Matt Slick Live

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 KARM.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, everyone. Welcome to the show. It's me, Matt Slick.

You're listening to Matt Slick live. If you want, you give me a call, 877-207-2276. I want to hear from you.

Give me a call. All right. Now, for those of you who may be tuning in new, Christian Apologetics site, we do Bible questions. We talk about all kinds of stuff, and we get into some really heavy stuff, heavy discussions, some heavy, interesting stuff we get into, all kinds of theology. Last night, we had the third Thursday at my house.

So, third Thursday for us is once a month at my house. People just come over, and we have discussions. They ask questions. They say, what about this?

What about that? And we just talk because I've been there for so long that I can do impromptu discussions on a variety of topics. Well, last night, we got talking about covenants and the new covenant. And what I did was I shared with them some stuff I've been studying and have not figured out yet.

And this is on the issue of the new covenants. There's some stuff I'm working on, some stuff I'm trying to figure out. And, oh, excuse me, there's a yawn. Oh, my goodness, there's a good yawn.

That was good. Okay, you know, they're all yawning out there now, and I don't know where you'll land because of that. But, so I've been doing a lot of studying and off and on, and so I am learning.

And my view on the new covenant is slightly changing, slightly changing. I'm not so sure about a couple of things that I've been generally told and read all the time. And so I'm like, okay, well, what is this? You know, what does this say? What does this mean?

And stuff like that. I do that a lot, you know, and I'll just have questions, and I don't have to tote the party line. There's not a denomination I belong to or I'm not allowed to believe something, teach something, examine something that isn't in line with that denomination. So I'm allowed to just go and question things and ask stuff and go, you know what? I don't know about this.

Let me check this out. Because if I were a pastor saying some of the things that I've been studying for the pulpit, oh, if I was in a denomination, they'd probably say you can't do that. And that's what bothers me. It really bothers me. You know, they'll say you can't say this, you can't say these things.

Why not? You know, it's not like heresy, like not to deny the Trinity. It's like the new covenant, the ratification of it is in the blood of Christ.

And how then does baptism fit in as a covenant sign? To what aspect does it? And just questions, just questions. All right. Hey, look, if you want to give me a call, the number is 877-207-2276. Let's get to Sarah from Philadelphia. Sarah, welcome. You're on the air. Hi, Matt. Thank you for your ministry.

My husband and I have been tuning in recently. And I had a question that I was been thinking about. I was reading through the Old Testament specifically in 1 and 2 Samuel. And I see like David, you know, I read that, you know, David about his wives. And, you know, and I know Solomon had a ton of wives and concubines. And it just doesn't seem like the Lord is judging polygamy as harshly as he's judging other things that David is sinning.

And I know that there was, you know, a lot of issues with Bathsheba and with his family in the aftermath of that. But throughout his early life, you know, with having multiple wives, it just doesn't seem like the judgment has come up for that particular sin. Why did he allow it? So why did God allow polygamy? Well, why does he allow injustice? Why does he allow women pastors and elders when they're not supposed to be in power? Why does he allow certain things? Because he allows it.

Now why does, that's what he does, he chooses to allow things. Now polygamy, the ideal is that God made one man and one woman in there to be married. And men often in that time died sooner than women because they had harder lives. They would go to war, they would work out in the fields, they would risk their lives more where the women generally would stay in the home, but safer.

And so it's not making any excuses, it's just the condition. And so men's lives were not as long as women and as many as around a lot of times. Polygamy was one of the ways that women could be taken care of. So in that ancient culture, in a lot of cultures, women who were not attached to a man were fair game for a lot of bad guys. And if a woman was married, she was off limits.

Now that doesn't guarantee everything, but that's just one of the things. When there'd be battles between nations, the men are the ones who died. Now some women did, but it was the men who went to war, the men who died. And the men, they weren't alive in a lot of cultures after that, and so the women would be starving because they didn't have men to work the ground and do the cattle and things like that. So polygamy was kind of almost a necessary thing, in a sense, to keep women alive and to safeguard them. On the other hand, some guys would just have more women because, well, they're guys, and they like more women, and get my drift there.

