The following program is recorded content created by the Truth Network Podcast. We're going to talk about the issue of pastors preparing congregations for the coming deception.
I've been talking about it, and it kind of struck me. Even though I've taught this many times and gone through what needs to be taught, it occurred to me that I just don't hear much of what people say that explains what we need to watch out for. What do the pastors teach? Are they teaching the congregation members what to watch out for when it gets bad? That's the thing.
I was realizing I just don't know of anybody who's had any pastors teach them. I'm not saying it's not happening. But we got talking about eschatology. We went to Matthew 24.
We're talking about some interesting stuff. Jesus says this in the last days of the arrival of the Antichrist. For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect. That's what we were focusing on for a little bit.
I started thinking about that. Show great signs and wonders and mislead, if possible, even the elect. That means there are going to be people who are going to claim to be prophets, and they're going to perform miracles. Now, what are you going to do if there's someone who claims to be a Christian, a Christian leader, and they perform miracles? Are you going to follow them? Are you going to just say, yeah, I'm going to follow?
He's doing miracles or she's doing miracles. Well, the Bible tells us don't. Now, how are you going to know? How do you know what's true and what's false about what they teach?
Now, if you don't know what the Bible teaches, you won't know, and you'll be ready for deception. So anyway, with something we were talking about last night, I thought it was interesting, and maybe I'll do some thinking on that and some teaching on that as well, what kind of things to watch out for and various things. So there you go. Hey, let's do this. Let's get on the air here with Rudolph from Raleigh, North Carolina. Rudolph, welcome.
You're on the air. Yes, sir. My question is, what is the oneness belief system? What is the oneness?
Oh, okay. What is the oneness belief system? The oneness denies the Trinity, and it says that God is one person, not three persons. So oneness theology would state that when Jesus became flesh, that it was the Father who became flesh, but yet the Father was also still in heaven.
And why? Because God can be everywhere. So Jesus supposedly had two natures, but then this is where it gets confusing. The human nature can talk to the divine nature, or the human nature can be speaking. And so when Jesus says, not my will be done, but your will be done, in Luke 22, 42, I've had many oneness people tell me that's the flesh talking to the Spirit. And there's problems with that. It denies incarnation.
It denies a whole bunch of stuff. So they'll teach that. They'll also teach that you need to be baptized with the Holy Spirit, or as they like to say, with the Holy Ghost. You've got to be baptized with the Holy Ghost, with the evidence that's speaking in tongues. And so it's the Holy Ghost. And so you've got to get baptized with the Holy Spirit, or the Holy Ghost. And speaking in tongues is one of the manifestations, or the manifestation, for the evidence that the Holy Spirit is dwelling in you. And they teach that when you get baptized, you're not baptized in the name of the Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, but in the name of Jesus.
They make a mistake. They say that the phrase, in the name of Jesus, means you say the words, in the name of Jesus, and that's how you get baptized. No, in the name of Jesus is a term of authority. I'm doing a study on that, and I'll release it in a few days, in the name of. And so there's even some verses I found in the name of the Father. Now that's really interesting.
I've got to study those. So they'll say that that's the case, that you must be baptized in Jesus' name, and that you can lose your salvation, baptism's necessary for salvation, the Trinity's not true, and stuff like that. So they're usually very charismatic. And I went a week ago tonight, I went to a local United Pentecostal church with the number one guy in the country who defends and teaches on oneness, and I challenged him to a debate, a polite, you know, I politely challenged him. He didn't accept. He said he may be a discussion, so we're going to see. I'm going to email him soon.
But yeah, they were very, let's just say, energetic, very energetic, running around and clapping and bouncing and turning in circles and various things like that, so I got it on film. Anyway, okay. So I listened to you.
You said that. So when Christ said that, when you baptize people in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, that's one. That's one. That's what they believe?
No, no, no. A proper baptism is done this way in the formula you say. You say, I baptize you in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. What they do is they say, I baptize you in the name of Jesus. Oh, so they don't believe in what he just said? Yeah, they'll say that when Jesus spoke in Matthew 28, 18-20, you baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. The name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit is Jesus. That's what they say.
