The following program is recorded content created by the Truth Network Live.
Info at CARM, C-A-R-M dot O-R-G. All of these are your chosen and your chosen. So, I can go on and on, but I don't have any confidence in them. Now, every now and then I talk about this, and I'm going to go back to Genesis 3. I'm going to talk about something here because I've been thinking about the issue of the nature of truth. Now, this is what it says.
It says, Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made, and said to the woman, Indeed has God said, You shall not eat from the tree of the garden. All right. Now, since God knows everything from forever ago, whatever he says is always true. Whatever quality he possesses, he does not possess its opposite. So, if he has existence, he cannot also possess non-existence. So, he is good and he's true and holy. We know that.
All right. So, when he speaks, it's always true because he cannot possess the quality of non-truth. This is the nature of God. So, I've been thinking about this.
It's really simple. For me, it's kind of a new light on a same truth kind of a thing as you see from a different angle. And when Satan said, has God said, the first thing he was doing was doubting the word of God.
Now, I've talked about this before. But I'm thinking about this stuff in society and the issue of the lack of truth. And when you don't have truth, then you don't have absolutes. We don't have absolutes. Morals are up for grabs because truth and morality are related. If there's no God that is the ultimate foundation of all truth, then we will step in and make ourselves the ultimate standard, our own opinions.
There is no universal outside of ourselves. And this is what I'm seeing in society. What I'm seeing in society is the fruit of the phrase, has God really said.
Did God really say it? In other words, I'm seeing the fruit of doubt, the fruit of there are no truth absolutes. And I'm seeing it in walking into stores and people looting because there is no God and no consequence. Or embezzling or insurance fraud because there is no God, there is no consequence.
And if you say it's wrong to do it, it's meaningless to people. Because without truth being anchored in the universal being who is God, then you can't justify really anything. Everything exists in what's called a causal chain. And every fact that exists, exists in a context.
So the fact that I'm talking to you, the context is I'm sitting in my chair in my office, headset on, radio is working, you're listening in your car at home, wherever it is. So every fact has a context. And no fact is independent of all other facts.
And so all facts that come into existence were caused to come into existence. And this means that everything and all truths exist in a causal chain, except of course God, he is the author of all truth. And so without the coherence of truth that is resting in the mind of God, then you can't justify truth absolutes and moral absolutes. When that's the case, then robbing, theft, extortion, sexual immorality, taking bribes in government, not following the laws, all of that is consistent with the idea that truth is not absolute and morals are not absolute.
Because if truth is absolute and morals are absolute, people are more inclined to follow them. But also, if there is universal truth, then it implies a universal mind, of course the Trinitarian God. Because if there's truth that is always wrong to murder, for example, it's always wrong everywhere all the time to murder, then what makes it true? Well, if I say it's true, it doesn't mean it has universal value. And if you say it's true, it doesn't mean it has universal value based on what you've said. You might recognize a universal value, but you can't declare it and create it. To recognize a universal value is interesting because a moral is an abstract idea.
It occurs in the heart, it occurs in the mind, it doesn't occur under rocks and not behind trees. And so, if there is universal truth that's related to universal morals, that implies universal truth systems. And when we think about this, what it means is that there has to be a God behind us. Now, I can get into the one and the many and universals and particulars and really, you know, I can get more philosophy and stuff like this based on Christian theological perspectives.
I don't know if I'll do that or not, but we'll see. And if we understand that God, the author of truth, and the basis of moral absolutes, if we're to think a little bit further along the line, if God is holy and not not holy, if he is good and also not the case that he's evil, because whatever he possesses as an attribute, he cannot also possess its opposite as part of his nature. The proof of that is, for example, God's nature is to exist.
Well, we can't say he both has the ability to exist and not exist, it's not sequitur. So, as I'm thinking about this and the necessity of God punishing, people say, well, why did he punish? Because if God is good and someone does something which is against him and his nature, then if he does not deal with the one who has done what is bad, then he is allowing the evil to be free. And it stands in contrast to the nature of God. And if God approves of evil by not dealing with it, then he is contradicting himself, because his nature is pure and holy, therefore he must punish the unbeliever, because to not do so would be to not be just and holy in regards to that which is wrong. So this is why God also, in the nature of truth, must be the one who is also the judge, because judgment is based on absolute truth and absolute morals. And people who don't believe in absolute truth and God will do whatever is right in their own eyes.