And so there's some inequities all the way around. So God allows these men to, even their godly men, to have multiple wives, not because it's the direct will of God, but because he indirectly permits people to do those things, and in the circumstances in which bad things would happen and deleterious effects and ramifications, and so it was allowed to continue. But there were consequences to it, like King Solomon, some of his wives led him into idolatry, and that was a bad thing. And then with the lust of David's own eyes, with other wives and things like that, there was sin involved. So God allows it, even though he doesn't condone it. I hope that helps.

Yeah, it does help. It just feels like a really big deal, and I just don't feel like it being judged as a big deal. So I was just kind of pondering on that as I was reading. Well, think about this, too. Slavery was allowed in the Bible, and there were even rules on how to handle slaves. There's even kind of slaves in the Bible. Not like we had chattel slavery here in the United States in the 1800s.

It was totally different. So my wife just handed me a note. So God permitted slavery, and it wasn't God's choice, it's not how he wanted things, but what he does is he allows people their sins and the consequences of their sins, and God often works in the middle of it. So we know that slavery is not a good thing, and neither is polygamy, and yet Jesus didn't condemn outright either one of them. He talked about man should leave his father and mother and become clear to one woman.

So he was reiterating what was supposed to be. He talked about the freedom that we have in Christ, and that we're not to be slaves unless it's to God. So he addressed these things, but he didn't come in to destroy cultures, because you could have like, I think it was half or something like that of slaves in the Roman Empire, half their population was slaves. Well, if they were to set them all free, the economic system would collapse. I don't think it was good or bad here, just like it would collapse, and you have a lot more famine and problems. So he works within systems, God does this, and then he gradually improves those systems, because people are in them and people are real, and they make their choices. And so God lets us have what we want and the consequences of it as well, and yet works in and through them to bring about his glory, even while we don't do what we're supposed to be doing.

And we should have one wife and no slaves, things like that. Okay. There. Gotcha. Yeah. Sorry. No, that's really, really helpful, Matt, I appreciate you taking the time to answer my question. Well, sure.

It's a tough one. But it's just the way it is in the Bible, and it comes down to God gives us commands. We don't do what we're supposed to be doing, and he works with us. I mean, my own life is a good example of that.

I've got so many things I've done wrong, and yet God goes, okay, we'll work with you. You know? He does.

Same. Yeah. And he's good at that.

He is. So there you go. Okay. All right. Well, we'll continue to tune in, and we, again, thank you for your ministry, and God bless you. Can I ask you a couple questions really fast?

I'm just curious how long you've been listening on the radio, and how did you find us? Sure. My husband actually knew me before we were married, and I've heard of, is it Karm, your ministry page? Right.

Karm. Right. Uh-huh. We've been listening to some of the debates that you've done for my husband, and we downloaded your podcast on Apple, and we have you up on YouTube, and you've been listening in, and we decided that we were going to catch you live here so we could ask you some questions. Well, good. Well, good.

I always like to know how people find me, because I'm only on 15, or I don't know, plus or minus stations, and then people from all over the world will call in sometimes, and I get to ask them, you know, how did you find me? It's weird. So I just like to find out. That's all. Not a big deal.

It's kind of fun. Okay. How long have you been listening? Just curious. A couple weeks. Okay.

My husband since 2015, and me just a couple weeks. All right. Well, good. The longer you listen, the more I'm going to challenge you, because I don't hold to any denominational differences or any necessities. I'm Reformed in my theology and believe in the continuation of gifts, and most Reformed people don't, you know, and so it's just I don't fit.

I'm an odd key for a weird lock. You hold to Covenant theology? Absolutely. I'm definitely a hardcore covenantalist, yes, I am.

Okay. Do you? We were curious, because we know that you went to Westminster Theology, and you're Presbyterian, or Presbyterian pastor, and my husband is really studying covenantal now, and I'm, you know, from what I'm hearing from him, I'm studying too, so we're, you know, this is a new journey for us, and so I'm sure he'll have some covenantal related questions for you. Well, I'm studying it, and I have a lot more to learn, but I'm becoming, I'm getting convinced that covenantal theology is far more important than I've realized. It's as important as federal headship, for example, and things like this that are not as superessentials, but they're really important, and I'm starting to see it as being even more important, so yeah. Yeah, we agree, we agree too, it's super important theology to study, because once you have, once you're settled in that, you kind of see the scriptures through that lens, and it changes a lot for you.