So you baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit because there's all one person, therefore his name is Jesus. That's what they do. They have problems.
And if you're one that you want to call me up, we can discuss some of those problems because there's two things they can't deal with very well at all, and that's the Trinity doctrine chart that I have on Karm. They can't refute that. They're not able to refute that.
They basically ignore it. And I tell people and I debate them, you need to look at this. And I even said in my last debate with a oneness guy, I said, you need to look at this, and for any oneness people who debate me in the future, you need to look.
I'm going to ask you about this chart right here. You need to know what this is. And so it exemplifies or shows how the doctrine of the Trinity is arrived at. That's one thing they have a problem with. Another thing is you ask them about the issue of personhood. And they don't like the idea of personhood or saying God is a person. And I explained theologically it doesn't mean like you and me as a person, body, flesh, and bones, but the center of consciousness, awareness, you can think, things like that. Is God a person?
And they'll say, well, yeah. Well, was Jesus a person? Yes. He's the same person as a father.
Yes. Then why does he speak to the Father? And these are the questions they don't do well with. Well, he's speaking to himself. It doesn't make any sense to say that. He's speaking to someone else. And in any other instance, in every single other instance, if someone's speaking to another, you say I was speaking to the Father. It's not the same person as yourself.
It's not the same one as yourself. They say in every other instance, it's two individuals or two persons. But when it's the Son and the Father speaking, then all of a sudden it isn't. They just really mess up the Scriptures.
They're bad. Just put it that way. Okay, well, thank you for explaining that to me. Appreciate it. Have a good week and be safe. You too, man. God bless, buddy. Goodbye. All right.
You too. Bye-bye. Okay, folks, you have five open lines if you want to give me a call.
All you have to do is dial 877-207-2276. I want to hear from you. Now, as some of you know, what I do on Fridays sometimes is do some hate mail. And so I like hate mail. I do. And I'm going to get in there and do some reading on that, some hate mail right now.
All right, I could open up my program. And here we go and move down over here to love and hate mail and hate mail. Yeah. You know, I'm already smiling. And I haven't even read it yet. And I'm smiling.
So for those of you who might be new thinking, what the heck is he talking about? The ministry I run, karm.org, has had 150 million visitors, is 26 years old. And let's just say a lot of people don't like what I write and what karm stands for. So we get hate mail. All right. All right. Let's see now. Let's see. That's hate mail. Okay, right there.
Eleven Biden supporters arrested in Atlanta for ballot harvesting. What? Okay.
They voted 123 times. This is in the hate mail section. I think someone put it there in the wrong thing. Yeah, that's just, okay. So let's go over to here.
Houston, Texas. The world is quickly discovering that the second coming of Christ is already here on earth, but also that 132, oh, I read that one. 132 days that the man Christ Jesus will transform his mortal Puerto Rican body into immortality, radioactivity and flames. I'm just like, man, that must be one hot burrito.
And it's like, you've got to be kidding me. So yeah. Okay. Let me, let me see if I can get another one. We already did that one and I got this one.
This is a good one too. You are a colossal idiot. I love that. See, because it's not just you're an idiot. You're a colossal idiot. That's huge.
That's immense. You're not just an idiot. You're really. So now nothing was said on why I'm a colossal idiot, but Hey, you know, I appreciate that.
It was good. All right. Uh, let's see. So this is a guy who wrote, uh, I've already read this before.
I'm going to go over it again cause I like it. Wow. You guys are really stupid.
Yeah. You obviously haven't read the Bible or you have no ears to hear. Have you not read about the day all those believers fell? Also, Paul makes mention of the people who left the faith. It's trash like you who the devil fooled. LOL.
Why would the Bible mention about this and to believers? He doesn't see what he's talking about. What you know? Oh yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay.
And uh, I thought the Christians read the Bible. It's punctuation. It's horrible. Oh man. Oh yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Maybe you're just enjoying what I'm doing. Okay. Here's another one, bro.
