The following program is recorded content created by the Truth Network. It's Matt Slick live. Matt is the founder and president of the Christian Apologetics Research Ministry, found online at CARM.org. When you have questions about Bible doctrines, turn to Matt Slick live. Francis taking your calls and responding to your questions at 877-207-2276.
Here's Matt Slick. Hey, everybody, how are you doing out there? I'm doing OK, you know, didn't get much sleep last night, had to take a power nap, went to the gym, worked out, been cranking on scriptures and verses and just being productive. You know, as I was praying with Charlie before the show, you know, last night, my wife and I were praying and while we got talking first, before we prayed, we prayed each night before we go to bed and you know, I was thinking I was thinking and talking to her about this. And she acknowledges that she says, yeah, that we have a great privilege as Christians to be able to serve God and to speak his truth. What a great privilege it is, you know, and I'm not trying to draw attention to myself, but wow, you know, get to do radio and lecture and teach and Bible studies and all of that stuff. And my wife and I were talking about how great a privilege that is.
And I just feel so blessed. And along with that, what's interesting is the contrast. We were talking about early life and stuff, and she made it. It is a lot of things kind of interestingly woven into it.
We are talking about my past because of of how I was raised. And she made a comment and now I wasn't planning on talking about this. I'm just going to jump in and bring this up. You know, it kind of has to do with white privilege. And she made this comment that there's a white privilege for you in my eyes. And you know, that's a good point. And the reason I'm talking about that is because the privilege of being able to speak the truth of God's word and what a contrast it is from those early days. There are so many things I regret as a new believer right before I was saved and stuff like that, even some of the stuff after. And there's a verse in the Bible, Romans 621. What benefit were you then deriving of the things of which you're now ashamed for the outcome of those things as death?
Of course, I have things I'm ashamed of as an unbeliever and I have things I'm ashamed of as a believer. And yet God in his great mercy has allowed me to to do what I do. You know, I'm on radio and I get this this huge Web site. And I get to spend time sitting each day researching the word. Researching the word like I've been doing today, researching scripture for scripture and being able to write articles and talk with, you know, employees of this ministry.
And, you know, international people who are working with this ministry and things like that, it's just it's a great thing and we're privileged. And we got talking and about where I came from. I said, you know, if you think about where I was, you know, I talked to my wife and one thing led to another and I started talking about my mom and my dad. Now, my my mom grew up. My mom and dad grew up during the Depression. And I was talking about all this kind of stuff. My wife, that's what my wife made this comment, white privilege.
And I'm going to just kind of mention that a little bit. My mom grew up during the Depression and she and her mom and her sister sometimes had to go out into the field fields to look for weeds and various plants for food. And their father, my mom's dad, left them.
So they had to fend for themselves. And it was a very, very difficult time. And then my mom's mom, my grandmother, whom I never met, she passed away from cancer.
And so my mom had to work very early. And she worked during World War II in factories and she worked in B-17 bombers. And she she worked inside the wings because women were smaller and they could get into the wings and do things that men, larger men couldn't do. And she told me stories about being, let's just say, not accosted, but teased, mocked because of her femininity. And she was a good looking woman. And, you know, the advances that guys would make and how she had to fight through all of that.
And then she met my dad and my dad during the depression. Let's just say his family situation was pretty bad. And I remember some things my dad told me that he had to sleep on different or someone told my mom who told me because my dad didn't know that my mom knew this, apparently, that my dad, when he was in his mid teens, would sleep on different people's porches during the depression because he had no place to sleep because of the home life situation. And he would go from place to place and sleep sometimes to couch surfing.
But a lot of times just sleeping on porches and didn't have much. And so he lied about his age when he became 17 in order to join the service. And he was in World War Two in the Navy. He then joined the the army and went to Korea and he joined the Air Force and went to Vietnam. And, you know, he had to struggle a great deal. And then the reason I talk about this is because I talk to my wife about all of this and I said, you know, it's a it's a surprise that I'm able to do what I do, considering that we moved 26 times before I was 12 years old and I went to 12 different elementary schools and I was anorexic.