Right. Well, I've been studying Jeremiah 31, which is the, we had nobody waiting, so it's rambled here a little bit, Fridays are often slow, and I'll do some hate mail, love mail stuff, but I've been going through Jeremiah 31 with the New Covenant, and God says something really interesting. He says three times in there, he says the days are coming, and there's three things with the covenant, and then it's mentioned in the New Testament, and it's throwing me for a loop, because people are, it's not saying what I'm hearing a lot of times, but at any rate, maybe there's a break. You can either stay on, or you can hang up, either one, we've got to go, hold on, be right back if we need, be right back folks, please stay tuned. That's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276.

Here's Matt Slick. All right, everyone, welcome back to the show. If you want to give me a call, the number is 877-207-2276, you can also send me an email to info at Karm, C-A-R-M dot O-R-G, just put the subject line radio comment or radio question, and we get to those, and we have nobody waiting, except for Sarah still, hopefully, three open lines, 877-207-2276, let's see if Sarah's, are you still there? Yeah, we're still here, Matt, would it be okay if I pass the phone to my husband to ask you some covenant-overlaid questions?

Sure, absolutely, I'd love that, yeah. Hey Matt, how are you doing? I'm doing all right, how are you doing, brother? Pretty well, how's your wife been? Struggling, you know, she's struggling, but she's a good woman, trying to get her on the air to discuss publicly what she's going through, and I'm hoping she can administer a lot of people if and when she does that, but okay. All right, we'll be praying for her. Yeah, anyway, I don't want to keep too much at a time by just getting a bunch of questions on here, but I was just wondering a little bit about covenantal, and I studied, I started looking into end time views, and then I realized I have to understand dispensational versus covenantal before I really started understanding any type of end time views, and through my study, I was led to like a video series that really, like a 29-part video series, and it was more progressive covenantal, but still very similar to regular covenantal, and it just really just opened my eyes to just how much more God-honoring and Christ-honoring that it was.

Oh, okay. The covenantal position. Yes, the covenantal position does, because one of the principles I try and teach people is the trinity. Now, they'll say, well, yeah, I get it, the trinity is one God's three distinct simultaneous covenantal persons, but I say something else that a lot of people are not used to hearing, that the trinity is a necessary preconditions for all intelligibility, and what that means is that all transcendentals, all universals, all truth values, actuals, potentials, counterfactuals rest in the sovereignty of God, and this gets into some epistemological issues, ontological issues and some stuff, but also, what God, we have to say God is the ultimate. There's nothing greater or equal to him, so in the Trinitarian communion where the one being who is God, in Ephesians 1-4, he chose us in him before the foundation of the world.

This is election and predestination. This was done in the trinity. Now, since there's no one greater than God, no one equal to God, then he binds himself by his own word. He can't swear by anybody higher. He swears by himself, so to speak, so we have an Old Testament covenant where the animals are cut in two and God passes down between them, because he's saying, may this happen to me if I break the covenant. Covenant is a pact or an agreement between two or more parties, so God binds himself by covenant. Now, the word in Latin for covenant is testamentum, Old Testament, New Testament, Old Covenant, New Covenant, and so the New Covenant is ratified with the death of Christ. That's Hebrews 9, 15-16, and then the Old Covenant is, so to speak, done away with or abrogated.

That's Hebrews 8-13. God works covenantally, and so covenants also have signs. This is because God, what he does is he makes his word known, but he gives a sign for us to touch, see, feel, experience, and it's a solid way to get in touch with the abstract, because a promise is an abstraction. When you and your wife got married, what you did was you offered to each other and before God and before people, so it's a triple, a three-way covenant between each other, between God, and between you and the people. In this, what you do is you promise and you agree, these are all abstractions. An abstraction is a concept, it's an idea, it's a commitment, it's an attitude.