This is what I've been seeing, and philosophically this is what I've been saying, and practically it works out in exactly what we're seeing in our country today. This is ultimately a spiritual issue, because truth is related to morality, and both truth and morality ultimately come from God, and whatever God does is holy, so therefore all truth statements have moral value, even 2 plus 2 equals 4. We ought to believe 2 plus 2 equals 4, because ultimately it's grounded in the mind of God. And since God is pure and perfect, we ought to believe what is true and becomes a moral issue, because to deny it would be to deny God's truth, and that would be sinful. So we have the obligation to believe and trust in the true and living God, and what's interesting is Jesus Christ is that truth in person, in flesh. Now here's a verse I haven't quoted in a long time, it's John 1.17. For the law was given through Moses, grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ.
And so he is the revelation of the true and living God, and this is why he said in John 14.6, by the way, the truth and the life. So ultimately, without God, without the truth of who God is, societies will crumble. They will crumble, because lawlessness becomes norm. Abortion, homosexuality, socialism, communism, oppression, lying, bribes become the norm.
And societies can't survive that way. Hey, we'll be right back after these messages. We have four open lines, 8772072276. We'll be right back. Hey everybody, welcome back to the show. If you want to give me a call, all you've got to do is dial 8772072276. Let's get to Clement from Utah. Hey Clement, welcome. You're on the air. Yes, I'm here, Max. Yes.
I'm a Western and East person from Trinidad and Tobago. Oh, cool. Okay. I have a study with some guys, and they bring some documents about the chair and the wheat.
About what? The chair and the wheat. I don't understand what you're saying. Sorry.
Say it again. Okay. Okay, wheat and chair.
Oh, the wheat and the tares. Okay, gotcha. Okay. Now, as you know, you always say that you have a good argument about those who were taken. Or the wicked ones. Yes, the wicked ones. In all discussions, you are not wrong in the sense that those who were judged will be taken.
Right. The two men in the field were taken. That's the wicked who were taken, yes. And the one I was speaking on, and then while I was reading it, what came to my mind, or maybe it would have been my right mind, John Ten. John Ten, yeah.
Nobody was in fact out. It's hard to understand you. Just to let you know, it's hard to understand you, because connections are not that good, and it breaks up a lot.
So I'm just training to follow you, but keep going. John Ten, twenty. John Ten, twenty. Okay. Twenty-eight.
Twenty-eight. I'll give eternal life to them, and they'll never perish. No one will snatch them out of my hand. Okay. So I'm saying they can be taken, they can be taken.
But my friends are bringing the message above it. In the rapture, those who will be taken up with the Lord in the clouds will be first, and all the rest last will be judged. And it's a contrast. I'm reading that too, but I want you to know if you could explain that contrast for me.
Sure. I think I understand what you're saying. So, the wheat and the tares, in Matthew 24, Luke 17, as it was the days of Noah's social, the days of the coming of the Son of Man, they were eating, they were drinking, given marriage.
Two men will be in the field when it's taken. That's the wicked who were taken. That's clear if you read the context, and most people just don't get it, because they don't read the context, but that's what it is. And in Matthew 13, Jesus talks about the wheat and the tares, and he says, first gather the tares. This is the time of the harvest. The first ones gathered are the wicked, and they're taken to a place of judgment and destruction. That's not the rapture. The rapture is when the Christians are taken. And so, we can have the wicked removed out of the kingdom of God, as Jesus says in Mark, in Matthew 13, 40 through 42. He talks about this, and then the rapture can occur, which is us being taken up into heaven, where the resurrected good are glorified first. So there's no problem, okay? So the wicked is not the rapture. No.
