Bible Questions & Answers (Q&A) Session (2) | Pastor Daniel Batarseh

So as you know, we're doing a Q&A and I'm going to hand it off

to Mark. But before we do that, maybe we

should pray. Ask the Lord to help us if you'd

like to pray for us, Sure. Father, we thank you for

blessing us with this time. Lord, what a privilege it is to

gather. Here is blood bought Saints to

dive into your word, to know you better through your word.

To live as Christians through your word.

Lord, may you enlighten our eyes, enlighten our minds and

our hearts as we answer and talk about these sometimes difficult

questions. Lord, it may propel us to

greater faithfulness and greater love toward you.

In Jesus name. Amen.

Amen. All right.

Well, we have a few questions here I'm excited to, really.

Just talk about them a little bit tonight.

There's some very practical questions, there's some

theological questions in there. But what I love about these

questions that you all submitted, it's really it's it's

not a stump, the pastor type of questions.

It's these are real questions that are on people's minds

wanting to know what the word of God says about some hard to

understand issues. And you know, I was reflecting

on it earlier today and you know in Peter second Peter where he

says that you know things that Paul says in the New Testament.

Hard to understand sometimes, right.

But ultimately, and I love how Peter ends that he says even

though these things are hard to understand, even though there's

some people out there who will misuse and abuse these difficult

scriptures to to bring doubt into your minds.

Peter ends this with, then ends that passage with this.

He he prays for them, and he says that he hopes they.

Grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus

Christ. To him be the glory both now and

to the day of eternity. Amen.

Amen. And so that's that's really why

I'm excited to really dive into these questions today.

So let's start, you know, as Christians.

Daniel, it's. We we live in a society where

all around us, the unbelieving world, there's conflicts,

there's arguments, there's just backbiting and hatred and

spitefulness. But as Christians, in a

Christian community of believers, not only in the local

church but in the wider Christian communities, we have

to be different from the world. But as Christians, we still

have. Sin.

We still have disagreements, We still have conflict.

So how do we as Christians confront a brother or sister in

Christ when that brother and or sister is in sin?

Yeah, that's a huge question because when you look at Jesus's

instructions about the church, there are only two places in the

entire Gospels where Jesus refers to the church directly

and clearly. Both are found in the Gospel of

Matthew and Matthew 16, where the revelation that Peter has

concerning Christ Jesus refers to the church being built upon

that revelation. And then in Matthew 18 where

Jesus instructs believers how to deal with a sinning believer and

he refers to the church in those set of instructions.

Now here's what I find so significant about that the the

fact that Jesus, out of all the things you could have said about

the function of the church, the one thing that he wanted to

touch on was that the purpose of the church in the believer's

life is that there would be a mutual operation of

accountability. Think about that when you and I

become followers of Jesus Christ and are joined to, yes, the

universal church, but the universal church express in the

local settings, the primary. One of the primary reasons for

that is that we would open our lives up to other Christians to

speak into our lives and also setting ourselves up to be ready

to respectfully restore brother or sister if they've fallen into

sin. I don't think that's how many

believers view the local church. I don't think that's how how

many people view their relationship with other

believers. That one of the top reasons for

Christ bringing us together is that we would have an eye out

for one another and what that looks like.

Once we've established that once we realized the the great call

that Christ has given us concerning what the church

should function as, we have to then ask how do we do that

right? And that really depends on a

case by case situation. It would depend on the nature of

the sin. It would depend on the setting

of where that sin perhaps was committed.

For example, you look at Paul with Cephas and Antioch.

Peter is acting hypocritically and he caused other Jewish

believers to also follow in his example to treat the Gentiles as

lesser than. And So what does Paul do?

It says there he spoke before them all and he confronts Peter

to his face. That's not a rule for all of us

to call out a believer and sin in front of everybody because

you go back to what the actual rules are in Jesus says of a

brother sins, you go to him privately.

And so we know if you read Matthew 1815 down, you see the

protocol given to believers. And yet even though the protocol

is there, there's still a call for wisdom.

And that wisdom is our attitude towards other believers.

And I would say the best way in dealing with people, especially

if they are caught in sin or they've offended you, is to do

so in a way in which you would like to be approached if you

were caught in sin. Whether that sin is intentional

or not. We have to also remember, when

people are in sin, sometimes they're not doing so

intentionally. Maybe they're operating with a

lesser revelation than you are. Maybe they're immature in the

faith. So you always have to put

yourself in their shoes. And more than that, Galatian

speaks about a spirit of gentleness.

And so with that, I believe there is a necessity to approach

a brother. And here's here's my preference

in doing that, to ask a lot of questions.

So approach a believer, asking questions, not coming with

evidence and then saying, you know you did this, this is, this

is your fault. Or whatever the case may be,

what you want to do is you want to love hopes for all things,

right? It hopes for the best.

And so you want to give them a chance to explain themselves.

You want to also give them the chance to be honest and to

confess that sin. And so the aim of our

confrontation is not to demean or discourage, but always to

restore. And even in the confrontation

stage, you want to win that brother or that sister.

You don't want to destroy them, and you don't want to push them

off or give them the impression that you're not for them.

Again with that, because Jesus also said that he was gentle and

lonely, there are moments and there are settings where a

strong word needs to be given that serious rebuke needs to be

offered. That doesn't exclude those

potential confrontations, but we just need to be wise and we need

to consider the different facets of the circumstance in the

situation. Always with the goal that I want

to redeem this brother. I want to see this sister.

Come back to the faith, come back to the will of God, come

back to honoring the Lord in their lives.

And so the way I've done it, and I've the way I've seen other

people do it effectively is, hey, I you did this.

And I don't know if you, I don't know if you meant it when you

said it, but it it did hurt me. And I just want to ask, you

know, do you have a reason behind what you said or what you

didn't say? You didn't include me in this.

You didn't ask questions because they could be operating under

ignorance. They could have done something

due to a blind spot. That's not how we feel when

we're offended. We always almost assumed that

they did it to intentionally hurt us.

And that's just one scenario. There's different, again,

scenarios that we have to consider, but I think as a

general rule, ask questions, come in gentleness and always

put yourself in their shoes. If if you were caught in

something, how would you want to be approached?

It's wonderful what what do you do, though, if you confront

someone and they're like I I didn't do anything wrong.

Or I did this. Not a big deal.

I don't understand what what? What's the big deal?

Like if you have a confronting somebody and they just, there's

no repentance, there's no remorse.

What do you do then, as a Christian?

That's a great question. Well then, Jesus provides the

answer. Bring two or three other

brothers. Let them begin to feel how

serious this is, bringing other witnesses to testify that this

is indeed a sin. And then if they still resist

and they still or repeat that sin and the repentance is

shallow and not true, then it comes to the point where Jesus

says, then you have to treat them in a certain way.

You have to treat them as a tax collector.

You have to treat them as a gentile.

In other words, you have to treat them as somebody who is

not part of the community of faith.

And at that point they forfeit certain relational privileges in

order for them to realize that there are consequences to a lack

of repentance. And so again, the to approach

somebody in their sin in the name of gentleness and kindness

and respect does not disqualify the need to bring in a more

serious approach if it requires it.