These are abstract actualities, but the physical form of it takes a wedding ring. The physical form of the abstraction of God's covenantal truthfulness based on his character and his essence to Abraham was circumcision, to Noah was the rainbow, to David, that's the future, Davidic covenant, fulfilled in Christ, which is the blood of the New Covenant, which is the communion supper. We see that what God does is he works covenantally and covenants have signs, and if there's no sign of the covenant, that's just being unbiblical. Covenants always have signs. In fact, the Ten Commandments are covenant documents, they're ten and ten, not four and six. A lot of people like to break them up after five and five, and they're ten and ten because each party gets a copy of a contract, and the Ten Commandments are a covenant pattern of the third millennium BC called the suzer and vassal treaty pattern of the third millennium BC, and has introduction, has covenant boundaries, rewards, and stipulations. If you read Exodus 20, one through 17, you'll see it does this, and you can find it.

So the Ark of the Covenant contained the covenant documents, two of them, copy of ten and ten. One symbolized the presence of God, one symbolized the presence of man. So God's binding himself by his word. What's interesting is the scriptures are called the word of God, and the word became flesh and dwelt among us. This all has to do with the attribution and nature and quality of God's character, his essential nature, and the abstraction of his existence is codified in real time for us to see, read, touch, et cetera, and that's how God communicates to us. He does it covenantally, and this is why we have communion supper.

So we can touch the bread, touch the wine, consume it, and it's our connection to the ultimate basis of abstract actualities that resists in the eternal mind of God, who is a necessary precondition for all intelligibility, as well as the nature of truth and faithfulness that he himself has instituted, initiated, and integrated into our Christian lives. Make sense so far? Now you sound like a, now you sound like a Vantilian. Well, you know, I went to Westminster Seminary and John Frame, Van Til's hand-picked successor, was my professor. Do you fall in line more with Frame's understanding of precepts or Bonsons? Yes, I flip around, and what I just told you, I developed on my own.

I didn't learn it from anybody. And so, because I've been studying this stuff in the inside of the scriptures and debating and teaching, I'm not saying, hey, look how smart, I'm just saying, you know, I've read this over there, and I don't remember what Frame's position is, I don't remember what Van Til's position or Bonsons' position is. It's just that, you know, I'm a presuppositionalist, obviously. But what I do is a little bit different, is I test my theology out in real time. So I go to Discord, like tonight I'm planning on going to spaces inside of X, and just open up a room and see people come in and I answer questions or I debate or impromptu and discuss. And so over the years, this is what I've done with Covenant as I've studied it, and what I just told you is what I developed.

And if Van Til says the same thing, then that's an incredible compliment that I happen to stumble on something, what he figured out, you know. Yeah, yeah, um, real quick, like I said, I got so many more questions, you can wait for other nights, but I did want to understand, because the people that I was listening to, they were progressive Covenantal, I'm assuming you're just Covenantal, you're Presbyterian? Yeah, I'm Presbyterian. There's a radio. Yeah, there's a radio, I am Presbyterian, but I'm a continuationist also, which is unusual. So, and I'm all millennial, I'm a pessimistic, all millennialist, continuationist, that. Oh.

That's weird. Oh wow. We'll be right back with you, buddy. Hey folks, there's a break, we'll be right back after these messages, 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, the number is 877-200-3200.

877-207-2276. Alright. Hey, you still there? Hey, yes I am.

Thank you for having me, Matt. So, my question is Hebrews 811, and for progressive Covenantalists, they say this is the reason why you shouldn't baptize your baby. Well here's the thing about this.

My wife and I are about to have a child, so I've been kind of wrestling through this. Alright, okay. Okay. Here we go.

We've got nobody waiting, I love it when I get to good discussions like this. Now, Hebrews 811, but let's examine Jeremiah 31 first, because Jeremiah 31 is what Hebrews 8 is referring to. Now we'll go through this quickly, in Jeremiah 31, starting at verse 27, it says, the days are coming, declares the Lord, and he says it three times in Jeremiah. He says it in verse 27, I believe it is, 31, and I think it's 38, alright?

So, in 27-30, it's the future planting of Israel and Judah. Now the Covenant, this is what I'm wrestling with. When it says, I'll make a Covenant with the nation, or the house of Israel and the house of Judah, these are specific bloodline people. It's not a bunch of believers or unbelievers, it's the bloodline people.

That's what it means, the nation of. In Matthew 15, 24, Jesus says, I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. This is after Israel and Judah became united, okay? And so, he was sent only to the house of Israel. He was only covenantally sent to the nation, people, group of Israel, not to the Gentiles. But they broke the Covenant, so we the Gentiles are grafted in. Now back in Jeremiah 31, it's a future planting of Israel and Judah, a future work, to be blessed, both people and animals, et cetera, and it goes on.