If you are not a Roman Catholic, you are in a cult or at least you're right. Oh, I read this until how come these are still here? I think so.
It might've moved to these and transferred these back in or something. I'll have to take a look here. So anyway, Hey, give me a call for open lines 877-207-2276. We'll be right back.
Please stay tuned. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276. Here's Matt Slick. Everybody. Welcome back to the show. If you want to give me a call for open lines on this nice Friday, all you got to do is dial 877-207-2276. Let's get to Steven from North Carolina. Steven.
Welcome. You're on the air. Uh, yes. I had some, a couple of verses I've been memorizing over a period of time, but then I started bringing them together in my head.
They seem inconsistent. And I said, well, maybe I'll call Matt Slick and he can help me. But after hearing about all them texts that you were just talking about, I thought maybe I should hang up.
I didn't know. But if you're an idiot, stupid and all that, maybe I'll help somebody else. Then you're called the wrong place. There you go.
But anyway, I'll get back downstairs. I know the Bible uses illustrations of earthly things to speak of heavenly or spiritual things. Well, a couple of these illustrations appear to be inconsistent.
Maybe you could run the square out for me. Sure. In 1 Corinthians 3, 12, it talks about building a permanent foundation of gold, silver, precious stones, as opposed to perishable ones of wood, hay, and straw. Yet in 1 Peter 1, 18, and I believe 19, 2, it says that we were not redeemed with corruptible things, such as good and gold and silver, but with Christ's precious blood. So are they just using gold and silver as two different type illustrations? Well, yeah.
Hey, here, look at this. See, it says for no man can lay a foundation. This is 1 Corinthians, a foundation other than the one which is laid in Christ. Now, if any man builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, so the foundation is Jesus, you're building on what Christ has done. You build silver, gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, each mantle will become evident for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire. So what he's saying by analogy is that which is gold, silver, and precious stones, these are the good things that are actually talked about in heaven in the book of Revelation. And wood, hay, straw is burned up. So there's what's called good works, bad works. Things built for the glory of God. I understood that part, but then when I got to 1 Peter 1, 18, I said, well, maybe I was misunderstanding, so I'm sorry to interrupt. Well, it's okay.
I was going to get over there. I just want to get the context first of 1 Corinthians 3. And now what we do is we go over to 1 Peter and what he says there, knowing that you were not redeemed with perishable things. This is on redemption.
The other one is building on what Christ has already done. This is talking about your redemption. You weren't redeemed with perishable things like silver and gold. In that context, silver and gold are just these objects. You can't buy your way into heaven. These things are going away with your futile way of inherited life from your forefathers.
Talk about possessions. You weren't bought with those, but with the precious blood that comes from the lamb. So all that's happening is Peter is using the same words in a different way than Paul is.
Paul is using them. The idea of gold, silver, precious stones are the good things you do based upon who you are in Christ, where Peter is talking about redemption is not by gold and silver. They're different things. For salvation after salvation.
One is after salvation, 1 Corinthians, and one is to get salvation in 1 Peter. I should have figured that out, but thank you for taking the time. No problem. It's a good question, though. You see, it's a good question. I'm trying to trick you.
I just really didn't understand. If I had thought through it more, but thank you for thinking through it more. No, that's okay. I appreciate it because we need the callers right now.
Fridays are sometimes slow, so there you go. If those are, you know, no problem, then call in. It's okay. Thank you. All right. Well, God bless. Hey, five open lines if you want to give me a call.
877-207-2276. All right. Let's see if I can get some more hate mail because I'm enjoying it. Wow.
The true human Bible. Yeah. That's interesting. Okay. Let's see. How about this one? Let's see. There is a way to know the truth, but you are obviously afraid of taking it.
Thank you very much. I didn't know I was afraid of taking it. You know, I like it when people tell me what I'm afraid of. In fact, one of the things I'll do sometimes is I'll point out, I'll be debating somebody discussing and they'll say, you know this, Matt, and you're just denying it. And I just go, what? You read my heart, my mind?