So I would say that Jesus had that in mind when he gave those

instructions. Somebody dismisses it or says

that's just my personality, you're too sensitive, OK?

Now you bring this before 2-3 other witnesses, and if it's

legitimate, they'll agree with you.

And then this person that has to deal with other believers who

are confronting them. What are they going to do then?

And the whole point of that process that Jesus gives us is

to keep the the sin issue of a person's A person's fallen is as

private as possible and to and to allow them to be in an

honorable way come to their senses before it becomes more

public. And if it deserves a more public

approach, then that's because of their unwillingness to

ultimately repent. Thank you.

Last followup question, because you know you you hear this a

lot, especially in the in the wider Christian community,

unfortunately nowadays are there do you think there are any

situations where Matthew 18 would not apply, where you are

not called to go one-on-one with the person who is sitting

against you? Absolutely.

I love that followup question because Paul exercises that with

the brother in the Church of Corinth who was sinning with his

father's wife. And the church knew about it.

And Paul skips all those steps and he says get him out of

there, get him out of there, he needs to go.

And the reason why he says that is because it was a public sin.

The church indirectly affirmed it and tolerated it.

And so there was no need to go through that protocol.

And so it's not this black and white thing.

There are Gray areas. There are different situations

that demand different responses and there is license for that.

So absolutely depends on the nature of this and the

circumstances, situation, situation.

If a leader sins, there's a different approach than if a

believer in the congregation a member sins.

So yeah, we can't just, we can't just take Matthew 18 and apply

it to every single case. That might be unwise.

And that's why there's always a call to wisdom concerning the

nature of send the severity of it, how public is it, how

dangerous it is. All those things need to be put

into Factor, yeah. Great, Okay.

Let's move on to the next one. You know, many churches preach

primarily from the New Testament and to the neglect of the Old

Testament, whether it's Sunday morning, Sunday evening, other

Bible study times. In fact, you do have some well

regarded or at least well known Christian leaders nowadays.

I'm thinking of Andy Stanley large church in Georgia, North

Point, who's on record as saying that Christians need to uncouple

themselves from the Old Testament.

What would you say to that? And and can we apply all of the

Old Testament to us as New Testament believers?

And how do we know what's and what not to apply if we don't

apply all the Old Testament? Yeah, it's unfortunate that many

people, whether they like the situation you brought up, this

is one of this, assisted themselves theologically with

the Old Testament. Or those who are intimidated by

the Old Testament and don't see the value of it choose not to

teach on and expound on it. At the same time, there is

concern because we realize we are in a new covenant.

So how does the old covenant apply to us?

And that's a vital question. That's an important question.

I understand the the reasoning behind that.

What we have to understand is even in the New Testament, we're

told in Romans 15 believe verse four told in First Corinthians

10. Believe verse 6 and verse 11,

that there is encouragement and instruction found in these Old

Testament stories. And even in these laws and and

these Psalms, there is value for our personal encouragement.

And so people kind of look down upon those who go to the story

of David and the story of Joseph and what they tend to say in

defense of Christ being. The theme of the Bible is you

can't put yourself in that story with Joseph.

You can't put yourself in that story of David.

And I get that you can stretch these stories to make it about

you and not make it about God's glory.

At the same time, Paul tells me I can go there for

encouragement. I can go to how God dealt with

Joseph's life with his perfect, sovereign, providential plan and

believe the same for my life. I can look at David's faith and

say, yeah, God honors faith and there is instruction and value.

They're concerning my faith with the lens of the New Testament,

of course. So it's a it's it's an

unfortunate thing to hear people speak like that.

I know their hearts are in the right place and that they want

to defend the glory of Christ being the theme and the golden

thread from beginning to end. But there is nothing

illegitimate with me and for you for anybody else to go to the

Old Testament with the boundaries of the New Testament

to see how these things apply to me.

In fact, the Old Testament is the best illustration book for

New Testament principles. However, I get the again, back

to the original question, I get the argument of well, we're in

the New covenant, so how do we know what of the Old Testament?

Maybe ceremonial laws, rituals, feast.

How do we know what transfers over and what is obsolete?

Or what has ceased to be applicable?

And there are two places that help me when I look at that

question. One is an Isaiah 42.

You're told they're in the first few verses, a prophecy

concerning the Messiah to come and and in the first few verses

we are told that the Coast lands will wait for His law.

That's an interesting phrase that as the Messiah comes, the

gentile nations themselves are awaiting a law to come from him.

When you go to Hebrews 7, the author of Hebrews is arguing how

the priesthood of Melchizedek is superior to the priesthood of

Aaron. And he says something in that

chapter, verse 12 I believe, where he mentions that if there

is a new priesthood, then automatically that assumes that

there is going to be a new law. What does that mean?

What that means is that in the new covenant you have in a sense

a law within that covenant, a new way of approaching worship,

approaching sanctification, approaching our relationship

with the Lord. And Christ brought that in.

Not that he dismissed the Old covenant, He was the fulfillment

of it. But he brought about the true

substance of the Old Testament, and that's what we would call

the law of Christ. So how do I identify the law of

Christ in the New Covenant? I think the best way to do is to

read the New Covenant, read the Gospels, read the epistles, the

apostles who were given authority, and the promise by

Christ that the Spirit would come and he would reveal

everything that the Christ would want him to know and expound

upon his teachings. Because at that time, they

weren't ready to receive all that Christ wanted them to know.

And what you'll see as you study the new covenant is that there

is some overlap with the Old Covenant, and there are some

things that don't apply anymore. So people often ask about the

Sabbath, right? They look at the 10 commandments

and they'll see that nine of those commandments resurface in

the New Covenant. But the the Sabbath, as the Jews

observed, is not necessarily repeated.

It's not emphasized as a teaching, as a practice for the

church. Well, why is that?

Because Christ is the Sabbath. Hebrews 4.

He fulfilled that, but at the same time, there's a universal

moral code that still applies in the New Covenant.

So the best way to know what applies to me and what doesn't

is to simply study the New Covenant.

Realize that there was a law, there was a law from them aside

that was anticipated, and that is what we are under.

That is what we are subject to. And then that that way you can

properly interpret the Old Covenant.

So I we know of a brother who's not here, but he loves the Lord,

and I trust that he's still walking with the Lord.

When he first got saved, he didn't have that revelation.

And so when he approached the Old Testament thinking, well,

I'm supposed to read this from cover to cover, he looked at

some of those levitical laws concerning how men should dress

and how they should not shave, that the ends of their the size

of their beards. And he thought, okay, well,

that's what I got to do as a Christian.

I got to not shave here and dress this way.

And a wise believer approached him and says, no, that doesn't

apply. You know, that's not binding on

us. And so that's the simplest

answer, I think. Just consider the law of Christ.

And that is what we are called to observe, yeah.

Great. Love to spend more time on that

one. Yeah, you know, unfortunately we

have to move on. Next question.

This is a good one. Some teach that Jesus went to

hell after he died and before his resurrection.

Where was Jesus during that interval?

That is a good question, and the only place where we are given

clear insight concerning that period of time between his death

and his resurrection, I believe, is first Peter Three.

