heart to God, and you don't know this special key, and you don't get your prayer answered because of that, every real problem with that, theoretically, it's number one.

Number two, I've basically never done that in my life. Now, maybe I've done it without consciously doing it the way he says, in other words, maybe I agree more than I understand that that's what I do naturally, but when I pray, I'm not thinking about the devil at all. I don't believe he has the power to stop my prayers, hinder my prayers, and I believe that if I cry out to my Father, right, just if you pray the Lord's Prayer, if you see how Jesus prays in John 17, just the way Paul prays in Ephesians 1 or Ephesians 3, these are just, Father, we're just pouring out our heart, and sometimes even just calling out directly to Jesus. And I've seen God answer those prayers gloriously and wonderfully for 50 years now without knowing the special techniques. So maybe he has an insight on something that can be a helpful concept, but when it becomes the thing, the method, you do it like this, no, I don't buy it. Yeah, and he says, well, yeah, this is all special revelation I've gotten from God, that Satan has a legal contract with God that, in so many words, that because we sin, Satan can use that against us, and this all has to be worked out legally in the course of heaven for God to answer our prayers, and we're, by going through this process, which seems kind of obtuse to me, you give God permission to answer your prayers. Right, so again, Sam, if you represented it accurately, I 100% reject that. So to the extent you represented it accurately, I want it, so feel free to, you know, maybe your wife wants to call him one day, she doesn't have to say, Sam's wife, they'd call from Raleigh, you know, and say what she's gotten out of it, or why she feels it's accurate, or, you know, encourage her to listen to our interaction and see if she believes things have been said accurately. But here, what I'd really encourage is meditation on Romans 8, 28 to 39. Meditation on Romans 8, 28 to 39, especially with what Jesus does in heaven on our behalf.

He's got us covered. When someone brings a charge, he says, no, no, I covered that. You can't bring that charge. My past sins have zero power over me because they've been washed away by the blood of Jesus. Now, if I committed a crime, I robbed a bank, right, and was convicted for it, went to jail and got saved in jail, well, I'm doing my time on a human level, but I'm 100% forgiven and free in God's sight.

1 John 2, I write these things to you so that you will not sin, but if anyone does sin, you have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ, the Righteous One, and he is the propitiation for our sins and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world. Now, perhaps if Robert Henderson was here, he'd say, oh, no, I know all that. I'm making another point.

So, in fairness, maybe there's more to it. But as you've represented it, I categorically reject it. I am not conscious of my sin. I am conscious of the cleansing blood of Jesus and fellowship with my Father.

Here, if I can enjoy intimate fellowship with God, if I could be away at a prayer retreat this past weekend, pouring my heart out and telling how much I love him and receiving his love without having to know the special method, I can assure you that he's attentive to our prayers. And what does Galatians 4, Romans 8, tell us? That God's put the spirit of his Son within our hearts, by which we cry, Abba, Father. So, hey, Sam, may the Lord give you wisdom. Your wife may be deeply spiritual, loving the Lord and getting good things out of this.

See if there's a way to really have a discussion and maybe review our little conversation here and have a follow-up where you interact with her or she interacts with me and we can go from there. And those that have read The Courts of Heaven and enjoy the books and think that something was missing in the conversation Sam and I had, feel free to call. Feel free to call. Hey, thank you, sir, and may the Lord bless your household richly. 866-344-TRUTH.

We go to Jonathan in Newport, California. Welcome to the line of fire. Appreciate you taking the call, Dr. Brown. Question in regard to Malachi 1, Romans 9-13. I've been encountering some Calvinists who tend to use these verses to say that God hates individuals from the foundation of the world, citing those passages saying, Jacob I love, Esau I hated.

My question is, how would you typically respond to that when you encounter these individuals? Number one, it can't possibly be what Paul was saying because Malachi 1 is talking about nations. Jacob have I loved, Esau have I hated. That's talking about Israel and Edom, whole nations. Does that mean that God hates and before the foundation of the world, dams to hell, all descendants of Esau through Edom and ordains to heaven and eternal salvation, all descendants of Jacob Israel?

No, it can't be. So that's the first thing. What's he actually quoting? He's quoting Malachi 1, which is about whole nations. So that's the first thing. He said, what's he saying?

He's talking about for service. He called 1 to serve him and through Jacob, descendants of Israel, comes the Messiah, who's a light to the world, and Israel called to be a light to the nations. And he rejects, utterly rejects, Esau, Edom. So that's the first point I would make.

The second point I would make is, well, don't stop reading there. Let's keep reading all the way through Romans 9, 10, and 11, right? So we get to Romans 11 and Paul says this, verse 32.

Okay, let me back up. For just as you, Gentiles, verse 30, were at one time disobedient to God, but now have received mercy because of their disobedience, Jewish disobedience, so they, the Jewish people, they too have now been disobedient in order that by the mercy shown to you, they also may now receive mercy. Verse 32, for God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all. That's where Paul ends.