That's God's job, not yours. What do you mean I know it? You're accusing me here of being purposely deception. Yeah. You know, it's like, oh, come on. All right.
Let's see. Hello. And, uh, I was looking at your website to see what it would say about atheism since it would be hypocritical of me to arraign, arraign something that I wasn't aware of all the facts or arguments of. You can tell it's a product of modern education here in America. I became excited because I thought your website would be tolerant of other people's views. Instead, I could hear your mocking undertone in your reasoning for your doubt of atheism. My mocking undertone.
Wow. You know, I talked to a lot of atheists and they don't, they never say I mock them. They say I'm very respectful, very polite to them. I talk to them.
Man. I mean, what is with people? They just accuse. Okay.
Let me go on. Well, how can you ridicule something that you called out on being un-open minded? Whatever that means. Not to mention you said when arguing with Christian, Christians, atheists must be sensitive to other people's views and experience. I'm, I am sensitive to Christian's views. I try to understand them and be open minded to others' ideas because I know that humans cannot know everything about this world. You say we Christians. You know, I believe that we are all equal no matter if we are gay, a Satanist, a Muslim, a woman, a man, a black or white. I've never been Christians.
I've never seen Christians or any group that believes in a God as an opposing force. You know, people, they, they ramble. They don't know what you're doing. Man. Okay. Let's see.
How about this one? Am I not the father for I am the father. So the father is in me. So I am him. He who has sent me to teach the word of truth and not to deceive. So those who know the father shall also know me for I am from the father who was in me.
I says the father, I'm tired of men's own understanding. It's just a big run on sentence. It's a whole sentence in a paragraph and it's like that. Um, wow. Okay.
Let's see. How about this one here? I want to thank you for compiling the dictionary of false terms. Thanks to your extensive research on Mormonism, I was able to find out much needed quotation by the prophet Joseph Smith that will support an essay I'm writing in which I attack the false notion that God is an absolute sovereign being existing beyond time and space without body or parts. Wow. You know, you think about that.
Isn't that sad? You know, the prophet Joseph Smith, for one thing, he wasn't a prophet. He was a false prophet, but not a true prophet. He said he saw God the father. The Bible says no one can see the father. It says that in 1 Timothy 6 16. And then the idea that God is not, this is what Mormonism teaches, that God got in body, flesh, and bones about six feet tall. And he's not the sovereign king.
He's not absolute. Their God is like a God equivalent of the Greek pantheon. He's like Zeus and Apollo. If you think about it, it's the same kind of thing because he just got in body, flesh, and bones. And he has powers. He's a human, but he's more God-like than human. That's Mormonism.
That's Zeus. The same kind of thing. Oh, it's so sad. Hey, folks, why don't you give me a call, five open lines, bottom of the hour, 877-207-2276. Be right back.
Randall says, 8 mil. Sounds like it came from a Berkeley graduate. Hey, pretty funny. We'll be right back. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276. Here's Matt Slick. All right, everyone, welcome back to the show. Hey, we have four open lines.
Why don't you give me a call, 877-207-2276. Let's get to, let's see, who is that? Casey from South Carolina. Casey, welcome. You're on the air.
Hello, Matt. I just had a question about the Tree of Life English Bible version. I was wondering if you'd heard of it and what you thought of it. It's a Bible version called the Tree of Life Bible version?
From what I understand and read about, it's from a Jewish perspective. Hmm. That would be interesting. Tree of Life version. Oh, let's see. TLV.
Wow, I never heard of it before. Okay. Well, I'm looking, though, you know? Read the Bible.
Let's see. Because what I want to do is see if I can find it and then find some scriptures. My research is from a Messianic Jewish perspective, or at least the translators are. Well, it could be good, you know?
I mean, a lot of stuff from the Jewish perspective, when really looked at, really is helpful. So I'm not saying it's good or bad. I'm just saying I don't know. But let's see.
TLV. Let's see, I'm looking at another source. I don't see it.
I don't see it there. So I don't know. I don't know. First, I've heard of it. So now you've got me curious.