That's the clearest place. And when you go to first Peter

three, you get one idea of what took place during Silent

Saturday, as some like to describe it.

He says this in verse 19. Well, I can read from verse

18th. For Christ also suffered once

for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring

us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the

spirit in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in

prison, because they formerly did not obey.

When God's patience waited in the days of Noah while the ark

was being prepared, in which a few, that is 8 persons, were

brought safely through water. So there isn't much given

concerning that time and where we are given little, we have to

say little not go beyond what is written.

But based on this, what we can say is that Jesus in the spirit

went to a particular spiritual place and he proclaimed a

message to certain spirits who were imprisoned, obviously in

prison for many, many, many years.

And we're, we're told specifically since the days of

Noah and for a specific sin or series of sin during that time

of Noah. And so these are commonly

believed to be demon spirits who had a great influence upon the

generation of Noah. And there's debate about the

extent of their influence and how they interacted with the

sons of of of men. But what's Jesus here doing,

proclaiming to these spirits who are incarcerated and imprisoned

until judgment? Right?

Based on this, we can make the case and in other places, that

there are some demons who are held captive until the day of

judgment, and there are other demons who are that loose on the

earth, obviously under God's sovereign will for them to do

their bidding. But at this time, Jesus comes

into this holding place and he preaches he doesn't preach the

gospel. He's not evangelizing these

spirits, but what he is doing is that he is making a triumphant

declaration. That's what Christ is doing.

And so there could be even the possibility that these spirits

rejoiced at the site of the death of the Son of God, that

that they probably thought, okay, we did it.

We we were able to overthrow prophecy.

We were able to conquer the plan of salvation.

And who comes in? Jesus Christ declaring his

victory, declaring his vicarious death, his triumphant success

over the grave? I would, I would love to have

seen those spirits faces. And so all this is saying is

that Jesus really came to declare his victory.

And one thing's for certain, he didn't go to hell to suffer for

our sins. He didn't.

He didn't do anything because it was finished on the cross.

It was finished at the cross. He he drank every drop of that

cup. And so all he's doing here is

letting people know that he did do that, letting specific

spirits know, and even the ascension is a declaration of

that. I I'm looking forward to

preaching one day purely on the ascension of Jesus Christ.

We often hear about his, his, his incarnation.

We hear about His crucifixion. We hear about His resurrection,

but very little is mentioned about His ascension.

There is a message with that ascension.

There's a reason why He bodily went up into the clouds, and the

and the reason behind that is deeper than we would think.

So you have to come to that sermon.

I'm not going to share it. Why now?

So looking at the Apostles Creed where it says that Jesus was

crucified, dead and buried, descended into the hell on 3rd

day rose again, would you say Christians should?

Not or should say that if they are saying the Apostles Creed

because some churches say the Apostles Creed is part of their

liturgy, the word hell, is that the the point that you're

bringing up? Yes.

Yeah that's a translation issue more than anything else.

So especially with older translations you'll see the word

hell used. But in the original it's really

referring to Hades the grave she Ole.

And so that comes really to a translation issue, if if what

they mean by Hell is what we see in Revelation 20 and where the

lake of fire will be created, where death in Hades will be

thrown into, and everybody whose name's not written in the book

of life. And yes, don't use that word.

Jesus didn't enter into Hell in that case, but he did enter into

the underworld as we see here. And he did declare triumphantly

how he conquered not just death, but Satan himself.

So just be careful with your terminology, whether it's a

creed or averse, concerning your translation, and just make sure

that you're not confused or people hearing it are confused.

Great. All right.

The next question, you know, in in many Christian colleges, it

was the case when I was in Christian college, and it's

certainly the case now. You still have you do have

people say legitimately I think sometimes, sometimes not

legitimately. A guy goes up to a girl, is most

often the case, and says God told me to marry you.

It happens probably not the wisest thing to say sometimes,

but should Christians? And I don't know if this is a

man or a woman asking this question, but so should I wait

for a prophetic word to tell me who to marry?

There's a common joke. I've said it before, so I

apologize if you heard it before, but if you haven't I'll

I'll share it anyway. About this woman who was at a

conference and after a few days a man approaches this woman,

obviously attracted, drawn to her, and says that very thing.

He says, The Lord told me that you're supposed to be my wife

and the woman gently looked at him.

He says really says yes, and she says, did the Lord tell that to

my husband? So should you wait for a

prophetic word to tell you who to marry?

No, absolutely not. You should not wait for a

prophetic word because there's no instruction for that in the

Bible when it comes to selecting a spouse.

Let me broaden it. I think a lot of Christians even

fall into the trap of waiting for any supernatural sign to

indicate to them that somebody is a potential candidate or is

supposed to be your spouse, because again, there is no

scriptural mandate or even invitation to do that.

Now I know how some people feel like, Are you saying that you

shouldn't pray for God to reveal who that person should be?

Absolutely not. You should.

There's anything to pray the most about Is that more than

your job, more than your car, more than where to move is Lord,

who would you have me marry? Who is the person that you would

have me covenant with? But I'm afraid that as people

are praying for, that they're waiting for something that is

not necessarily something that God has to grant.

Can God supernaturally make something known?

Yeah. Who says that he can't?

Is that the norm? I I say, no, it's not the norm.

And where people tend to go is the story with Isaac and

Rebecca. Genesis 24.

Abraham sends his servant to find a wife for his son Isaac,

and he arrives at a specific well and he seeks the Lord.

And this is what he asked the Lord.

He says, Lord, when a woman comes and if she asked if I want

to drink, let her also ask if she can feed my camels and then

I will know that my trip was in a waste.

And this is the person that you have for my master son.

And people tend to use that and they get very creative in asking

God for signs, right? Lord, when she knocks on my

door, let her wear this. Or Lord, let her order.

That. Or Lord, let her call me at this

time. And so we make very specific

demands and we use Genesis 24 as a license to approach that

decision or that kind of prayer in that way.

But people miss what the Abraham servant even prayed about.

He wasn't asking for a random sign.

Notice what he asked for. He asked that the Lord would

reveal something about this woman's character.

Right, this Lord, I want her to not just do what's obvious and

what's demanded of or what's the social norm.

I want her to go above and beyond.

So Lord, if this woman goes above and beyond, then I'll know

that she's someone special, then I'll know.

So there's something there in principle for us that if you're

going to be asking the Lord for anything, is to open your eyes

to that person's heart, to that person's inner beauty, to that

person's fear of God, to that person's integrity, right.

I think that's how we need to be praying with that.

Don't get me wrong, pray, Lord protect me from the wrong one.

Because Ecclesiastes tells us that there's something worse

than death, and that's a woman whose heart is chains and

fetters, right? In other words, out.

Externally she looks fine, but internally she's a trap.

And he says the Sinner is taken by her, but the one who pleases

God escapes her. And so take that scripture and

bring it before the Lord. But again, that's that's found

in the word of God. Lord, as long as I walk in your

way and your will, as long as I'm honoring you, you promise me

that I will not be in a trap. You won't put me in a

relationship that I'll later be like, what did I get myself

into? You promise me?