Then I'm going to skip the written on the heart part, and I'm going to come back to it. And in Jeremiah 31, it says days are coming. And this seems to be prophetic about the rebuilding of Jerusalem as a city, because it talks specifically about locations. And I did research on them there, just for the nation of Israel. And it's saying that the nation of Israel will not be uprooted anymore.

It's going to stand forever. Jerusalem is. Well, that's future. Now, that can't be full progressive, because from what I understand, some progressives are semi-dispensational, and the church replaces Israel. But according to Romans 11, 25, 24, 25, 26, God's not done with national Israel. Okay, now, in the new covenant, now check this out. Now I'm a bit of a logician in some areas.

Check this out. The days are coming when God will make a new covenant, not like the old covenant that came out of Egypt. He'll put his law on them and their hearts, and they'll be his God, verse 33. Now here's a question. When does that occur? People automatically want to say it occurs when you get born again.

I would agree. I would agree, but is it saying that anybody who participates in the new covenant is automatically saved? And that's a question. And I'm going to show you something in the Bible. When I was shown this, I was reading a book about this, and it brought this point up, and I went, ooh, that's a good point, because it shook me up. I had really examined it. I had never seen it before.

And I'll get to it in a sec. So they will not teach each other. Does it mean, then, that it's restricted to the born again? Well, it seems to be the case. What's the sign of the new covenant? It's communion.

All right, now, we got that, no problem. Now, you know, it's Hebrews 8, and the first covenant had faults, verse 7. He says he'll effect a new covenant in Hebrews 8, 8, and they'll not teach everyone.

They're going to know everything. And he again says, with the house of Judah and with the house of Israel. This is what bothers me, is that it specifically is a quote about the nations of Israel. It's specifically about them. Now, the question then is, well, then, is it for the Gentiles? Just a question I ask. Some people would say, don't ask that question. Of course it is. I say, well, maybe it is, maybe it isn't.

Let me look. Now, I know in 2 Corinthians 3, 6 that the covenant is for all of us. So what's going on in Hebrews? Because also think about this, when Jesus was instituted in the Lord's Supper, he was under the law, and he was speaking to the Israelites with the new covenant.

Now, the question is, is he speaking to us? Well, yes, but he's covenantally speaking specifically to the people of Israel. But the new covenant's not ratified till he dies. That's when we, the Gentiles, are really grafted in. That's why Jesus says in Matthew 24 to the woman, I was sent only to the law, sheep of the house of Israel. I wasn't sent to the Gentiles. This is all covenant.

All right. So, I'm going, okay, okay, there's a lot here. But notice this when we go to Hebrews 10, and he says in verse 16, this is the covenant I will make with them after those days, says the Lord, I'll put my laws upon their heart and put their mind and write them. And he says, and their sins and their lawless deeds I'll remember no more. Now in the context of Jeremiah, this is future stuff to the covenant time then, but it also includes eschatological ramifications in the arrival of Jerusalem. So I can't help it.

I don't have it worked out yet. It looks as though the covenant is at least in part related to that, in part. And so here's the verse that really was interesting, and this is Hebrews 10, 29.

Now the book of Hebrews is written to Hebrews and there is covenant language all over the place. In verse 28 it says, anyone who sets aside the law of Moses dies without mercy, the testimony of two or three witnesses. Verse 29, how much severe punishment do you think he will deserve who is trampled underfoot the son of God and is regarded as unclean, the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified and is insulted as spirit of grace? Now wait a minute. I think I was just doing research on this verse the other day, and it's, I remember James White was saying that this is actually referring to one of these verses about Jesus.

I think it's the same thing, hold on. It can't be about Jesus, trampling underfoot the blood of the covenant. Underfoot the blood of the covenant is regarded, I might be thinking of a different verse, hold on one second. That's all right. Now you might be talking about verse 26, 10, 26, when sending willfully, if perceived by the knowledge of the truth, no longer makes a sacrifice for sins.