Well, yes, yes and no. When the tares are taken, that's not a rapture, but when the wheat are taken, that's the rapture. And what's really odd is that the majority of people in America, and probably what you're being taught, too, by whoever, teaches that there's going to be a pre-tribulation rapture, and then later, and a thousand years later, the wicked are judged. Except that Jesus says that when there's two men in the field, one is taken, one is left. That's the wicked, and they're taken to a place of judgment. And so, when Jesus says that the wicked are to be gathered first and bundled in order to be burned, Jesus says that they are taken out of his kingdom.
That's what he says. For the Son of Man will send the angels that will gather out of his kingdom the stumbling blocks. And that's in the context of the tares.
This must mean, then, that the kingdom of God is existing for the tares to be in it. Now, some people say, well, that's the pre-tribulation rapture, or the millennium, at the end of the millennium. But that can't work, because it says the first ones are gathered and such are done at the end of the age, and there's only two ages, this age and the age to come.
So that's why that doesn't work, because it doesn't fit the timeline. I don't know if that helps. I don't know if the people in Trinidad are teaching you right or wrong. I know there's cults out there. I don't know if it's good what you're being taught.
I don't know. I'm not saying that they're teaching you. I'm saying that I have a little Bible study going on with some brothers, and we decided on who was taken first, or who and who were taken, like in the theory we understand that that is wicked, but the other part of the Bible is talking about who was taken first was actually protected by God. It's hard to understand you.
Sorry. The who were taken by God? In other parts of other parts where when Jesus is coming in the crowd, the dead in Christ are right, those who are alive will rise. Yes, 1 Thessalonians.
Which one is the back one? I'm not sure, because it's hard to understand you, but it doesn't say that God takes them. It may be the case that God takes them, but the implication is now that you've said that and I'm thinking about it, I'm like, wait a minute, it looks like it's the angels who are doing something. But I don't know, I've got to study that, because in Matthew 13, 30, allow both to go together till the harvest, at the time of the harvest, I'll say to the reapers, first gather the tares. Then when you go to verse 40, the tares are gathered up and burned with fire, souls should be at the end of the age. The Son of Man will send forth his angels and they will gather out of his kingdom all stumbling blocks. Okay, so the wicked are gathered by the angels, we know that. And then it says, then the righteous shall shine forth as the sun. I just thought of something, because of what you said, a thought I've never had before. Seriously, could it be, I'm just asking the question, could it be that when it says the Son of Man, that's Jesus, will send forth his angels, they will gather out of the kingdom the stumbling blocks, so the wicked are the ones who are taken, could it be that the angels sent by Christ are taking the wicked, and could it be then that God is the one who does his work in the resurrection of the good?
I don't know, I'm just asking the question. Because it doesn't say that God does it, that I'm looking so far in these verses, because it does say the Lord will descend from heaven with a shout, the voice of the angel, the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. It doesn't say who causes them to be risen. It's going to be God. And then when he who are alive remain shall be caught up together. It doesn't say who's doing the catching up. Since we know from Matthew 13, the angels are taking the wicked, and they're taking it to a place of judgment.
I don't know if it's a rapture kind of a thing, or if it's an engineered gathering to like Armageddon or something like that. Look, God has good questions on there. I'm going to have to see if I can figure it out. Anyway. Yeah. Well, we've got a break. We've got a break. Can you hold on?
We've got a break, brother. Hold on. Okay, Clement. Okay. Hey, folks, we'll be right back after these messages.
We have three open lines. 877-207227. We'll be right back. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276.
Here's Matt Slick. Hey, everybody. Welcome back to the show.
Bottom of the hour. Let's get back on with Clement. See if we can understand him any better. Clement, are you still there? Hello? Maybe we lost him. Okay.
Well, let's just move on then to, let's see. That's Paul. I guess that's Paul from Virginia. Hey, Paul.
Welcome. You are on the air. Hey.
Hello there. It's been many weeks since I've spoken with you. Okay. My question is around some of the things that you were speaking about at the top of your show today. And one of my first questions, well, I have a question around a term called demo side.
But then I was wondering, how is it that the Chinese can have police stations in United States cities? Oh, that's easy. You have the left allow it.