You promise here that you will guide me to the right person,

and so open my eyes to the extent in which I can see this

person as a potential partner for life.

And so be careful asking for something so specific that would

delay you or even cause you to miss out on potential candidates

before you. And so, yeah, it breaks my heart

to see people thinking that way that they that in order for them

to find somebody, they need this extravagant, awesome story.

And I get it. But, you know, you want God to

be glorified in that story. But again, I'm afraid that

people romanticize that story. They want this testimony so that

when somebody that says how do you, how do you guys meet?

You can say, oh, let me tell you how we met.

And I remember we studied the book of Ruth when we did that

few years back. And it dawned on me with the

backdrop of Genesis 24 with Isaac and Rebecca, you can say

that that was a supernatural story, right.

It was still an answer to prayer, though the the request

was very, very realistic. You look at Ruth and Boaz's

story and and you don't get any hint of that kind of

intervention. You see Providence.

You see a woman who just wants to obey God, and so she does

what she's called to do as a poor individual.

She goes and she gleans from, you know, the the, the wheat

fields and as she's there, just obeying what she's been given

concerning God's revelation for her life and that season of her

life. There's Boaz in the same field

and they meet and they reflect on the fact that there's a

relationship here so I can actually redeem you.

I I can actually be kinsman Redeemer.

So they go to court and they figure it out and there was a

little bit of an obstacle and they overcame the obstacle and

they got married. That doesn't sound as exciting

as Abraham servant praying and God revealing it.

And then I'm going back to Rebecca's house and sharing that

story and then all be like, wow, this has to be of God.

But is is Boa's and Ruth story any less God's will?

Is there any less of God's leading?

No, it's not. So don't idolize or romanticize

this Disney idea of Prince Charming meeting someone.

Just just trust God's leading and believe that he can lead.

If not, he tends to mostly lead through Providence more than

anything else. OK.

Yeah, I love that I and and just to add on that, I I love how you

said that's normally God works through ordinary means.

That's not to say he doesn't work through supernatural means

like salvation, right? Could God, could Christ appear

visibly to everyone that he is going to say?

Absolutely. But he does it through ordinary

means, through the preaching of God's Word.

And like when you're looking for a spouse, God has given you all

of the means to choose a spouse. Praying.

Seeking the wisdom of the Lord. Reading your Bible right?

You would I I I'm surprised by how many people struggle.

Like, is this person for me? Is this person not for me?

When one's a Christian and one's not a Christian right, it's not

even a question. So we don't need a supernatural

sign for that. And also wisdom from other

believers. I will say that, but go ahead.

Please go. Yeah, especially your parents.

Are your parents believers? What do they think are your

friends? Are your older people in the

church? They're believers.

So get around these people with your potential girlfriend or

boyfriend or future spouse so that they can see they can speak

into your life. They can see this other person

probably clearer than you can because they're not distracted

by. Romance or love or anything like

that. They can see it from a Christian

wise perspective as also someone who cares about you as a brother

or sister in Christ. Absolutely.

And and the council of many, their safety proverb says right.

And whenever it speaks about counselors, it's plural.

So not just even one person, you know, have a few people in your

life that are mature spiritually, that that you know

are for you and love you and that you can open up about and

say this is what this person's like and be honest in your

assessment of that person, Right.

Be honest. This is what this person's like,

you know, their spiritual condition, their actions,

reactions, interactions, be honest so that you can have the

best kind of counsel you can get with the clearest evidence that

you provide. So yeah, it's God has given us

the same Holy Spirit who can speak prophetically is the same

Holy Spirit who says and many counselors.

There is security, right? It's the same Holy Spirit who

says get get around believers who can speak into your life and

guide you and help you see blind spots, right?

Great question. Amen.

I'll end it with this. Learn from Raya Boehm, right?

Don't pick all of your friends, people your own age, people with

the same life experience as you, as your only counselors.

Learn from the wise, the older, the Gray heads around you.

It's really good. Amen.

OK, next question. Why do you baptize in the name

of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit rather than baptizing in

the name of Jesus as the apostles did?

Because Jesus said to Matthew 28 we're commanded by Christ to

baptize in the name of the Father, Son, Holy Spirit.

Where this comes from though is when you read the book of Acts,

you see this habit of the apostles in the early church

baptizing purely and exclusively in the name of Jesus.

And so that has created a trend among some specific

denominations, namely Oneness Pentecostals will apply that

where they will baptize in Jesus name only.

Is this even a big deal? Like what's so important about

that question? And it is a big deal, One,

because it's a command that Jesus gave, right?

And two, there are massive implications in Jesus giving

that specific set of instructions the formula of our

baptism. One, it's it's one of the two

ordinances, right? And two, you are identifying

with something in your baptism. And what Christ is saying there

is very special because he uses the singular noun for name,

doesn't say in the names of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

He says singularly in the name of the Father, Son and Holy

Spirit, which solidifies our belief in our God being triune

right. Muslims will often ask.

They ask a lot of things, but they'll often ask.

Show me where in the Gospels Jesus ever taught the Trinity.

And I always go to that verse. I'll always go to Matthew 28.

I see you tell me what it means to baptize in the name of the

Father, Son and Holy Spirit. What does that mean?

And that pretty much ends the conversation, at least with that

question. And so those who who tend to say

you know you should only baptize in Jesus name because the early

church and the apostles did don't have a trinitarian

conviction. Not all, but most.

So it makes sense why they would use that as an argument.

But it still begs the question, if Jesus commanded it, why do we

not see that more often as a pattern in the New Testament,

namely in in the book of Acts? And I think the reason is

because Jesus Christ himself was rejected as the Messiah, and

especially with the Jewish audience.

The call to be baptized in his name was especially scandalous,

and it reinforced the identity of Christ that demanded their

allegiance to and their surrender to and their

repentance to. And so Jesus being at the

forefront in the call for baptism was important because of

what the nation of Israel had done concerning Jesus, what they

thought about him. And so it was a call to

acknowledge and pledge their allegiance to Christ to him

specifically because of the recent events concerning him.

And so that's the, I think, the best way to explain why they

emphasize Jesus. And it doesn't override what

Christ had commanded. Amen.

Amen. OK.

The next question comes from a sister.

She says, why should I have an open womb instead of using

contraceptives? And I and and I think even

before you start answering contraceptives, I think we

should be very clear on definitions, right?

There's those contraceptives that are abortifacients, Plan B,

other other contraceptives like that.

And then there's other contraceptives that prevent

conception. Right.

Prevent the egg and the sperm joining together.

And there's also other contraceptives that aren't even

medical per se, right? Natural.

Natural contraceptive. So what do you say?

This is controversial. Some people feel very strongly

about this topic and this question.

And so let's just set a foundation and saying that any

kind of contraceptive that would induce an abortion or a

miscarriage is wrong, right? We don't want to kill anything

because we believe that life is at conception.

And so that's out of the question, I think where the

debate is other means that don't necessarily do that, that not

interfering with life necessarily, but interfering

with God's sovereign will in that process.