It's very rare among males. And I remember going to the fourth grade and the first day of a new school, 12 different elementary schools, and wondering how long it was going to be before I got beat up because I was a new kid in school. This is how it was. And I got mixed up in the occult and things like that. My wife goes, And there's your white privilege for you. It dawned on me.
I go, That's right. There was no white privilege. It was work and suffering and difficulties and trials. You know, my mom and my dad had great ones, depressions, living in people's porches and going out to fields to eat.
No one was giving them privilege because of their race. They had to work hard. And my dad did, my mom did, and I certainly did. And I have worked so hard to get where I'm at.
And my wife made that comment, and I thought I would share that. But you know, what's interesting is what God can do with broken vessels. God can redeem my mom and my dad.
They were redeemed, and at least I believe they were. And how he can work with a broken vessel like myself, who moved 26 times and was anorexic and, you know, had no social skills and was, you know, diagnosed with Asperger's. I'm telling you. And then God takes such a person and says, Here, I'll use you. God uses broken vessels. What can he do with you if you're not that broken? What can he do with you if you give your heart to him and say, Lord, it doesn't matter what race I am, what gender I am, how big or small, how much I know, how much I don't know. Lord, would you please use me in the capacity that you have me now and train me to be used even more in the future? It doesn't matter how much I do or how little I do, as long as I'm doing what you want me to do.
What would happen there? See, that's not white privilege. It's Christian privilege, the privilege of being able to serve Jesus Christ. And he is the one with whom we should identify, not in our race or our gender, but in our relationship with Jesus Christ.
This is how Christians ought to be. The Christian privilege of being freed from sin, of being able to be used by the almighty God, of being cleansed, and that we can love one another no matter who we are, what we are, and share the faith with others so that others might come to know the Lord and the Savior, Jesus Christ, that that's what I got out of my wife and I's conversation last night. And the one thing she said sparked it, sparked it that, you know, comment.
There's your white privilege. For you, she does that every now and then. She will say things, and I think she's listening, so I'm hoping to get some kudos and maybe a sandwich after the show. But she will say things that are often very wise and insightful. Of course, it's a lot of a shadow of doubt cast over her because she married me.
So that makes me wonder about her judgment overall. But every now and then it shines through like it did last night. Hey, folks, if you want to give me a call, three open lines, all I got to do is give me a ring. Eight seven seven two zero seven two two seven six. Let's get to John from Salt Lake City. John, welcome.
You're on the air. Hi, how are you doing? Doing OK, doing OK. Hang in there, man. Good.
I really, really enjoyed what you just said and endorse what you said. One hundred percent. I'm just curious.
I know that you're going to be in a lot of trouble. I'm curious. I know that you are definitely an advocate of salvation by grace, which I also am an advocate of. But do you consider baptism an act? Yes. I mean, in Matthew's point of view, Mark 16, 16 says, and those who believe and are baptized will be saved. Yeah.
So let's talk about that. Would you agree that those who believe and go to church will be saved? Those who believe and go to church will be saved. Yes. OK. Would you say that those who believe and read their word, read the Bible, would be saved? Yes. OK. Would you say that he who believes and reads the Bible will be saved, but he who does not believe will not be saved? That's correct, right? Right. How about he who believes and reads his Bible, but he who will be saved, but he who does not read his Bible will not be saved. Would that be true? No.
Good. So the emphasis is on belief. He who has believed and is baptized shall be saved, but he who is disbelieved shall be condemned. It does not say he who is not baptized. If baptism was a requirement, then it ought to say there that you have to be baptized.
It should say something like, he was disbelieved and refuses to get baptized, or has not been baptized, you'll be condemned. Then you'd have something to work with. OK?
Yeah, I don't know that I would. It's very clear to me. And then also it says, he who perseveres in the end will be saved. But let's finish this up with Mark 16 first. Let's finish with Mark first, OK? Because there's something else going on with Mark. After he had appeared in a different form, this is Mark 16, 12, after Jesus had appeared in a different form to two of them, well, he did not appear in a different form. He was raised in the same body he died in, 1 Corinthians 15, 35-45, and John 2, 19-21.