That's it. The left has allowed it. I'll be here in Idaho 10, 12, 15 years ago. I heard from many people that they'd recently stopped a movement from our stupid government to sell 50 square miles to the Chinese communist country. And it would be sovereign Chinese territory.
People here said, no, that's not happening. They have been buying facilities within 10 miles of military bases. So why would our government allow this?
As far as I'm concerned, it's because they're in cahoots with evil and they want our country to be reshaped for the great reset and the new world order. Yes. And so I guess in that way, it makes sense to me. I still want to ask about the demo side. But first, with you being a millennialist, if I'm saying that correctly, you do not believe in pre-trip at this point. I've heard so many different things. I'm not sure what I believe other than I accepted Christ when I was nine years old. But the fact that you don't believe in pre-trip rapture, are we already in?
In other words, was COVID possibly the first of one of the bowls or trumpets or seals? Are we already in the tribulation? I don't know.
I don't think so. I do believe there's going to be tribulation. I just believe that we're going to go through it. That's it. We're after it out afterwards. Hope I'm wrong. So the Temple of Jerusalem needs to be rebuilt.
I get word every now and then from people saying yes. They're training the priests. They already have the ashes of the red heifer.
The building is being constructed and being ready to be transported in place and erected quickly. So when that happens, then start looking towards the heavens for the sign to the heavens, as it says metaphorically and literally. What's going to happen, I don't know. But I wouldn't say we're in the tribulation yet. It's going to get bad. The tribulation period is bad. It's going to be bad. Well, let's put it this way.
The standard view is it's good for the first half, then bad the second half. But I believe it's going to be bad all the way around because the good that is spoken about, there's peace, is at the sacrifice of truth. And we Christians stand up for truth. And if you can't buy or sell without a mark or a card or a tattoo or whatever it is that's going to be that symbolizes the mark of the beast, then those who don't submit will be moved away and put in camps.
And then you'd have peace in your society. So this is all possible like this. Yes. And if you recall, I had mentioned to you back in late 21 and into 22, a book called COVID-19 and the Global Predators, We Are the Prey. It is at wearetheprey.com or Amazon. I have no connection to the book.
I would just like people to know about it. But with that said, going back to the question on democide, my understanding of democide is murder by the government. And I was almost when I took, unfortunately, I believe to be what I consider to be propaganda and fear campaigns, which are ongoing, but were more broad around when all of this COVID started up. And so I wish I knew then what I know now. And my actions would have been different, but I feel like my government has totally lied to me and tried to murder me because the third shot nearly killed me and I started doing more research. Yes.
And there is a website called realnotrare.com. Well, hold on. Let's talk about the shot thing, because I don't believe that my opinion is the government is now there to kill people. I think they actually wanted to help people, but the COVID shot is part of the control. It's called control markers. Cults and mind control groups have things that I call control markers. They are things they look for. Like in Mormonism, you dress a certain way, you talk a certain way. In Jehovah's Witnesses, the same kind of a thing. And I could recognize them because I've studied them for so long.
But you can have them in governments and societies as well, control markers. I was talking to somebody today, as a matter of fact, who said that he was speaking to a woman who said, if I get the third COVID shot and I die because of it, at least I know I've done the right thing. And it was just a stunning moment of stupidity for this guy.
He saw it and he goes, that's dumb. But people have that kind of mentality. They are so brainwashed to think that the government is automatically right, that they submit to it. Those are the kinds of people who are ripe for the Antichrist. So is the government seeking to kill us on purpose, all of us?
Well, of course not. But have there been intentions? Like Waco, if you're familiar with, remember Waco?
I remember when it was happening live. I was yelling at the TV because I knew exactly what not to do and the feds were doing exactly what not to do in order to cause a problem. And they fomented that problem. They caused that problem. They could have had everybody be fine if all they had to do was deescalate, but they pushed and they did exactly what this cult prophesied would happen, that they'd be attacked and be persecuted. Well, if that's what they think and you know that because that's what the feds knew, all you've got to do is just back off. That's it.