So here's what I would say. And we have to be careful

because the Bible doesn't explicitly prohibit this,

doesn't give clear instructions about this, and so we have to

operate with wisdom and we have to take the whole council of God

into consideration. Is the idea of family planning

wrong? I would argue no, because if we

use the same line of argumentations that people use

to deny any kind of birth control, I'm I'm talking about

the legitimate ideas, we wouldn't use another facets of

life. So one of the common ideas

concerning this is people would say, well children are a gift of

the Lord, why would you try to stop yourselves from receiving a

gift from him? And I understand that sentiment

and we have to believe that children are gift of of the

Lord. But when we look at, for

example, marriage, we see marriage as a gift as well,

right? Is it not?

He finds a wife, finds a good thing and obtains favor from the

Lord. But just because that in itself

is a gift. We don't expect every single

person to get married. We don't demand marriage on

everyone. In fact, Paul Paul in 1st 27

says that in the case that he was in the context he was in it,

it's better that you are as I. And he gives reasons for that.

Yes, there was persecution that was arising that made marriage

and and and that worldly care very difficult.

But he also says, you know, you secure an undivided devotion to

the Lord in your singleness. So is Paul contradicting?

What Genesis says, right? Because Genesis is often alluded

to be fruitful and multiply. Yes, be fruitful and multiply,

but also says in Genesis it's not good for man to be alone.

But we don't condemn anybody if they believe by God's leaning

that they are to be single. They are not dishonoring God in

that right if they believe that this is something the Lord's

called them to. And so we have to be careful in

using these ideas that are from a good place, but to condemn

others for not having that same convictions as others would

have. I think there is wisdom and

regulation, there's wisdom and thinking and and praying, and I

think where we have to check ourselves in this whole process.

And I hope they're asking this within the context of marriage.

I'm assuming they are right. What are your reasons in

delaying and what is your attitude toward children now?

If you, as a believing husband and wife, look at children as a

burden altogether, and you don't want to have children because of

your personal preferences and your ideas and your goals that

are disassociated from the Kingdom, then you have to

actually evaluate your heart and ask yourself, am I operating

under selfishness here or my reasons for delay?

Legitimate. But if you as a husband and wife

are wanting to devote even as a couple time to serve the Lord at

a certain capacity or you're in a difficult place where you need

to kind of put things in order before bringing a life into your

home, but in your heart of hearts, you believe that God

would want to expand your your home and to fill your quiver,

that's a different mindset. That has to be, it has to be

considered even by those who feel very strongly that we

should allow God's sovereign ways in that beautiful act and

in our in our covenant with another person.

So I would say to to just sum everything up.

I would say that it's not illegal.

It's not ultimately wrong, but you have to examine your

attitude and your reasons why. If they are righteous, if they

are God centered, then you shouldn't feel condemned by

planning when to have a child. That's how I would answer that.

Amen. Amen.

I love that that you know the world says children are a

burden. It's the Christians who can

stand out and say children, no matter when I have them or how

many I have their blessing from the Lord.

Healthy children, disabled children, adopted children.

All a blessing from the Lord. That's what sets us apart.

Amen okay. Next question.

So what does Jesus mean when he repeatedly uses the term Kingdom

of God in the Gospels? What must I do to enter it?

Is it the same as going to heaven?

How will it arrive? Is it?

Is it synonymous with the second coming of Christ?

There's a lot of. Some questions in there.

Yeah, there were and and I think there are more in the original

question. So the best way to answer that,

you read the Gospels. You see Jesus speaking about the

Kingdom of God, even the Kingdom of heaven.

I believe that there aren't any significant differences between

the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of heaven.

Some would say so. I don't believe so.

The King of God just speaks about the ruler of the Kingdom.

The king of heaven just speaks about the Kingdom itself.

Let's define some terms. What is a Kingdom?

A Kingdom is any territory that is ruled by a monarch, a king.

And so if you use that definition, then you can, you

can say the Kingdom of God. If God has created all things

and he is sovereign over things, he sustains all things.

And the Kingdom of God is really everything.

It's the universe itself. And there are Old Testament

texts that would prove that that would back that up.

But you come into more problems when you read the Gospels and

you read things like repent. For the Kingdom of God is what

it's at hand. Hold on.

If a Kingdom is the region that a king rules over.

God created all things. He rules over all things.

Surely then everything is his Kingdom.

Then what does it mean that the Kingdom of God is at hand?

It's near. It's approaching.

Now we come to a more narrow and more specific answer.

Surely the Kingdom of God is about God's sovereign rule and

reign, but more specifically his sovereign rule and reign through

the Messiah himself being that ruler.

In other words, the Kingdom of God is the Son of God ruling and

reigning on the throne, and that helps clarify many things.

So when Jesus and Luke 17 is confronted about the Kingdom of

God, he says it's in the midst of you.

What do you mean it's in the midst of you?

It's very simple because the King of the Kingdom was in the

midst of them, right? And Jesus gave examples and he

gave demonstrations by invading into his world at the time, by

demonstrating what it's like for God to sovereignly rule through

the Messiah, by healing and delivering and forgiving and

restoring. And so there is an aspect of the

Kingdom of God that has been inaugurated.

When Jesus came into the world, it was inaugurated, but the

fulfillment of it is not. Yet the consummation of the

Kingdom is still to be awaited. So the same Jesus that the

Kingdom of God is in the midst of you is the same Jesus who

told believers to pray your Kingdom come, your will be done

on earth as it is in heaven. So we are still awaiting the

consummation of the Kingdom where the Messiah, the Son of

God, will enter into our world and establish a real throne in a

real place for 1000 years. So then how do we relate to this

idea of the Kingdom of God now? Well, I think there's an

invisible aspect of the Kingdom and then the physical aspect of

the Kingdom. We are enjoying and living under

the invisible realities of the Kingdom of God.

Today. Jesus Christ is king.

He's sitting at the right hand of God.

We are citizens of his Kingdom. Now, I wouldn't say that the

church is the Kingdom of God. Some would make that mistake

that the church is the Kingdom of God on earth.

I wouldn't say that because you, you start confusing things.

We're asking for the Kingdom of God to come.

Jesus inaugurated the Kingdom when he came.

I would say that the church is like the embassy of the Kingdom

of God and that though we are citizens of the Kingdom, we are

ambassadors in a foreign land, persuading and appealing to

people to to gain their blood bot citizenship so that they

would be prepared when the King does come and that they would be

part of his Kingdom. And through our lives and our

example, our testimonies, we would show people to some extent

what it's like to be Kingdom citizens.

Because he is king of our hearts, He rules in our hearts.

And so there's an aspect of us that shows what it's like to

have the governance of God over us.

And as the Church, the Bride of Christ, we are waiting for the

Kingdom to be ultimately manifest when Jesus Christ does

return. So there is and aspect of us

being part of the Kingdom, Christ being king, we enjoy the

invisible spiritual realities of that right righteousness, peace

and joy in the Holy Spirit. That's Romans 1417 where we hear

about what the Kingdom of God is about.

And so, yeah, Jesus inaugurates it.

We wait for it at the same time, and we do our best to represent

it to the extent that we can, to convince people to be ready for

the king and to be citizens of his Kingdom.

Amen. Beautiful.

OK, this question might lead to a little bit of squirming.