That's a problem. Furthermore, in those 11 verses of Mark 16, 9-20, which are not found in some of the ancient manuscripts, in those 11 verses are 17 words that suddenly appear in just those 11 verses that don't appear in the entire Gospel of Mark. 17 new words. And I read a Greek scholar who said there are 17 non-Markan words used in a non-Markan sense.
That means the style was different. So the question is, why is it that these new words appear right there in those last 11 verses but not in the entire Gospel of Mark and the text seems to be different and it has what would appear to be a doctrinal problem if he appeared in a different form. And the text doesn't appear in many ancient manuscripts. So this is why I say I will never preach out of these verses. I am not convinced that they are authentic. You're dismissing those words as part of the canon of the New Testament. I am not convinced that they are because there's different endings. This pericope does not exist in all the manuscripts.
There's a doctrinal issue with verse 12, we're saying Jesus appeared in a different form, plus there's 17 new words that appear there that are not in the rest of the Gospel of Mark. To me that is enough evidence to doubt it. You're dismissing them. Yeah, I'm not going to dismiss them. I'm saying I won't preach out of them.
I'm not convinced they're in. And that's why it says later manuscripts add verses 9 through 20. The earlier manuscripts don't. And usually the earlier ones are the correct ones.
So this is why I don't go to that verse to approve anything. But hold on, okay? Yeah. Hold on, we've got a break coming up. We'll talk some more, okay?
Okay. Hey folks, we'll be right back after these messages. Please stay tuned. Welcome back to the show. Let's get back to John from Salt Lake City.
John, welcome here on the air. Yes, so obviously I brought up that I think you're on shaky ground when you start to question sections of Scripture, just as Luther didn't like James, so he said it shouldn't even be in the canon of the New Testament. Can I ask you what church you go to? It doesn't matter. Yes, it does matter. It really doesn't matter. Yes, it does. Okay. It matters.
Why do you say it does? Because I will then know what presuppositions and assumptions you come to the table with, and I'll know how to cater my answers better to you. So what church do you go to? I'm an Eastern Orthodox Christian. Okay, all right.
Thank you. So I do believe, like I said, Luther wanted to dismiss... Okay, I'm not talking about Luther. We're talking about the evidence instead of Mark.
Did you know about these 17 non-Markan words used? Are you familiar with verse 12? No, I was familiar at the very end of the Gospel of Mark about... Are you familiar with verse 12, where it says Jesus had appeared in a different form? Since you're Orthodox, you would then understand that Jesus rose to the dead in the same body he died in, right?
Yeah, I mean, obviously you're thinking a logical approach. So then, can he appear in a different form? I don't know. Those things are mysteries to me. Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. Stop, stop, stop. John, John, John. I'm not going to let you just say it's a mystery and you dismiss it.
You have to understand something. Jesus prophesied his own resurrection in John 2, 19-21. Destroyed this temple, and I will raise it up, but he's speaking to the temple of his body. In 1 Corinthians 15, 35-45, it says, that which is sown is that which is raised. And so the body of Christ was raised in a glorified sense, and in John 20, 25-28, he said, put your hand into my side.
Put your finger into my hand. It was the same body he died in that was resurrected and glorified. Do you agree with that? Yes, but also the prophet recognized it on the road to a man. Mark, John. Then how is it, according to Mark 16, 12, that Jesus appeared in a different form? Do you agree that he appeared in a different form?
You know, I don't know. I mean, obviously, you thought through this, and you've come to this conclusion. But the point that I really want to get to... John, John, John. The reason I've come to this conclusion is because of the evidence, because of what the Scripture says and prophesies about Jesus' physical resurrection, and for the fact that there's 17 non-Markan words used in a non-Markan sense in these 11 verses, and for the fact that it says that, or that the history shows that there's different endings and that the one you're referring to is in a layered manuscript set, not in an earlier one, plus the verse 12, which you can't respond to. So why would you ignore the evidence? I'm not ignoring it. You win the argument.
Then you're going to say then that Mark 16, 16 is not a good verse to go to for your position. Great. What's next then?
What do you got? Because my basic intention is that I don't agree with what's called irresistible grace. I believe that salvation is... Do you know what that is? Excuse me. Let me just finish, and then I'll answer that.