Yeah, I heard of it from Dr. Brown, Michael Brown, I believe his name is. Okay. I was just curious. I was looking at it. It's different.
I mean, it's not that different. Okay. Okay, I found it. The Jewish perspective, where I guess it's more focused on you. Well, what I'm doing, I found it online, so now I'm looking at a particular verse. Yeah, okay, Romans 5, 18 is not bad. Let's see what they do with Colossians 2, 14. These are doctrinally rich verses that sometimes translations weaken because they don't like what they actually teach.
He wiped out the handwritten record of debts with the decrees against those who took it out of the way. But now it's not bad, not bad. Yeah, it seems okay, you know, so far. I'm just going through and doing some analysis. I'm looking at John 1, 1 and verse 14. Oh, I like that, tabernacled among us.
Let's see what it says about John 8, 58. Let's see. Come on. There we go. Come on. I'm clicking. There we go. Okay.
John, okay, I've never learned how to use this thing right. There we go, John 8. There we go.
Let me see, 24 first. It says, therefore I told you, you will die in your sins, for lest you believe that I am, you will die in your sins. Very good. And 58, Yeshua answered, Amen. Amen. I tell you, before Abraham was, I am.
Now they put Yeshua in there. Now, I have a problem with stuff like that. But hold on a sec. Because I believe in staying close to the text as possible.
Now, they do have an italics. So, I get what they're doing. So, I get it. Now, what I'm going to do now is, let's see. There's another verse I was going to look at.
Oh, yeah, I know what it is. 1 Kings 8, 60. Let's see. Let's see.
Let's see. Because it says, Yahweh is Elohim in 1 Kings 8, 60. Lots of verses like that. And it says, Adonai, he is God. There is no other.
And that's a problem. 1 Kings 8, 60. Yeah, actually Yahweh is Elohim. And they have it, Adonai. And they're probably doing that because it's the name of God.
The tetragrammaton. And then they use Adonai instead of Yahweh. And for that, I wouldn't use the Bible. Just for that alone. I understand what they're doing.
I understand why they're doing it. But it causes problems. Because what's happening is when you go to, for example, Exodus 6. Let's see, Exodus 6. And it says, 2 and 3. God spoke further to Moses and said to him, I am Adonai.
That's not what he said. He said, I am Yahweh in the Hebrew. So they've taken that principle of not misusing the name of God. And they've substituted Adonai for Yahweh. Or, you know, Yod-Heh-Vad-Heh, the tetragrammaton. And so if you don't know that when you're reading this, you'll be confused.
You won't get it. So you're saying they're mixing Yahweh and Adonai? Yes. Let me explain it a little bit better.
Better sticking with the... Okay. Right. So Ten Commandments say don't misuse the Lord's name. Don't take his name in vain. Yahweh. Yod-Heh-Vad-Heh in Hebrew.
The four letters which designate the I-M. So Yod-Heh-Vad-Heh. So we kind of transliterate it as saying Yahweh. It's one of the acceptable ways of pronouncing it.
We don't know what it really is. We don't know how it's really pronounced. But Yahweh or Jehovah. Jehovah is really an Englishized version.
But Yahweh is really kind of acceptable. Well, you could also say the Tetragrammaton. You could say Yod-Heh-Vad-Heh or Y-H-W-H. You could use those letters. We transliterate those letters from Hebrew. There's four letters into English. Y-H-W-H. Or Yod-Heh-Vad-Heh is the Hebrew letters. And they're called the Tetragrammaton. The four letters that comprise God's name.
All right. So the Jews would never want to misuse or mispronounce God's name. So they substituted Yod-Heh-Vad-Heh, Yahweh, for Adonai.
They substituted it. And it's just out of an issue of respect. And for never wanting to accidentally take the Lord's name in vain.
That's why they do it. I admire that. But what it means now is the text doesn't reflect the original. So if I'm talking to... Yahweh. Is that synonymous with I am? Mm-hmm. Yep. Okay. Okay. So, you know, for example...