So a couple years ago the Barnard group did a survey and

discovered that Christians in America on average gave 3% of

their income to churches or ministries, which then leads to

this question. How much should Christians?

And this question uses tithe or you could use give.

And then why do many people within the church not tithe?

When we think about tithing, and that word denotes a 10% right, a

portion of your income or your resources.

That was an Old Testament principle, actually was a law,

and it had an intention. There was a goal with the tithe

in the old covenant. It was this.

The Levites had no inheritance. The the tribe of Levi had no

land to their name. They were supposed to be devoted

to the the House of God. God was their inheritance and so

they did not have the same access to the resources as the

others tribes that. So what did God do in order to

support the Levites? He called for a tie from the

other tribes and it actually mounts up to more than 10%.

If you do the calculations it's more right 2023% even some would

argue, and the idea is this, the the tribes would then through

their tides support the Levites as they devoted their their time

and their energy and their lives really to supervising and to

serving in the temple. It was to support the Levites.

Now when you come to the New Covenant, that idea of the

people of God contributing in order to help those who have

devoted their lives to fulltime ministry is still there.

In fact, in First critin 9, Paul goes back to the priesthood to

make a case for the the the fulltime minister being taken

care of through his gospel work. He should be compensated through

his gospel work. The difference though, is how

that giving should occur. The goal is still the same

right? You have a people who work and

they do other things, and they benefit spiritually from those

who have given their lives over to serving in the ministry.

But the means and the way we approach that is different.

There was an actual number given in the old, and I'm sure most of

you in here know what the standard is.

According to the New Testament, what's the standard?

Whatever is on your heart? 2nd Corinthians 9 Second

Corinthians 9 tells us very plainly in verse seven.

Each one must give as he decided in his heart.

That is the clearest instruction that we are given concerning how

we should give. Here's where I would like to

challenge people, though, and this challenged me.

If hearing that you and I go good, I'm glad I don't have to

give as much as they gave in the Old Testament.

Thank God. I don't think we're thinking

right about giving if we're thinking we're in the new

covenant, so it's less burdensome to us now because we

don't have to give as much as they had to give.

We're not thinking right about giving.

So that's Second Corinthians 9 seven, right?

When you go to 2nd Corinthians 8 seven, Paul speaking to the same

people about the same thing, he says something that every single

time I read it convicts me every single time to this day.

Let me read it to you, he says here in verse 7.

But as you excel in everything, he's speaking to the Corinthians

in faith, in speech, in knowledge, in all earnestness,

and in our love for you or some transition, say, in your love

for us. See that you excel in this act

of grace also. What act of grace is he speaking

about? Giving.

He's calling the Corinthian Christians to excel in giving,

to be excellent in giving. Every time I read that, it

convicts me. So one preacher said something

and it just a light bulb went off.

He said if we are we claim to believe that we are under a

better covenant, that Christ makes everything better,

shouldn't that then demand of us?

Better giving, not less giving, the better giving, more

rejoicing in our giving, more excitement in our giving.

More intentionality in our giving.

If our covenant is better, shouldn't our giving be better?

I heard that convicted me. And so we we should examine our

hearts and we should think to ourselves constantly.

What do I really believe about the gospel, about the local

church and I'm part of about the value that I received from the

ministries that I am connected to And whether we like to

acknowledge it or not, and this is for all of us are giving to

some extent is an indication of that.

It is. It's an indication of where our

value is, where your heart is there, your treasure will be

also. That's what Jesus said, right.

So if you want to know where your heart is, what he's saying

by that is look where your money goes.

And that is not to say that we should not spend money on

vacations or good food and events.

But if in our scope of giving and our scope of how we manage

and plan our money, investing in the proclamation, the

advancement, the sustaining of the gospel and the ministries

that we are part of is not there, then we have to ask

yourself, how much do I really believe that I am under a better

covenant and that I really, I really do want this to continue

and excel? Because whether we want to

acknowledge it or not, money is a real part of what we do.

It's it's, it's even here. Do we put our trust in the

money? No.

Do we need money? In the sense of if we don't have

money, we can't do the work of God.

No, God is our ultimate source. But giving is not so much about

what God needs because he doesn't need anything.

It's more for us, and you've said this before, it's an

invitation for us to participate in something, and it even trains

us to be reminded that life is beyond what I spend, what I save

up for here. I want to invest in eternal

things and for things that will exceed my lifetime and exceed

this world. So I would say look at your

heart and and even look at your heart and ask the Lord to make

you excited about it. Not to under compulsion of or

merely under duty, but to to to operate under the revelation

that this is a better covenant. I want to as a result of that

worship and excel in this grace also, and so let it come from

that place. And the Holy Spirit will help

us. He will.

Yeah, I'm wondering, as you know, let's let's say there's a,

a Christian out there who really wants to do the right thing by

the Lord, but they don't know how.

Do you have any practical advice on giving a percentage you think

that's good? Just an established percentage

right from the beginning or a regularity, just just to help

people in that? Yeah, that's a good question.

Again, I think Paul's instruction here is clear.

It will be subjective. Your income, your family

situation, the season that you're in right now, my demand

of you something else to the next person, right.

And giving should never put a strain on you.

It should never cause you to put yourself in a compromising

situation at all. And so I would just say have

conversations. If you're married, have

conversations with your spouse about it, pray about it.

Ask Lord, Lord, what is it that you would want us to give

regularly? Would you want us to give

periodically? How is it that you would want us

to do this? And let me also add this.

I'm not one to just encourage people to throw their money at

anything, even in the name of ministry.

Even if somebody, it doesn't matter because I know there are

a lot of sketchy things out there and you're not supposed to

back up everything that comes your way just because it's been

presented to you. You should be careful where your

money goes. You should, you should be able

to investigate and say, I trust this leadership, I trust this,

their vision. I see how biblical they are.

And so just to put anything in an offering plate to say that

you give, I don't think the Bible even encourages that kind

of giving. Even if you're giving to a

ministry, you have to be careful.

You have to be wise. You have to be steward of the

resources that you have been granted by the Lord and so be

careful, be strategic, look into things, ask questions.

And that's why even here we want to be as transparent as possible

with our finances. That's why in our members

meeting we show you everything. And if you have even deeper

questions, you have every right to come to our leadership and

say, hey, we want because it's we don't see it as our money.

This is God's money and This Is Us as as a family coming

together to put in our resources because we have this collective

goal of advancing the Kingdom and advancing the Kingdom.

Looks like at this point of our ministry saving up for a

building because we want a place to host the ministries that we

are enjoying here and to make room for more people to enjoy it

as well. So yeah, don't don't be naive

and you're giving and I'll give you proof of that when you go to

first time V5. There was a whole system

established even back then about which widow should receive

financial support. Paul didn't believe this idea

where people can come in and just say I'm in need.

I'm a widow. He goes, OK, who are you?

How have you served the Saints? How old are you?

There's this whole list of qualifications that Paul had in

mind about where the money should go.

So not just anybody who comes in with rags or with a need demands

the priority of our resources. We have to be very, very careful

where that goes because people will manipulate.

People are evil. People know the generosity and

the charity of Christians that will take advantage of that.