Sure. That salvation is 99% an act of God, but it's 1% a function of our will. And you have passages like, Whosoever receives him, to him he will give power to become sons of God. Behold, I stand at the door and knock.
Whosoever opens the door, I will come. There is will, our will, involved in salvation. Okay. So do you know what irresistible grace is? Yeah.
What is it? Irresistible grace. God elects us, and there's nothing we can do, and we're saved or not saved.
That's not true. That's not what irresistible grace is. Irresistible grace is the teaching from the Reformed community that upon the point of regeneration, that the grace of God cannot be resisted, and that a person will become regenerate. That's what irresistible grace means. I debate with Eastern Orthodox people regularly, and it's unfortunate that they don't know what they criticize very often. And this is the case here. And that's what it is there. Now, when you say salvation is 99% an act of God and 1% an act of will, can you show me the statistics derived out of Scripture from that so that we know that that's what is true, and it's not something you just made up? I don't have any statistics. I just told you two very obvious passages.
Whosoever receives. Wait, wait, wait, wait. One thing at a time. You said 99% of the time is the act of God and 1% of man. So that's what you're saying, okay? And I'm just asking, you know, 99%, do you have anything in Scripture to back that up in that statistical set?
No, you don't. No, I believe we're saved. So let's go. What verses would you like to look at on whosoever? Like John 3.16? Yeah. I mean, John 3, God so loved the world.
Yeah. And then whosoever receives him, behold I stand. Let's look at John 3.16. Those are acts of the will. We agree.
We have no problem with that. I don't deny that there's an act of human will. But just so you know, John 3.16, it does not say whoever.
It doesn't say that. In the Greek, it's pass, ha, pistouon. All the believing one. That's the literal Greek, pass, ha, pistouon. The word for whoever in Greek is hos.
It's an omega sigma with a rough breathing mark over the omega. And that exists in the Greek, but it does not exist there. It's all the believing one. That's what John 3.16 says. You've got another verse you want to look at? Well, anyway, I've got to run, but I think those two verses that I mentioned, and I think there are many, many others, I'm not prepared to get. Behold, I stand at the door and knock.
Whoever. We must open, open to the act of the will. I agree, and I have no problem with those verses, whoever does. Now I've got a question for you. If it's just up, if it's up to human will, because you're saying 99% and 1% human will, if that's the case, then why does Jesus say you can't come to him unless it's granted to you from the Father, John 6.65? Sure, and why does it say, Behold, I stand whosoever opens the door? I'm asking you, I ask you a question. If what you're saying is true in the way that you're trying to say it, then why is it also true that you can't come to Christ unless it's granted to you from the Father?
You're the one who said it. Your will is active in deciding to come to Christ. But apparently Jesus says to the contrary, I'm asking you to harmonize them, not contradict. I can't harmonize, they don't harmonize, they're paradoxical.
They are harmonizable. Whoever comes is the one granted by the Father to come to Christ, John 6.65, and they've been granted by the Father to believe. Yes, if you open the doors because you've been enabled by God to do so. Don't take credit for what he does.
He grants that you believe Philippians 1.29. All right, I've got to run. My wife's calling me. So thank you for your time. I appreciate it.
Thanks a lot, John. Please call again. I'll be debating an Easter Orthodox guy on this issue on August 7th. You can tell, folks, that generally speaking, Easter Orthodox, like the Catholics, aren't very well versed in the very issues they need to study in order to have a meaningful and deep discussion on this topic.
I'm going to tell you, I recommend EO and Catholic study the Protestant position before you try and criticize it. Hey, folks, we have two open lines, 877-207-2276. We'll be right back after these messages. Everybody, welcome to the show. I hope you're enjoying the show. All right, let's see.
The next longest waiting person is Preacher, Preacher T from Arizona. Welcome. You're on the air. Are you there? Hello. Can you hear me?
Yes, I can. Great. What's up? How you doing? I'm doing great. How are you doing? I'm well, man.
I'm going to just share my report real quick. While I'm here, I believe the gospel, that Jesus is God the Father, and he manifests in the flesh. Oh, you're a heretic. You're a heretic. You're a heretic. You're a heretic. You're a heretic. You're a heretic. You're a heretic.