And then the prophecy can't come true. So it's real easy, but the feds know what they're doing in a lot of ways, and I think they're testing the ground. Yes, I'm more speaking of maybe not the exact term democide, but according to that book that I referenced, this was indeed carried out over a number of years with the gain of function, and they already had the shot, so they needed a virus. And the virus had never been isolated. Well, see, I don't know if that's the case.
I've never heard that. I've done research on it and other things, written a lot of articles on COVID and masks and things like that, just did research. And so I don't know if that's true.
But I would suggest that you send me that information because I like to verify things, and that's what I want to do, is verify stuff. Yes, well, when we spoke many months ago, you had said you had bought the book, but you hadn't had a chance to read the book. Right. Yes, that's correct. I have over 550 books on COVID on Kindle, and 500 of you I have here. Oh, excuse me, 607. Oh, okay.
Yeah. So I've got stuff here on endogenous retroviruses. I've got stuff on ancient aliens. I just love alien stuff. I just read stuff like that for fun.
And I don't go through that very much. I'm reading through some of the ventilian stuff, and Hebrew Insights on Revelation was interesting, and some stuff on genetic tracing. I'm reading that. I've read books on quantum physics. So I have a variety of information I like to read, because I'm weird.
I like to study stuff like that. So are you saying then, just as I'll let you go, you need to move on probably, but did I understand you correctly to say that the temple has to be rebuilt before the, quote, tribulation period can start? That's one of the views. My overview is that it can be rebuilt during the tribulation period, sometimes at the mid part of the tribulation, and that's what would trigger some other stuff.
So there's views. And what I hold to is I think that it's possible that the building of the temple will be one of the major signs of the beginning of the tribulation, but it could also be that it could be built in the middle of the tribulation period. I've heard different things. I've not really studied it all that much. What I have studied a lot is this age and age to come, and the wicked being taken, which I am so surprised how so many Bible teachers get that wrong.
We were told that the thing that you're referring to, one will be taken, we were repeatedly taught that all the way through back when I was a child in the sixties and seventies, we were always taught that. I know. And when you read it, it's not it. Just amazing. Anyway, there's a break.
I think I'll talk about that after the break. All right, buddy. God bless. All right, folks. Five open lines, 8772072276. We'll be right back after these messages. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 8772072276. Here's Matt Slick. When that music gets going. There we go. I want to read. A lot of people when I just heard me say that the ones who were taken are the wicked.
Two men in the field. One is taken. One is wicked.
One is taken. Those are the wicked. They're like, no, that can't be the case. Yes, it is. I'm going to prove it. Okay. So I'm going to do is just read what Jesus said. Just going to read it.
Okay. And this is Luke 17 26. And just as it happened in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the son of man. They were eating. They were drinking. They were marrying. They were being given in marriage until the day that no entered the arc and the flood came and destroyed them all. So who are the ones who are destroyed? The ones who are eating and drinking and being given in marriage. That's that's who's destroyed.
Okay. That's what the Bible says right there. So when we go to Matthew 20, maybe 24 36 and 37. Jesus says for the coming of the son of man will be just like the days of Noah for in those days before the flood, they were eating and they were in drinking. So this is the wicked. They were eating, they were drinking, marrying and giving in marriage till the day that no entered the arc.
And they did not understand till the flood came and took them all away. And so will the coming of the son of man be, there'll be two men in the field. One will be taken. One is left. That's the wicked. Now people go, no, can't be.
Well, let's go back to Luke 17, right? They were eating. They were drinking. They were marrying.
They were being given in marriage until the day that Noah entered the arc and the flood came and destroyed them all. That's who's taken. That's who's destroyed. And he goes on. He says it was the same as happened in the days of lot.
They were eating, they were drinking, they were buying, they were selling, they were planting, they were building. But on the day that lot went out from Sodom, it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all. See, that's the wicked.
It is the wicked. If you disagree, you can't read the Bible. You don't understand. It just, that's what it says.