So, but let me continue with this a little bit, we'll get to just a little bit. So what's interesting is this verse 29, Hebrews 10, 29, seems to be about those in the covenant because it says they're sanctified. I'm going to show you another verse that's really interesting about this. The spirit of grace, sanctification, the blood of the covenant, and the covenant. That's the future covenant. That's the Jeremiah covenant. The blood of the covenant. Because it's the ratification that Jesus said, excuse me, in Matthew 26, 28, he says this is the blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many. It didn't say all, it only says for many. So this blood of the covenant is the same language that Jesus is using.

This alone makes me wonder. If the new covenant, it appears the new covenant is prophetic, if you look at it eschatologically, the new heart, the new this, the new then, the born again, that seems to be the fulfillment of the new covenant, where the new covenant is instituted at the death of Christ and others can be in it the same way they were in the Old Testament. It seems to be the case because of Hebrews 10, 29, regarded as unclean, the blood of the covenant, by which he was sanctified.

But wait, there's more. When you go to 1 Corinthians 7, 14, for the unbelieving husband is sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through her believing husband, for otherwise your children are unclean, but now they're holy. So people can be sanctified inside of covenant without affirming it, the same way the Old Testament high priest covenantally would offer the blood for him, and get this, oh man, there's so much stuff here, I'm warning. In Leviticus 16, he would offer a sacrifice for himself before he went into the temple, but not only himself, but also for his family. He had to offer a sacrifice for the household because they were represented by him, he's a federal head, that he had to be clean, he and his household.

Households covenantally are automatically included in the father, it's just how it is. And he would offer sacrifices and then go into the temple, and he'd offer the sacrifice there. And so the children were sanctified through what he did, doesn't mean they were saved. Just as he offered the sacrificial propitiatory work on Yom Kippur for the nation of Israel, doesn't mean that they were all saved. So when I come back to this issue of Hebrews 10, 29, I'm still trying to work this out. It says that they're in the blood of the covenant, and yet they were trampling it. It tells me that the, or is it this, we've got a break coming up, is it the case that the new covenant is present and prophetic?

We have to understand it in both, but we only understand it as present, we'll make a mistake and fail to understand something. We've got a break, so hold on, okay? Hey folks, you can write back after these messages.

I love doing theology, I'm learning as I go. Please stay tuned. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276.

Here's Matt Slick. All right, welcome back to the show. We're talking about loving our wives in the chat room, and I was telling people, I love my wife by cooking, cleaning, doing stuff, and some days I don't love her, I watch TV. And then one guy wrote, he says, he does the same thing, but he pushes his wife aside for ESPN.

Just pushes her aside, then sends ESPN, I got to kick out of that. All right, all right, all right. Okay, we're back on there.

You're still there? What's your name? I forgot your name. My name is John. Okay, John. All right, John. Before we're done, I want to give you an argument in favor of infant baptism, okay? It's quick and slick, too, but go ahead. You are the slickest of the slick.

Yep, that's true. You wanted me to ask something else? Well, I'll tell you what, how about this, because you can see I'm really working through a lot of this covenant stuff, and it's just a lot to have in your head, and I'm really working through it. I haven't related yet baptism as it relates, because it looks like the Old Testament covenant sign is circumcision, probably, and the New is the covenant wine. How does baptism fit? Because in Colossians 2, 11, and 12, Paul relates circumcision and baptism, and circumcision, according to Romans 4-11, was the seal of the faith that he already had while uncircumcised, sign in his seal.

So I'm trying to figure out what baptism is and how it relates, and I haven't got it figured out yet. But here's something to think about. Here's something to think about. Okay, look. Now, I believe in baptism, but if you don't, that's okay. It's not explicitly taught in Scripture. However, look at this. God works covenantally, and let me ask you, do you know what federal headship is?

Do you know what that is? Okay. So, for those who don't know, it's the male, the husband, father, is the head of the family, represents his family. And I can expand on it quite a bit, but that's basically what it is. Okay. So we were in Adam, but now we're in Christ, if we are saved in Christ.

We were in, we were actually both. Only the elect are in both, and the non-elect are only in Adam. Okay. Both.

In Adam all die, that's everybody, but in Christ, that's the elect. Oh, okay. Yeah.

Okay. So, Abrahamic covenant was commanded to have infants in it, commanded to circumcise them on the eighth day. It doesn't mean they were saved. It's a sign of the covenant. Yeah. And what I'll often do is I'll ask, well, why is it only the boys were circumcised?