You're on my show here. You're teaching heresy. Preacher. Preacher. Preacher. Preacher.
Hey, hey, hey. You said Jesus is the Father. That's false doctrine. Amen. You said Jesus is the Father?
Yeah, let's go to Vietnam 6. Hey, preacher. Okay.
I put him on hold. Oh, I love heretics. I do.
I really enjoy it. But they got to be quiet for a minute, and they got to let me respond on my own radio show. So I'm going to try and get him back on the air here. Let's see if he can slow down, okay? Preacher, if you don't be polite, I'm just going to cut you off altogether. Understand? Okay, man, I'm being polite, but go ahead. That's fine. Can you stop? Hold on, man. I'm telling you I'm being polite. Okay. I put him on hold again because he's being obstreperous. You can look up that word, obstreperous.
It's a really good word. Let's try another time. Preacher, are you there?
Are you there? Go ahead, man. If he is the father, then why was he praying to the father? That's just my question.
Yeah, he said I came in my father's name. Then let me respond. I don't want you to cut me off. Then answer the question. I'm answering it.
No, you're not. Why do you pray to the father if he is the father? Well, I'm trying to give you the answer, Mr. Slick. You won't let me answer it. Answer it. Go ahead.
Okay, well, let me answer it. I am coming in my father's name and they receive me not. And if you look in Isaiah 9-6, it says, For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given, and the government shall be upon his shoulders, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, and the Prince of Peace. So Jesus is claiming that the name of the father is Jesus, and he came in his father's name.
So the name of the father is Jesus, and the name of the son is Jesus. I want people to hear what it means to debate with an unbeliever. I'm not here to debate. Oh, yeah, you are.
Absolutely you are. That's the evil spirit. The spirit of debate is against your... Well, no, let's go by scripture. You debate me? Okay, this is what it's like to deal with brainwashed people.
Hey, folks, watch this. I'm going to go to Jude, and I'm going to go to verse 3 where it says, Contend earnestly for the faith. Now I'm going to go to Acts 17. So Paul was reasoning, dialoguing, debating, in the synagogue with the Jews and God-fearing Gentiles. So it's biblical to do that, all right?
So it's okay to debate about it. Now, preacher, you know, you're... Okay, he couldn't handle being polite, okay? He was rude.
So I'm going to go... This is what I'm going to ask him. When he goes to Isaiah 9-6, this is what they do. And notice he did not answer the question, folks.
We'll get to that. He went to this verse, Isaiah 9-6. For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us, and the government will rest on his shoulders. His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace. Now, what they'll do is they'll say, See, he is the Father.
And I'll say, Well, wait a minute. It says his name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace. And what they're going to do is say, Well, that means he is the Father. Well, is his name also called Wonderful Counselor in the New Testament? And the answer is no. Is his name called the Mighty God in the New Testament? The answer is no. Is his name called the Eternal Father in the New Testament?
The answer is no. So what does it mean when it says his name will be called? It's talking about the attributes and characteristics of how he is going to be. And Hebrews 1-3 says he is the exact representation of the nature of God in the context of God the Father, which is why he'll be called, referenced in that.
His name will be called that. It doesn't say he is that. Furthermore, when I asked him if he is the Father, why is he praying to the Father? And he didn't answer the question. And oneness people routinely failed to answer that question and even more difficult questions, which I can ask him. And unfortunately, he was so rude that he wouldn't even let me reason with him.
He wanted to dominate in order to teach his damnable heresy. Adam from Arkansas, welcome. You're on the air. Ah, there you go. So what do you got, buddy?
Hey. Yeah, I debated with a friend of mine and he's talking about you know, we feel physical pain and I told him that the spiritual pain is going to be way more unimaginable. He was telling me that what you would refer to as the terrors, the wicked ones, they'll be in a resurrected body too.
Is that true? The wheat, excuse me, the terrors of the wicked are going to be resurrected and there's debate about exactly how it looks like they're going to be resurrected in a body that will not die in the sense that it will not be literally consumed by fire, but they're going to exist in a form in eternal damnation and held conscious torment. Yep. That's what I was trying to get at because I thought I knew we'd get a resurrected body, but I wasn't for sure about the terrors if they got one. When we say resurrected, we tend to understand it to be a resurrected and glorified body.