Okay, I just want to... Yah. For 1 Kings 8, see, this kind of stuff is really important. And as an apologist, it's important to know. And for the Lord and it's Yod-Heh-Vad-Heh, it's 3068 in the Strong's Concordance. And it occurs an awful lot of times in the Bible.
And it's the name of God. So they've changed it. So for that right there, I wouldn't use it just because of that.
Because then you'd have a lot more explaining to do. And, you know, I just don't need that. Okay. Yeah.
For me as an apologist. All right. I appreciate it. Okay. What's your kind of go-to version in English? I use the NASB 95 is the version I've found to be the most consistent with the Greek New Testament. And that's what I've been using.
Okay. That's what I'll probably always use. And it's very good, very literal. And because of the NASB, because of that version specifically, when I was younger. Yes, the 95.
95, yep. I was reading it and I came to Romans 518. And I could get into it quite a bit.
I actually taught it last night here at the house for about a half hour. I really opened up the verse and what it says. But the long story short is if I'd have read it and most any other Bible, I would never have seen the issue that was there. I would never have dug down deep.
I would never have learned what I did. The NASB. Did you say that was 1019? Romans 518. Okay.
Yeah. Which says in the Greek, literally in the Greek, through one transgression, condemnation to all men. So also through an act of righteousness, justification of life to all men.
There are two sentences joined by conjunction. But there's no verb. And what it literally, literally says is as through one transgression into condemnation to all men. So also through an act of righteousness into justification of life to all men.
It doesn't have verbs. Well, sentence A governs sentence B because sentence B says in like manner. So whatever verb you put in sentence A, you're going to put down in sentence B. Theologically, sentence A through one transgression, there resulted condemnation to all men. That's consistent with the very next verse of Romans 519. And also 1 Corinthians 15, 22, which I can get into, but I won't here.
And so then you take the verb, there resulted, you put it down in sentence B. And it says there resulted justification of life to all men. But that can't be because all means everyone be saved and people go to hell. So what the translators have done of other Bibles is they've let sentence B govern sentence A.
And then they say it led to or the free gift came and they add and they modify it. But what they don't realize is by letting it stand for what it actually says, you then learn that Paul the apostle himself uses words in a different way. He uses the word all, for example, in that verse and in 1 Corinthians 15, 22, in the same sentence he uses the word all in two different ways. Just like in Romans 5, 19, he uses the phrase the many in two distinct different ways.
And you would never have picked up on this if you weren't looking at a version that was literal to the Greek. And it's important. It's important.
And there's theology behind it. Sure. Okay? All right. Okay. Thank you.
All right, Casey, God bless. Hey, folks, you want to give me a call? All you got to do is dial 877-207-2276 for the last segment of the hour on this Friday. We've got nobody waiting.
So why don't you give me a call? We'll be right back. Please stay tuned. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276.
Here's Matt Slick. All right. Hey, everybody, welcome back to the show. You know, I was just thinking, I introduced an interesting topic nobody's calling right now. So I'm thinking what I'm going to do is teach on the topic I just raised.
And I've done this every now and then before. And so hopefully, hopefully you'll enjoy this. I'm going to teach you biblical theology right out of the scriptures.
I'm going to start with the idea of what's called federal headship. I hope you guys have heard this stuff before. I hope your pastors and your elders have taught you stuff like this.
If they haven't, ouch. So here we go. Federal headship is the teaching that the male represents descendants, not the female. Adam and Eve were in the garden, and she sinned first. She gave the fruit to Adam. He then ate. But sin entered the world through Adam, Romans 5-12, not through Eve. Furthermore, when they were hiding in the garden, the pre-incarnate Christ came and said to the man, where are you? He didn't address the woman at first.
Where are you? Because he's the one who's responsible. Now I could go into Acts 7 through 10 where it says, Levi paid tithes to Melchizedek while in the loins of his father Abraham. So Abraham paid tithes directly to Melchizedek, the king of Salem. And Abraham had children, children, children, children, all the way down, generations down. And Levi was then born.
Generations way down there. And so the writer of Hebrews says, And Levi paid tithes to Melchizedek while in the loins of his father Abraham. So Abraham represented him. Now this is important stuff because it's called federal headship. I'm going to teach you something.