And if people look at me like I'm an idiot, what do you mean, why are you the only one? And I say, well, it's a deeper question that I'm getting on to here, you know. I said, because it's essentially the blood shed, Christ is our federal head, the blood shed of the headship representation bodily is representing ultimately the sacrifice of Christ in the blood shed of the federal head. Christ is our federal head in Christ.

So okay, that's not a problem. Now the Abrahamic covenant is Genesis 12 three, in you all the nations shall be blessed. But Paul quotes that covenant in the new Testament in Galatians three, eight, and he calls it the gospel. He says, the gospel was preached beforehand to Abraham saying in you, all the nations shall be blessed. He's quoting that verse, Genesis 12 three in Galatians three, eight, that tells me the Abrahamic covenant is still in effect. My question is, then where is it in the new covenant that we're told to exclude children from the same Abrahamic covenant that God commanded to be in?

That's just me. And that's what point one, here's another point I give and covenant signs and stuff. We have two Jews, every Friday they would walk along to go to town to business back 2000 years ago.

And they've been to this for years and years. And one of them is, he became a Christian and he's breaking the news to his buddy. He says, yeah, I've been listening to Paul, the apostle Paul, you know, he's working miracles and says, and now that I'm a Christian, now I get it. God does not include infants in this covenant faithfulness anymore. Doesn't include my children in my house. That would be like, what? That's crazy.

He always does. And you always, I've just been reading through Acts and you always see like once the whole household kind of like gets saved or they get baptized and whatnot. Yes, but on the other hand, almost all the time you and your whole household, you believe and your whole household, that's what generally, uh, it's connected to a belief, but not in the case of Lydia in Acts 16, 14, a woman in Lydia from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple fabrics, a worshiper of God was listing the Lord opened her heart to respond to the things spoken of by Paul. And when she and her household had been baptized, she are just saying, if you would judge me. So it doesn't say that everyone in our house believed.

Now I'm not making a proof text out of this. I'm just saying there's a household issue and doesn't say there's infants or babies or whatever, but it's just there. And we, you know, so, so we could see the idea of households being, uh, covenantally baptized. Well, people say, well, we only see adults being baptized. Well, yeah, because that's how it was back then they were adults, baptized all over the place. Oh, and also I'm getting convinced this is heresy.

This is heresy for a lot of people. I'm getting convinced that baptism more and more is not immersion, but sprinkling and pouring. That's, I'm getting convinced of that more and more because of what I see in scripture. And I could go through some of that too right now, but, uh, and then here's the third point I want to make. I did hear, I did hear once before, I forget where, but that, um, there, there is something talks about baptizing your furniture or something like that.

And they were like, go ahead. The way it works in the, in the old Testament, when you're anointed with oil, the oil is applied to you. When you're washed with water, the water's applied to you. The high priest would go to the tent of the, uh, the tent door and he'd be washed with water.

At the tent door. It didn't mean he stripped down naked, got into a bathtub and was dumped. It means he would take water and apply it. So I did research on this oil, blood, water are applied to, so verb with an object, verb anointed, uh, blessed, uh, whatever, sprinkled, whatever with something is always that element being applied to the object or person. So in the old Testament, the Holy Spirit is prophesied as being poured, always being poured. I've got all kinds of listings for that.

I did research on that as well. The Holy Spirit's poured even in the new Testament in Acts chapter 10, 44 through 48, uh, in verse 45 in particular, it says the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. In Acts chapter, I'm going quickly because we're running out of time, but Acts chapter two, uh, 17, uh, it shall be in those last days, God says, I'll pour forth my spirit and all mankind. In verse 18, in those days, I'll pour forth my spirit. The Holy Spirit is poured.

That's how it is. That's how he's presented in the old Testament. All right, so now when you go to Acts one, five, where Jesus says, for John baptized with water, you'll be baptized with the Holy Spirit.

So wait a minute. If baptism means immersion, John immersed you with water, you'll be immersed with the Holy Spirit. It doesn't fit. Uh, John poured water on you. You'll be at the Holy Spirit poured on you. That fits. In fact, Jesus, I firmly believe that he was sprinkled because he was entering into the priesthood after the order of Melchizedek and the old Testament requirements of that were in Hebrews, excuse me, in Leviticus six, Leviticus eight, numbers four and Exodus 29. We had to be 30 years of age. Do we have a requirement for the Melchizedek one?