Okay. But it's not a glorified body in the sense that the unbelievers have it, but it's a resurrected body because they will be cast into hell. So it is worth, you know, me to do a study on that to see if it is an actual physical body and I'm not sure that it is, but I'm not sure it's not at the top of my head.
And I've always assumed it was. Ah, thank you so much. That's my position. That's what I understand so far.
Okay? But they're going to be consciously tormented. Ah, thank you, Mr. Blue. Ah, thank you. God bless.
And furthermore, it would make sense to say that the conscious torment they're going to undergo would not just be a spiritual one, but actually a physical one because it has a fire and flame and how does that affect a spirit which is not affected by those kind of things. So there you go. Let's get to let's get to Kevin from Raleigh, North Carolina. Kevin, welcome. You're on the air.
Hi, Matt. Thanks for taking my call. Um, two real quick questions. One is the gentleman that was the Greek Orthodox Christian there that wanted to argue with you about um, you know, the 99% as God's work and 1% as the person's work.
That was pretty much dispelled by Martin Luther in Bondage of the Will, wasn't it? Yes. Okay.
I thought so. Ah, second question. Um, those that are non-believers that do go to Hell, um, why I guess a question, it's kind of a strange question, but why would uh, why didn't God just make them go away? I mean, they were created so they can be uncreated so to speak. Is it because um, of God being so holy and they had a chance to meet His standard through the salvation and the grace of Jesus Christ that this is their punishment for not?
I think that's part of it along with something else. In that um, an illustration I use is if I were to slap some guy in the street in the face, he might take a swing back at me, he might not, whatever. If I were to slap the president, the real president whoever that is, in the face then um, then uh, you know, it's a federal offense. The exact same action gets a different result based on who it's against. And so if we were to sin against the infinitely holy God, the implication is there's an infinite offense because of who it's against. If someone is simply annihilated, then that infinite offense is terminated in a sense. It means that they, the people who committed that offense against that infinitely holy God don't have to endure the comparative repercussions of that infinite offense. It's not infinite for them. It's temporal, if at all, and they stop existing. And this is the logic that I've wondered about that. And that makes sense, what you just said, because you know, God being holy as he is, which we really don't comprehend well, um, that makes you sit back and think about just how holy God is. I mean, as a Christian, we think, oh, we go to heaven and it's going to be great.
Well, how do we look at that view of God's holiness as opposed to somebody that's not Christian, goes to hell, and they are suffering for, as you just described, the offense against the most holy, infinite, holy God. And it just makes sense that they would end up being annihilated. That's okay. That answered my question. Thank you very much. Okay. All right. Well, God bless you. Along those lines, I think that the punishment is conversely to the reward.
As much as you reject God, you're going to be punished that much. Hey, folks, we'll be right back after the messages. Please stay tuned.
Before we get to the next call, I've got two waiting. A guy in the text chat made a really interesting comment I never really thought of before. And this guy by the name of Joseph, and he said in regard to annihilation, the punishment of annihilation would be a mercy. And you know what? That's a good point. It's a mercy. It's even a grace. It's even a gracious movement because they don't get punished forever. It's a mercy to stop their punishment.
And yet, that would be an inconsistency because how could God show mercy to those who are outside of Christ? You know, in their judgment. It's interesting. And I like that. So anyway, let's get to Wendell from Fort Worth.
I guess that's Texas. Wendell, welcome, you're on the air. Hello, Matt, and thank you so much for being a great inspiration. I have a question concerning Genesis, chapter 1, verse 27, as it relates to the word image. Alright, I believe, God made us in his image. Now, I wrestle with that for a number of seasons, and I want to know what you think about that word, what you know about that word image. Well, not just our appearance, I'm sure of God as spirit, but... Right, that's John 4.24, God as spirit, and Luke 24.45, the Spirit does not have flesh and bones, as you see, I have, or is it 4.39, that's it, 24.39.
So the word image, I'm looking at an image that is the Hebrew word selem, and it means vainly show image, likeness, yeah, semblance. So we are in the image of God. Generally what's understood is the difference between what's called the communicable and incommunicable attributes of God.