That's his emphasis. He wants to have mercy on all. A Calvinist would say that just means Jews and Gentiles. Well, who else is there aside from Jews and Gentiles?

That's the whole world. So then I would go to the many verses that speak of Jesus dying for each of us, Jesus dying for all of us, Jesus dying for the sins of the world, Jesus dying for the sins of the whole world. Passages like Ezekiel 18, where God says he has no desire that the wicked perish, but rather that they repent and live.

And I would say, how else could God say it? It speaks of each, all, the world, the whole world, Jew and Gentile, not just us, but everybody that Jesus dies for, God's love for the whole world, God's desire that the wicked repent. And who does he forgive in the Old Testament on a personal level? The two most wicked kings, Ahab and Manasseh, when they repent, he forgives them on a personal level. I mean, that's a bit of a side issue, but that's his desire that the wicked repent.

So number one, the text can't mean that because it's speaking on a national level in Malachi 1. Number two, Paul concludes his discussion by saying God's concluded all men together in disobedience so that he may have mercy on all. Who is in disobedience? Everybody. Who does he want to have mercy on?

Everybody. And that's how it all falls into place. So you have to keep reading, and he's not talking about individual salvation. He's talking about specifically calling to service, Israel's purpose, Edom's purpose, etc. So hopefully that's helpful.

Just ask, keep reading through. Let's not stop here. Let's get to the end of the discussion. Okay, Jonathan, got a break here, but thank you for the call.

Hopefully that is helpful. Your voice of moral, cultural and spiritual revolution. Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34-TRUTH. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. Thanks for joining us on the line of fire, 866-34-TRUTH.

We go right back to the phones. Let's go to Ag- Oh, I wanted to answer that question from Agnes. How can someone be a Christian Jew? Well, if a Christian is a follower of Jesus, and Jesus is the Jewish Messiah, that's the thing to do. If a Jew only means someone who practices traditional Judaism, and a Christian only means someone who practices traditional Christianity, then it's an oxymoron. But just like I am a male follower of Jesus, my wife Nancy is a female follower of Jesus, and Kai and Chris, who are on the show today, are Gentile followers of Jesus, and Nancy and I are Jewish followers of Jesus.

Yeah, it's the way to be a Jew, is to follow the Jewish Messiah. Alright, let's go over to Dave in Salt Lake City, Utah. Welcome to the line of fire. Hi, Dr. Brown. Hey.

I got a question about yesterday's show. Yes, sir. So yesterday, for those that weren't watching, we once again debunked the idea that there are hidden pictographic meanings that still adhere in the Hebrew language, in the Hebrew Bible.

Yes, go ahead. I'm in a bit of confusion, because there are certain teachers out there that are well-respected and trusted. I'll name-drop, I'll give you a name, Chuck Missler, and he kind of lays out that same sort of meaning in the text by using the Hebrew pictograph, like the pictographs, and so my question is, I'm trying to understand if we want, as let's say we're in the United States, which I am, and I want to get away from the traditional evangelical Pentecostal movement here, and I want to go deeper into the roots of the faith.

I mean, what are good resources to do that, because I'm getting conflicted information in my earnest seeking to do that very thing, just to study- Yeah. Well, first, with all respect to Chuck Missler, he was an evangelical teacher. In other words, he was a Christian teacher, I'm sure with a lot of excellent content, but he certainly had a Hebrew scholar. If he did teach that, then he was an error. I mean, it's really simple. It's as simple as if I tell you that you're actually not in Salt Lake City, Utah, and that I know you can't be in Salt Lake City, Utah because it's actually a lake filled with salt, and no human beings live there. You'd say, you don't know what you're talking about.

So it's this basic. In other words, there's no one that is a solid Hebrew scholar that for a split second would adhere to these views. That's why you don't find it among Hebrew scholars. I mean, here, give me a name of your top three people that teach this.

Well, I may be being controversial, but one is Chuck Missler. Another one is the publisher of the F Stepper. That's horrific. That's horrific stuff. It's just so misguided.

This is why it's fringe stuff. This is why you'll not find a major solid... What you've got to understand is that a major solid academic publisher or evangelical publisher, they may not get everything right, but they're not going to publish the real nonsense. That's why it's these self-published things, you know, and people that don't know Hebrew or that, you know, learn it on their own in some different way. It's just what you want to do is not try to get away from evangelical Pentecostal beliefs, but keep digging deeper. And in that sense, you know, get yourself some good study Bibles, you know, and just get yourself some good scholarly commentaries. Here, here's a good place to start. You want to get background that'll give you real background into the ancient world. Get the Zondervan Cultural Background Study Bible. Zondervan Cultural Background Study Bible. Use that.