And so we have to be very, very cautious and wise and how we

approach that. And you should be just the same

with your giving. Great.

So we have several more. How many more do you think we, I

don't know, how you guys doing? All right, keep going.

In a premillennial view, some eschatology here.

Now the Millennium includes a new temple with the

reinstatement of animal sacrifices.

Skeptics bring up 4 flaws with that delegitimately

delegitimatize this view from being a viable.

Based being viable based mainly on the sacrifices with some

attention to the temple itself. And then they this person lists

some of the objections. Yeah, we can hear them.

I think it's good. Well can we just pause and does

that already on catching on to what was just said.

So there is a belief that during the millennial reign of Christ,

after the tribulation period, when Christ does return

physically and establishes his Kingdom on earth, many who hold

to that view also would say that there will be a temple during

the Millennium and that temple will actually have a function

and in that function there will be a priesthood and there will

be animal sacrifices. And so the there are those who

obviously oppose that view and we're about to hear that main

objections to that. What's the purpose of a temple?

Being reintroduced when Jesus Christ comes to rule.

And so we all understand the question so far.

So now we're going to hear the main objections, and they're

they're good objections, but we'll we'll address them.

Yeah, the first one is why do we have that If Christ Atonement

being once and for all time was already accomplished, well, why

don't we read all of them and it maybe we'll just yeah.

Okay. So Christ Atonement being once

and for all time. That's the first objection.

The second one is. God's displeasure with animal

sacrifices. 3 God's establishment of his bride as

the temple removes the possibility of a physical

temple. And then lastly, God instituted

a proper way of remembrance known as communion.

Great question. I love this question.

It's a deep question. The idea of a temple being

erected during the Millennium period is not a random thought.

It comes from the book of Ezekiel.

So when if you, if you've read Ezekiel, you know that Ezekiel

40 to 48 is dedicated to the detailed blueprint of this

glorious temple. And it's so detailed.

I mean, there's 8 chapters dedicated to it.

And within those chapters you have even instructions of what

is to be happening in that temple.

For those who would not hold to that because of these arguments

that there will be a physical temple during the million and

they would say about Ezeka 40 to 40, that's it's allegorical,

it's speaking about the church, it's speaking about believers.

It's speaking about Christ. In some regard.

It's it can't be literal because it just doesn't make sense in

light of what Christ will accomplish and what he has

instituted in the New Covenant. And so they would say from 40 to

48, it's it's purely allegorical, it's symbolic and

it's meeting. It's not to be taken literally.

I am among those who would believe that Ezekiel's temple is

literal for the simple reason that it is given to us to be

understood literally. And so when you read Ezekiel 40

to 48, there's something interesting that pops up of an

Ezekiel 43, verse 10. I want to read it to you.

Ezekiel 43:10

And it says here, As for you, son of man, describe to the

House of Israel the Temple, that they may be ashamed of their

iniquities, and they shall measure the plan.

And if they are ashamed of all that they have done, make known

to them the design of the temple, its arrangements, its

exits and its entrances, that is its whole design.

And make known to them as well all its statutes and its whole

design and all its laws, and write it down in their site, so

that they may observe all its laws and all its statutes and

carry them out. That can't.

That can't open up the possibility that what you see in

Ezekiel 40 to 48, then, is allegorical, because Ezekiel was

instructed to take the actual blueprint and to read it out

loud, and to make it known to the people of Israel to inspire

holiness, to forsake their sin. And say we want that temple, we

want that kind of glory. So if we, because of those

arguments, want to dismiss the literal interpretation, I think

an allegorical interpretation opens you up to more questions

than actual answers personally. So then what do we do with this?

Because I think the burden is not so much on those who would

say that this is a reality. I believe the burden here based

on those objections is, OK, fine, it is a literal what's the

purpose of it? Then how do we understand its

function? And how do we reconcile that

with our faith and our covenant? And that's where I understand

where the tension is. There are many things to say

about this, and I think the main problem that people have is the

idea of the sacrifices more than an actual temple, it's the

sacrifices themselves. And here's what I would say to

somebody who would then, if you first can say confidently, okay,

this is a real temple. Ask yourself this question.

Has this temple ever been realized in history?

No, it hasn't. It wasn't recognized in

Solomon's temple. It wasn't recognized in Ezra's

temple. It wasn't recognized in Herod's

temple. This kind of manifestation has

never been known. More than that, when you read

Revelation 21, you will see explicitly that there will be no

temple. We're told that in Revelation 21

there will be no temple. But that's speaking about the

eternal age, because Christ will be there, right?

We don't need a temple. So then we got to fit this

somewhere. If it's never been recognized

before, if it's not going to be realized in the eternal age,

then what What do we have left? The Millennium?

The tribulation? There will be a temple, right?

Paul alludes to that when he speaks about the desecration of

the temple and 2nd Thessalonians.

But the shifts that will happen geographically, the shifts that

will happen in the world might demand that there would be a new

temple and that would fulfill what is Ezekiel's prophesying.

So, OK, it's there. So then why the sacrifices?

Why all these different things that seem to contradict what

Christ has done? And here's the thing that I

would challenge you with, and this would maybe encourage you

to do further Bible study. When you look at even Paul as an

example, maybe you've never thought about this.

If you read Acts carefully, there is an instance where Paul

himself actually post experience with Christ, participates in

some of the rituals and ceremonies in the temple of his

day. Does anybody know where where

I'm thinking, anybody know what I'm referring to?

I mean, Dan, you've preached to the Acts, right?

So in Acts 21 you read of James and you can turn there because I

want you to see this and I want to.

There's a reason why I'm bringing this to your attention.

In Acts 21 you read of James telling Paul and encouraging

Paul to take four men who were under a vow.

And it's believed that the vow was a Nas right vow and to go to

the temple and to have them purified and to actually pay for

their expenses concerning the purification procedure.

So I want to read that to you. Verse 23 do.

Therefore what we tell you. He's speaking to Paul.

Here we have four men who are under a vow.

Take these men and purify yourself along with them and pay

their expenses so that they may shave their heads.

Thus all will know that there is nothing in what they have been

told about you, but that you yourself also live in observance

of the law Here Is James concerned?

There were all of these rumors that Paul was going around

preaching that he is anti law, he's anti Torah, that he wants

to dismiss and cancel all that the covenants that the Jews have

known. He he just now is presenting

this new concept altogether. Dismissing that and James like

for the sake of your testimony would you just go ahead and do

this to prove that that is not the case And Paul agrees he

agrees. You read in verse 26.

Then Paul took the men and the next day he purified himself

along with them and went into the temple giving notice when

the days of purifications would be fulfilled and the offering

presented for each one of them. Now if you look at if this is an

ass right vow. If you go to numbers and you

look at the whole protocol for Nazarete, included in the

Nazarete vow was not just to extend your hair length but was

also animal sacrifices. So what do we have here?

We have Paul post salvation, teaching others about the

sufficiency of Christ's sacrifice, willing to partner

with men who underwent A ceremonial law in the temple.

You know what some people say about Paul?

He was wrong. Paul was actually in sin, that

he caved under the pressure and he did something that he

shouldn't have done. You know why I have problems

with that? Because if Paul is wrong, James

is wrong too, because he's the one who told him to do it.