So let me explain what that means. So God exists, and he has certain qualities, and that is his eternal independence of all things. He has immutability, he does not change, he has omnipresence, he's everywhere all the time. He has omniscience, in other words, he's all-knowing.
He has omnisapience, which means he has all wisdom. These are attributes that belong to God. Another thing we would say about God is that he is not dependent upon time nor space, but he can indwell within them.
Well, we are dependent upon time and space, and so we would say these are incommunicable attributes, they cannot be communicated to us. God is omniscient, we are not. God is everywhere all the time, we are not.
God has always been, it's not the case with us. The communicable attributes of God are those attributes or characteristics that belong to him that we can participate in. So he loves, we love.
He hates, we hate. He reasons, we can reason. He can recognize others, we can recognize others. He has attributes of personhood, we do too. And so it's considered that his image deals with the communicable attributes of God that can be communicated to us, that we can experience because we're made in his image, and that's what it means. Okay? Okay, alright. So, okay, we're looking at the attributes of God which are the Okay.
It's kind of like that. I'm more technical than most, the attributes are exhibited out of the ontos. So a bowling ball has by necessity hardness and roundness or spherical quality. And so those are, those exist because that's the nature of that. When we say attributes, I don't like saying it too much by trying to find another word. Those are the qualities or attributes of God that can be communicated to us. But the attributes reflect out of the ontos but our ontos is in the image of God, our nature, our essence. So we can share certain characteristics because of the image that we have which is similar to God's.
But we don't, we're not omniscient, we're not omnipresent, etc. So Alright. Well, I do thank you very much for accepting my call. I appreciate it.
You're welcome. Call back again anytime, okay? Alright.
Okay, God bless. Bye-bye. Alright, let's get to, let's see, that would be, we have four open lines if you want to give me a call, by the way, 877-207-2276. Let's get to Matt from Tennessee. Hey, Matt, welcome. You're on the air. You're on the air.
Hey, thanks, Matt. I was in a debate here a couple of days ago and trying to get some more knowledge under my belt before I rehash this with this person, but I know that the Bible is very clear that justification is by faith alone. But my friend is insistent that it is through baptism. And so what he threw at me was 1 Peter 3 21. And I know it talks about, it says not the removal of dirt, which I'm trying to explain that to him, but he is stuck on the baptism which corresponds to this now saves you.
So I was wondering if you could give me any tools that I could put in my toolbox when I rehash this out with him. Surely I'll give you two things to work with. One, that. In the Greek is the Greek word antitupon. It's an antitype, a representation corresponding to that. So what is the antecedent? What does it refer back to? And that's in verse 20. And it says who, and this is the question I'm going to ask, what does baptism correspond to, the baptism that saves, what does it correspond to? Verse 20, who were once disobedient when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah during the construction of the Ark in which a few that is eight persons were brought safely through the water. So baptism now saves you.
It corresponds to what? What does it correspond to in the previous verse? The people during the times of Noah, the people that were saved in the Ark. So baptism refers to the Ark. The Ark is what saved Noah.
It was not the water. And Peter uses it, water, as a means of destruction in another verse, I forgot where in Peter, but he does that. He mentions it again, destroyed through water and things like that, the world and things. So the thing about the Ark is it has one door. And the people entered into that door and God closed the door. There's only one door. Jesus says he is the door.
He also says that what is opened by God, it cannot be closed, what's closed by God cannot be opened. Now they entered into that Ark. God closed that door and then God opened the door for them to exit it after the flood.
This is the work of God. This is salvation representative in that sense of being saved through water. So Peter comes along and says corresponding to that, now I believe it's the Ark. Because that's what saved them. That's what baptism saves you.
Well how did they enter the Ark? By faith. So it's the faith that saved them and they're going to say but baptism saves you. But even though it says not the removal of the dirt from the flesh, but an appeal. Well the baptism that Peter is talking about is an appeal. Because sometimes what they'll say is baptism must mean immersion in water. But Jesus when he was baptized was not immersed. He was sprinkled according to Old Testament law to enter into the priesthood. And I can back that up. Just go to Hebrews 8.7.