There's going to be something I'm working on in the future that's going to be tremendously helpful, but it's some years down the line. But that'll give you legitimate background about the ancient world from which the Bible came, the ancient languages, the first century Jewish background, all kinds of things like that. It'll give you lots and lots of reliable info all in one Bible from top scholars in the field that are getting going, digging behind creeds and beliefs and just going back to the ancient texts themselves. So that it's the Cultural Background Study Bible and you'll get all the notes in one Bible, tons and tons of great information on Old Testament, New Testament. Start there. So you'll have it right there in your Bible.

And then from there you can build a good library. But the ones that are fringe, the ones that are just making a name mainly on internet or they are popular preachers and teachers but they're not Hebrew or Greek scholars, you need to avoid that in terms of getting these special insights and revelations. And again, what I'd warn you about is trying to get away from the one. Don't try to get away from the one. Dig deeper. And when you come away differing with an Evangelical or Pentecostal belief, fine.

But don't try to get away from it. Try to dig deeper into the text and you'll find a ton of stuff affirming and agreeing and other things where you might see a little differently. Okay? Yeah, I'm with you. I just have one kind of point of contention, if I may. Yeah. It's what goes, actually goes on inside of the Pentecostal and Evangelical churches that I'm at odds with because I honestly don't believe that it's the fruit of the Spirit that's laid out in Scripture. I believe it's antithetical in what I've witnessed inside those churches. And that's what I mean.

Got it. Well, yeah, so here's the thing, Dave. I'm not going to deny your bad experience and that there's a lot of junk out there. On the other hand, I've been in this for 50 years and seen extraordinary devotion to the Lord, great love, sacrifice, heart for Jesus, people trying to raise their kids right, trying to be witnesses in their jobs and the junk. I've seen the junk. I've been hurt by it.

I'm sure I've been part of it. So I'm not denying that for a second, sir. But ask God to show you some of the good as well. And I'm not saying you're denying that. So I'm not downplaying bad experiences you've had and there's a lot of bad fruit and a lot of egg on our face. I agree. But there are a lot of fine people who've been transformed that love the Lord. Maybe the Lord will bring you among more of them that will give you more encouragement as well and you'll see some of that fruit of the Spirit that you are legitimately looking for. Fair enough? I can guarantee you this.

You go on the fringes and the cults, you won't see it there at all. Hey, thank you. Thank you very much for the call. All right, we've got time for another call. Joe in Los Angeles, thank you for holding.

Welcome to the line of fire. Hey, Dr. Brown, it's a pleasure to be talking with you today. Thank you. My first time calling you.

Awesome. My question is regarding Jesus and the book of Matthew when there was the man with the legion of demons and the book of Matthew, it says that there's two of them, but I remember that in some of the Gospels it says there was one. So my question is if you can comment on that and is this an apparent contradiction?

You know, how can I address this to anybody? So, yeah, Mark and Luke talk about one man and Matthew mentions two. You have this a couple of times where Matthew will give you a detail that the others don't. So they all have in harmony that there's one main guy and one guy called legion and one main guy that Jesus interacts with. Matthew just happens to tell us there was another one there. For example, Matthew tells us that the two thieves on the crosses on either side of Jesus reviled him, right? But Luke tells us that one of them then repented. Matthew doesn't give us that detail. That's why we have all the Gospels.

If someone asks you about it, just say it's the standard account if you have a crash, two cars crash on the road in an intersection and the police are interviewing witnesses and you interview people in the car and then you interview the bystanders and they each give you a different account of the same thing based on the perspective and emphasis and when you put them all together, you get the whole story. So there's no contradiction. If Luke said and there was one and only one and Matthew says there are two, that would be one thing but it's very common for one to be emphasized so you've got the main character and then the lesser character.

The others don't even mention the lesser character. Some mention one detail, others mention another detail and remember that these were all received by the early believers as carrying authority so you can ask a friend, do you think that people would have taken these all together as God's words if they were so obviously contradictory? In other words, if you're seeing the contradiction now somebody would have seen it in the first century and yet Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, early on were received as true scripture by the followers of Jesus. So again, one just gives an extra detail. By the way, that's very common in the Old Testament. Read through numbers in Joshua, Deuteronomy as well, where it will mention Joshua and Caleb came back with a good report and the other ten spies a bad report then other times it'll only mention Caleb, only Caleb and this is in the same context and then a few verses later it'll mention Joshua and it'll say only Caleb and you think, wow, it's only Caleb and then a little bit later it mentions Joshua so it's just a matter of emphasis what was being put forward and it's common throughout the Bible even within the same book of the Bible the same author might do that emphasizing point A to the point you think that's the only point there is and then also mentioning point B. Hey, hopefully it's helpful if you check out some of the writings of J. Warner Wallace who came to faith as an atheist detective this was some of what helped him seeing that the reports were slightly different because if they all said it exactly the same way without deviation or variation he would have questioned whether they were accurate but the little different nuances to him as a detective indicated these are authentic. May the blessing and smile of the Lord be on you all.