Okay. And he says, you'll be just the same on the day that the son of man is revealed. Well, what will be the same? The wicked are destroyed. That's what he's going to say. On that day, the one who is on the housetop and the one whose goods are in the house must not go down to take them out. And likewise, the one who is in the field must not turn back.
Remember Lot's wife. Whoever seeks to keep his life will lose it. Whoever loses his life will preserve it. I tell you, on that night, there will be two men, there will be two in one bed. One will be taken and the other left. What's the context of who's taken? It's the wicked.
Now prove it by Jesus' own words here. Watch this. There will be two women grinding at the same place. One will be taken and the other will be left.
Two men will be in the field. One will be taken and the other will be left. And they answered, where? The disciples are out.
Okay, where are they taken? Now, if it's the good who are taken, they're going to be going to heaven. If it's the bad that's taken, then we get this. Where, Lord? And Jesus said to them, where the body is, there also the vultures will be gathered. So what the Bible is teaching, what Jesus is teaching, is that two men in the field, one is taken, one is left.
It's the wicked who are taken. Now I challenge anybody to get around that. I really do. I just can't see it. I have shown people this for years and years, and their eyebrows just shoot up, and they're like, man, I never saw that before.
I go, yeah, all you've got to do is read the context. Now here's a question, and I've asked this before over the radio and I've talked about this. Why is it that pastors still teach that that is the rapture? Now the rapture occurs, but this is not the rapture. Why would they mistakenly apply these scriptures to the rapture when they clearly are not about the rapture?
It's the wicked. If they can't get something that simple right, my question then becomes, well, what else are they just not studying and just repeating whatever they've been told? That's the concern I have. That's the concern I have. When I've taught this, and I've shown this to people in Bible studies, a lot of people, they just, what?
That's not what I've been taught. Let's read it. Go through and they'll say, now what do you think? And they go, oh, I never saw that before. I says, exactly. I said, so who has it taken?
And they just say, the wicked. I said, there you go. I said, why is it that so many pastors and elders can't even see this when all you can do is read it? Just read it. Just read the context. Just read it.
That's all you've got to do. And they don't. What is going on? Now, more and more people are realizing that this is the wicked that are taken in this context, okay? It used to be when I was first on the internet, you know, 25 years ago, 27 years ago, talking about this. No, it's always the preacher rapture verses. And I remember nobody ever said anything contrary to that. It was always the preacher rapture verses.
And now I get it regularly. People say, no, it's not the rapture. It's the wicked that were taken. Great. That's what happens a lot. People are waking up, and that's good. So there you go. That's something I think is interesting. And then when you tie it over to Matthew 13.
I know I'm shaking a lot of people up here. Matthew 13 is the weak and the terrors. It starts at verse 24. The kingdom of heaven could be compared to a man who sowed good seed in the field. And while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and they went away. And when the wheat sprouted and bore again, then the tares became evident also. The slaves of the landowner came and said to him, sir, did you not sow good seed in your field?
How then does it have tares? And he said to them, an enemy has done this. The slaves said to him, do you want us then to go and gather them up? And he said, no, for while you're gathering up the tares, you may uproot the wheat with them.
Allow both to grow together until the harvest. And in the time of the harvest, I will say to the reapers, first gather up the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them up, but gather the wheat into my barn. So the first ones who are gathered according to what Jesus taught, the first ones gathered, are the wicked.
That's what it says, okay? Now, when you just go down 10 verses later, verse 36, then he left the crowds and went to the house, and his disciples came to him and said, explain to us the parable of the tares of the field. And he said, the one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man. The field is the world, and as for the good seed, these are the sons of the kingdom, and the tares are the sons of the evil one.
And the enemy who sowed them is the devil. And the harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are angels. So just as the tares are gathered up and burned with fire, so shall it be at the end of the age. The Son of Man will send forth his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all stumbling blocks, and those who commit lawlessness, and will throw them into the furnace of fire in that place that will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Then the righteous shall shine forth as a son in the kingdom of their father.