That shocks a lot of people, particularly them. Because they're going to want to say it's immersion. And I can show plenty of verses where it's not the case. You go to Acts 1 5. John baptized with water, you'll be baptized with the Holy Spirit. That baptism is the charismatic movements that comes upon them in Acts 1 and 2.
So this is why Peter is saying no, no, no. As the baptism is simply a covenant sign in water, but he doesn't even say that the baptism that you have there is a baptism of water. He doesn't say that. He's assuming that it says that. This is why I think he says it's an appeal to God. And that baptism is a figurative use because it's in reference to the ark in which they entered by faith.
You can't say that baptism saves you in the sense that water baptism by immersion is what clutches you from your sin. There's a problem there for them. That's one thing. Here's another thing. You go to Romans 5.1.
This is what I do with them all the time. And it says having therefore been justified by faith and I ask them what does it mean to be justified? And the answer is found in Romans 4-5 to the one who does not work but believes his faith is reckoned as righteousness. And it goes on and talks about being justified. So it's the righteousness that's imputed to us.
I ask them this question and you should ask your friend this question. Does the Bible say we're justified by faith? He's going to have to say yes. Then are we justified by faith when we have faith?
What's he going to say? If he says no, you have to be baptized, then you're not justified by faith, are you? Right. And if he says yes, well then baptism is not necessary because people are justified before they have faith. Before they get baptized, excuse me. Okay.
Yeah, that makes sense. Well thank you for that. Before I go, I wanted to tell you that I was listening to one of your Bible studies that you were doing at your home and you were mimicking somebody making fun of you and every time that I mention if I say with my own words that's what it says in my brain I hear you going, that's what it says!
Anyway, thank you. My friend Nathan mocks me about that. Because I would say, what's it say?
That's what it says! He exaggerates it, so now I exaggerate when I say it. So it's all in fun. Well it's contagious. Hey, well thanks for all you do. Appreciate you. Alright man, God bless, buddy.
Have a good one. Whoops, I forgot to hang up on him. Hey, by the way, Glenn Kelly I'm going to give a little kudos for Glenn. By the way, Glenn needs a lot of prayer. Glenn wouldn't say this I'm going to say this, Glenn has kept calm running over the years. He kept it running for like 10 or 15 years 10 years probably and did an incredible amount of work to keep it going at a lot of expense to himself. Glenn also I'm just going to say this, Glenn is one of the guys who was a first responder in 9-11 and because of it he's got some sickness and some issues and he has to deal with a lot of personal health issues and his IQ is 189?
I think it's 189 he said. He's a lot smarter than me. Makes you doubt because we're friends. At any rate, that's Glenn Kelly and he's in the chat. I'm just giving him a shout out Please pray for Glenn, he's a great guy. Alright folks, back to baptism. You've got to understand something, we're justified by faith in Christ, what he did not what he and what we do. It's not by faith and our baptism not by faith and our goodness not by faith and our communion not by faith and the sacraments. It is by faith in Christ. You see, the Bible says in Romans 328 We maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law. Apart from the works of the law.
Now they're going to say, well that's the Old Testament law. Well, great, let's go to Romans 4-5. To the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly. His faith is credited as righteousness.
What is credited as righteousness? Baptism? Or faith? It is faith. What the people are doing who are saying that baptism is necessary for salvation, they're saying that you have to go through a ceremony in order to be justified before God, that faith in Christ is not enough to save you. It is faith in Christ plus what you do. Now Paul says in Galatians 5, 1-5 and I recommend people read this, he says If you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you. You have been severed from Christ.
You who are seeking to be justified by the law. By works. Because what he's saying is you're doing one thing, circumcision. And Paul says and you're seeking to be justified by works by your doing. This is the same thing with baptism because Paul relates baptism and circumcision together in Colossians 2, 11 and 12.
Don't have much time to go into it, but there you go. By faith alone and God's grace alone and Christ alone are we saved. Not by faith in Christ and a ceremony. Praise God for the gospel. Hey everybody. God's grace will talk to you tomorrow. Another program powered by the Truth Network.
Whisper: medium.en / 2023-09-18 01:53:55 / 2023-09-18 02:14:23 / 20