Watch this. So 1 Corinthians 15-22, I've mentioned this verse before. For as in Adam, that's a term of federal headship, as in Adam, all die. That means Adam represented all people.
So also in Christ there's another term of federal headship. All will be made alive. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.
Well, wait a minute. The only ones who are made alive are the Christians. Because it's not talking about just some generic resurrection. We're alive in Christ. Now, this is interesting because in 1 Corinthians 15-22, Paul says, For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive. So when he says for as in Adam all die, that's the all who are in Adam. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. In other words, that all is referencing those who are in Christ. Now that's interesting because he's the representative.
Now watch this. Go to Ephesians 1-4. Just as he, that's the father, chose us, that's the elect, in him.
There's federal headship again. That's Jesus. The father chose us and him in Christ before the foundation of the world. This means that the electing of God for the people who are going to be in Christ so that they can be predestined to adoption.
Because that's what the verse says. Just as he chose us and him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before him. In love, he predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to himself according to the kind intention of his will. So it's talking about the father who chose us in Christ and he predestined us through Jesus Christ. So you see, because Jesus, he wasn't even existing then, but what Paul's talking about here is that Jesus had an existence beforehand with the father and that the father chose us in Christ.
That means Christ, Jesus, is the federal head, the representative of those who are in him. Remember, 1 Corinthians 15, 22. In Christ, all should be made alive. Now, I'm going to do is go to Romans 6.
6. Knowing this, that our old self was crucified with him. Well, wait a minute. When was our old self crucified? When was it crucified?
It says with, with him. Well, some like to say my old self was crucified when I got baptized. My old self was crucified when I believed.
But that's not what the text says. Knowing this, that our old self was crucified with him. When was he crucified?
2,000 years ago. So we were crucified with him. Well, wait a minute.
That can't be the case. We didn't even exist. How could we be crucified with him? Well, what's Paul saying? Your old self was crucified with him. This is a now and a not yet issue. For Christ, everything was now. But we were not yet 2,000 years ago when he was on the cross. That was his now.
But for us, it's not yet. Yet, 1 Peter 2, 24 says he bore our sin in his body on the cross. That means all sin, past, present, and future of all the people that are in Christ were imputed to Christ. This is why it says in Romans 6, 6 that our old self was crucified with him in order that our body of sin might be done away with.
So that we would no longer be slaves to sin. For he who has died is freed from sin. Now, if we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him.
Now, here's more of what's called the now and the not yet. We've died with Christ. When did Christ die 2,000 years ago? Some people say, no, we die when we get baptized, when we believe.
Nope. Because Jesus represented us. We died with him. Because he's the federal head, just as Ephesians 1, 4 says he chose us in him. That means we were chosen, we were elected before the foundation of the world by the Father in Christ. Why is it in Christ? Because you can't have election that's being chosen for God's holy work and purpose. You can't have that without the redemptive work of Christ. Because he can't elect people to be saved if there is no redemptive work of salvation. That's why it says he chose us in him before the foundation of the world. He could not elect without the redemptive work and redemptive work is useless without the election.
They go together. This is theology, folks. Love theology. So now when we go back to 1 Corinthians 15, 22, we get a better clue. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.
Ooh. Now it makes more sense. The all who are in Christ are the ones who died with him or were crucified with him or were chosen in him before the foundation of the world.
Right? Now, who's that all? The all is different in the first all. As in Adam all die, that's Adam sin, everybody died. In Christ, his redemptive work, the all, those all who are in Christ will be made alive. Now we go to Romans 5, 18. As through one transgression, that's Adam sin, in Adam all die. Through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men.
No problem. Even so, through one act of righteousness, that's Jesus' sacrifice, there resulted justification of life to all men. That's what it actually says in the Greek.
Okay? And so the justification means you're saved, but that second all is in reference to those who are in Christ. See, here's one of the points I can make from this.