He who has ears to hear, let him hear. Now, so we see what Jesus is saying. He's saying that the first ones gathered are the wicked, and they're gathered to be burned, and the angels gather them, and it happens at the end of the age, which is the harvest. In Matthew 24, Luke 17, the wicked, two men in the field, one is taken, one is left. That's the wicked. And when they ask where they're taken, to a place of judgment, where the body is, the vultures gather.
They're consistent with each other. Now, folks, the rapture occurs. Now, the question is when, mid-trib or post-trib? That's up for grabs. But those verses, two men in the field, one is taken, one is left, is not about the rapture.
It's about the wicked being taken. And that's what I want to point out. All right, now, we've got an e-mail in. I want to address the e-mail.
Let's see. It is from William. My question is, is Molinism middle-knowledge biblical?
What would be the problem with it? No, middle-knowledge is not biblical. Let me explain what it is, what Molinism... Well, middle-knowledge is what is based... What Molinism is based on is middle-knowledge. Middle-knowledge, there's natural, middle, and free knowledge. Natural knowledge, God knows all things that are possible and logically necessary. Free knowledge, God necessarily knows in totality all that actually exists.
Middle-knowledge is in between those, hence middle. God knows what any free-will choice would be of any person at any time in any circumstance. This means that God's knowledge pertaining to people is contingent on human free-will choices.
Another name for middle-knowledge is sentient media. And so what it's saying is that God knows what free-will creatures will do in different circumstances. Now, the problem with this is not that it's not true, because God does know, as he does say in Matthew 11, 1-24, What are you, Chorazin?
What are you, Bethsaida? If these works have been done in you, they would have repented. So he's saying it's called counterfactuals, something that is not actual and was not actual, but would have been different under different circumstances and Christ is certainly saying that. In 1 Corinthians 2, 8, none of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
So there's another verse and people say, Well, that supports middle-knowledge. There's a yes and a no to it, because God ordains whatever shall come to pass and there's discussions about how God knows because it seems to be only because he ordains any predestines, and yet we're still free. But the freedom cannot exist apart from God's sovereignty. Some people want to say that man's freedom is such that God knows what we're going to do because it's completely up to us, but that entails the idea that God is not sovereign, necessarily, over every aspect of our freedom, and that would be a problem. Furthermore, the idea then is that God's choices are based upon what he sees free will choices of individuals will be. So if they were going to move to the right and serve the left on a certain day, God then knows that and he makes decisions based on that.
But the problem here is huge. It now means then that God's choices are contingent upon man's and this denies the sovereignty of God. It denies that God ordains whichever shall come to pass according to the counsel of his will. Well, they might come back and say, Well, no, that's okay, because it's his will to know what they do and what they do, he then reacts to it.
Oh, there you go, reacts. So now we have God being reactionary based upon what free creatures will do. Furthermore, generally speaking in Molinism, God knows which people will freely choose God. And so he will then work on circumstances to bring them into faith because he knows under certain circumstances people will believe and other ones won't. And so what he's trying to do then, God is trying to do, is bring the most number of people possible to be saved. Except this works against Scripture, which says no one seeks for God, no one does any good. They cannot receive spiritual things.
So they cannot have any actuality of freely choosing Christ left up to their own libertarian free will because it's not possible, because the Scripture says so. So middle knowledge fails in that area as well. And this is why there's a lot of problems with middle knowledge. I didn't go on, but we're about out of time. So I just want to let you guys know about that. And I just want to say, Hey, you know, tomorrow will be on the air, same time, same place, and by God's grace. And I want to tell you that one of my joys in life is to make people think. I'm not saying I'm right about everything, but what I am saying is, look, check it out.
You can't trust a guy on the radio named Slick. You've got to trust what the Word of God says. But I want to stir the pot to cause you to study. And if you come to a conclusion that's different than me, by studying, praise God, maybe you're right.
Maybe I'm wrong. But the idea is study, to show yourself approved to God, handling accurately the word of truth. 2 Timothy 2, 15. May the Lord bless you, and by His grace, we'll be back on here tomorrow, and we'll talk to you then. God bless everybody.
Whisper: medium.en / 2023-02-21 01:09:11 / 2023-02-21 01:26:24 / 17