Yes. In the old Testament, the priesthood requirements of the Melchizedek one, but no, we don't have it that I've seen. I don't see any requirements of it, but he's a priesthood, but Levitical and Aaronic priesthoods have this requirement of being 30 years of age, verbal blessing, my beloved son in whom I'm well pleased, okay, oil applied. The oil represents the Holy Spirit. First John two 27, it came upon him and water is sprinkled on him. I could find no place.

I did a study on this. I could find no place where the priest has immersed in water. So when Jesus was baptized, I'm convinced, it's just me personally, that he had water either poured on his head or sprinkled because it was fulfilling the law, because that number is eight seven.

The priest had to be sprinkled. That's what it is. That's the order. That's what it commands according to the law.

So Jesus was made under the law, Galatians four four. This is why I don't speak at conferences. People don't want to clean up my messes.

I talk like this. You'll be kicked out. You know, a presby group would say, well, we can go with that, but you said you believe the continuous of the gifts. Yes. Well, forget it.

We can't have you in now. It's just all kinds of stuff. And so I've been studying a lot of this stuff now for a couple of years and I'm just still trying to figure it all out and work it into the sovereign grace of God and covenant in the inter-trinitarian communion and all kinds of stuff I've got floating around in my head.

And sometimes everything crashes down and I'd start drooling and then I have to go watch TV for a few hours. Or debate an atheist. And they're easy. They're so easy to debate.

They're easy, particularly when they're naturalists. That's true. Especially if you're a presuppositionalist, you just don't grant them anything that they want to be granted to them. That's right. I don't grant them anything. They've got to earn it all. And replaying in our king's yard would give you the right to be in our yard using our presuppositions and assumptions to validate your positions.

You can't justify them. That's right. Amen. Thanks, man.

I appreciate your time. I'm just thinking about all this stuff, man. I'm really going through it. I really am. I really think. Well, let me know when you figure it out.

Which probably will be never. I can't figure out what baptism is related to the communion supper in the new covenant and how baptism relates in the new covenant. What is it? Oh, I remembered one more thing. I remembered one more thing.

I just remembered this. So you go to a church, and they have a new baby. And so the couple gets up, and they bring the baby up, and they do a dedication ceremony. And they say they promised to raise the child in the ways of the Lord, and it's beautiful stuff. And I love that.

It's wonderful. There's an applause, maybe whatever, and then they sit down. My question is, you made a covenant, right? They say, yeah.

Where's the covenant sign that you're including the baby in? Ah, yeah. So there you go. Okay. Mentioned for yourself.

Thank you so much, man. I took up the whole hour. That's good.

There's nobody waiting. This happens every now and then where we get great conversations, and people love it. They tell me later, man, that was great. I didn't like what you said, but it was fun. You know, or whatever.

So it's good stuff. You irritated me. You made me think. This is Bill. Bill, he's listening all the time. Bill doesn't know what I'm doing. I just tell him whatever to believe.

He goes, okay, whatever you say, because you're slick. And that's it. Yeah. But yeah, anyway, thank you so much.

And just a shameless plug. I'm also going through your apologetics course on CARM.org. Good.

It's pretty good. I'm learning. I'm trying to memorize the vocabulary right now.

Good. Yeah, vocabulary's critical. Yeah, if you can learn about 10 words, and you know them well, you can figure out about 90% of theology. If you understand 10 concepts, 10 words and concepts is how to relate. It's all you need.

Maybe even less. Yep. Covenant. Trinity. Person.

Work of Christ. Hypothetic union. Justification. Imputation. Propitiation.

Federal headship. You get these down, oh yeah, it's wonderful. And there's the music, brother. We're out of time. Amen, brother. I'll talk to you later. Bye-bye. All right. Hey, folks.

We're out of time. Lord bless you. I will not be live Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday next week, because I'll be in Texas at a conference, a religious broadcasting conference in Dallas, checking things out. I'll be back on next week sometime on Friday. God bless. Have a good weekend. This is another program powered by the Truth Network.