You've got to understand something. That in Christ, from the foundation of the world, you were chosen by the Father, and the Father gave them to the Son. This is why Jesus says in John 6, 37, he says this, All that the Father gives me will come to me, and the one who comes to me I certainly will not cast out. It does not say all who come to me the Father will then give to me.
Nope. It says all that the Father gives me will come to me. That's what it says. And this is the will of him who sent me, that all that he's given me, I lose nothing.
Why? Because God the Father elected them from the foundation of the world in Jesus in redemptive work, and he gave them to the Son in the incarnation for safekeeping so that Jesus would not lose them, because he's going to redeem the ones given to him by the Father through election. This is biblical theology, ladies and gentlemen. This is the kind of stuff we need to hear. This is the kind of stuff that if you believe, you will be far less ready and susceptible to deception. When someone comes along and says, It's all up to you and your free will, and God can tell me what is going on, and your feelings, and blah, blah, blah.
I can go into it. And this is a problem. They don't teach biblical theology like this.
Why? Because they don't study the Bible well enough. They don't study it deeply. And they submit it to their own understanding. That happens across the board in Christian churches. Not all of them. There's a lot of good pastors out there.
I'm just saying there are certainly some that are not teaching good biblical theology. Okay, I just wanted to get through some of that stuff for you. I hope that was interesting. Ariel from Utah, welcome. You're on the air. Hi.
Hi. I have a question just regarding Genesis 50. Okay. Because it's my understanding that the church of the latter days of Jesus Christ, I probably said that wrong, that Joseph Smith kind of added to that Genesis 50 where it prophesied about him. And so I was wondering, is that something, without his translation, is that found in any of the other versions of the Bible?
And if it's not, should it have been? Well, let's see. I'm trying to look up what the verse is. I think it's in verse 24, Genesis 50, looking.
JST, the stuff. And I haven't done a comparison verse by verse, so I can't tell you the thought in my head. So without it, then it doesn't talk about Joseph Smith at all or Moses and Aaron.
Right. And so are you saying that because the word Joseph occurs in Genesis, that it somehow is referencing or the Mormons or Joseph Smith said it's referencing himself in typology, in the Old Testament, so he altered it? No, I'm just wondering, well, if Joseph of Egypt made a prophecy and proclaimed Moses and Aaron and all that they would do and then expounded on that more and talked more into now our day and what happened to Vincent Joseph and what he might do, I just wondered if from the Joseph Smith translation that's added in there, but without Joseph Smith, then we don't learn about Moses or Aaron either. So I guess my question is... Joseph Smith was a false prophet. He was not a true prophet of God. Absolutely, he was false.
You know that, right? What I'm wondering is, is there any other place or any other translation of the Bible that has that expounded version of Genesis 50 where it talks about Moses and Aaron? No, it doesn't. In fact, in Genesis 50, it ends in verse 26. And you see in the JST, the Joseph Smith translation, it goes up to verse 38. So he added a bunch of stuff in there.
And then if you read through it, it's very interesting because I'm scanning through it right here. Thus, the Lord God of the fathers, unto me a choice seer will rise up in the fruit of his loins. And he's putting stuff in the Bible, it looks like, about himself.
And that's what I'm going to suspect and may be wrong about that. And the Lord sware to Joseph that he would preserve his seed forever and stuff. Therefore, Joseph said to his brethren, God will surely visit you. Joseph confirmed many things to his brethren. So Joseph died.
Okay, so I'd have to read through that and do a comparison. But Joseph Smith violated the word of God. He altered it. And he altered it severely. Based on, based on, is that based on, let's see. No Hebrew Bible says what Joseph Smith says.
There's no evidence at all, historically, biblically at all, that what Joseph Smith added has anything to do with truth. Not at all. There's nothing there. Okay? We're out of time. Call back Monday, okay? Sorry about that, Ariel. Thank you. All right.
Hey, folks. I hope you have a great weekend. May the Lord bless you. And by his grace, back on there tomorrow. Well, on Monday. Have a good weekend. Another program powered by the Truth Network.
Whisper: medium.en / 2023-03-16 19:27:54 / 2023-03-16 19:47:02 / 19