And if Paul is wrong, then why? Later in a couple of chapters,

when he gives testimony of what happened, he he speaks about

this incident and there is no sense that he's in the wrong for

doing what he did. He speaks about him coming into

the temple. He's, he's disclosing the event

that led to his arrest, and he speaks about this moment.

So then what do we what do we have here?

I believe we have Paul, who is able to, with a clear conscience

to some level, participate in these rituals and ceremonies

because in his mind, he did not see redemptive qualities or

properties in his participation of it.

He does the same thing with Timothy with circumcision,

right? So here's what I want to just

propose as a possibility. If you see this example with

Paul in the temple, partnering with some of these Jewish

believers in their participation of the rituals of the Levitical

law, is it so hard to believe that in the Millennium there

will be some of this, not to atone for sin, not to undermine

the blood of Jesus Christ, but for other purposes?

That's all I'm suggesting to you, right?

There is no way that Paul approached this because he

thought that in doing so he would have some of his sins

cleansed. And when you, when you think

about it that way, then it opens up the the possibility that in

the Millennium, because where people feel strongly about this

is you're actually blaspheming Christ by thinking that you're

reintroducing the Mosaic system. When Christ is ruling A

reigning, he's the fulfillment of it.

Which I would also say, if you read Ezekiel's instructions from

40 to 48 very carefully, you don't have a reintroduction to

the Mosaic system. You know why?

Because a lot of those feasts are not reintroduced, including

the Day of Atonement. Some of the furnishings that

were there in Solomon's Temple in the Tabernacle are not there

again. So we're not reintroducing the

Levitical law in the Millennium. We're not doing that.

So we got to eliminate that. And though we may not know the

full answers to why those things will be in practice, we can be

rest assured that Christ will be honored and glorified His

sacrifices atonement will reign triumphant as the reason why we

glory in him, and that nothing will interfere or conflict with

that. I mean Paul didn't even in Acts

21. As a born again believer, I hope

that makes sense. At least entertain the

possibility with the evidences throughout scripture.

Yeah. Thank you.

Alright, this next question, I love the heart behind this

question. I don't know who submitted it,

but it it it really speaks to me as far as the the really

concerned this person has. So when we look around the

landscape of the church today, whether it be different

churches, denominations, organizations, Christian

colleges and seminaries, some pastors and ministry leaders,

even family members, we often see more secular and cultural

ideologies permeating how people think.

And what they practice and preach rather than the truth and

the gospel of Christ. Here's the question, How do we

best speak out against this when we see it?

I know every situation is different, but I wrestle at

times with whether my discontent is of a holy indignation and

from a place of true love and zeal for the Lord and others, or

if I am being self-righteous or judgmental in a way that is not

pleasing to God. Do you have any advice on how to

react with practical wisdom in these situations with others,

whether it be at home, work or social media?

When should we speak out and when should we stay silent?

Such a good question, and in some way it might tie into the

first question of this session, though not entirely.

But I would first say to this person's heart that you

shouldn't condemn yourself for feeling this way about clear

opposition and contradiction to the word of God being done in

the name of Christ and among those who claim to be leaders

for Christ. And I would say, hone that, own

that, praise God for that, and ask God to harness your feelings

so that it wouldn't cause you to act in unrighteousness.

But even the disciples, when they saw Jesus enter into that

temple in John Chapter 2 and overthrew the money changers,

John 2 · chapter mention

they saw that zeal and they realized zeal for his house will

consume him. So there is a righteous zeal

that we should feel when it comes to the purity and the

integrity and the honor that God should have in his house and

with his word. And so if you feel that passion,

I I applaud that because there's some people who care less and

they're so consumed with their own lives that they're not

consumed with the glory of God. And so I applaud that that heart

for the honor of the Lord Jesus. But the question is followed up

with, how do I express this? How do I deal with this?

And that indicates that there are people in this person's life

that are proposing this, that are preaching this, that are

sharing this, that are teaching this.

And so I would say, as he said and and he's on to something,

that the format will demand a different approach, right.

And so from a preaching standpoint, we got to deal with

it as clearly and as authoritatively as possible, to

call it out for what it is and to denounce it and to condemn

it, and to be very direct. But that's not the case for many

believers. So what the What should they do?

I would say, in hearing that, depending on the extent of your

relationship with other believers who might be

entertaining these ideologies and these philosophies and these

wrong doctrines have conversations with them, right?

And so we're told there in Second Timothy how the Lord's

servant should be. And that includes being gentle

and patiently enduring evil and being able to interact with

people in a certain way so that you would win them and that they

would come to their senses and escape the snare of Satan.

So there is a call for conversational and respectable

dialogue. And the best way to do it again,

is from Jesus's method to ask questions to say you know, or to

invite somebody out to say, you know, I saw these things that

you're posting and I heard that you believe these things.

I'm curious, no more Can I ask more about that?

And maybe it's a colleague from work where you take a lunch

break and you have that time or if it's a family member, but you

want to have a conversation with them because those people

assumingly believe that this, whatever they're believing in is

of God, is God's will, God's word.

And they're interpreting things. So have that conversation with

them and hear them out and then deal with it accordingly and

guide them. Usually when you give people a

chance to speak, they tend to give you a chance.

And I know some people are not like that, but some most are.

And have those conversations and trust that those conversations

can be fruitful and that and and here's what I always say, don't

feel like you have to win that person in the first conversation

or that first kind of interaction.

Believe that the seed that you plant can actually be enough for

them to wrestle with what they hold to.

So be patient, be patient with them, and I would say just ask

God to continue to fuel that passion in your heart and for

platforms, be able to just testify if His truth and for

divine appointments with people to hear what you have to say

concerning the truth. And I'm sure the Lord will honor

that in a day of age where people are very afraid to speak

out what God has to say. So.

Wonderful. All right, this is the last

question. You know, I don't think it's any

shock to anybody that in America we live in a very litigious

society. People love to sue other people,

but the people love to threaten to sue other people.

So this question says when is it right for Christians to seek

legal action in Scripture? We do not take our brothers to

court, but instead forgive. But what about unbelievers?

The word says vengeance is the Lord.

So is there ever a time when we should, as Christians, take

legal actions? I think you should answer that

question too, with your history and your background.

And I will ask that I'll give an answer and please add on to it.

Here's what I would say based on scripture.

There is a clear call that believers should suffer wrong

instead of taking each other to court.

Because protecting the testimony is the testimony of crisis far

greater than you gaining extra money or getting payback.

But what do we do with unbelievers?

And I would say that Paul's mentality with the believers,

the principle that he's operating under, overlaps even

with how we interact with unbelievers to some extent.

What was Paul's mindset when he talked taught that in First

Scrinthian 6, your rights, no matter how strongly you feel

about them, should be in subject to the greater cause of the the

person, the nature, and the message of Jesus Christ.

And so if you, surrendering your rights protects and Shields from

an unbelieving world, a possible scorn, mockery, disdain, then

sacrifice your rights. And Paul did that for himself

and 1st Corinthians 9. He said, I have the right to

demand material benefit from you as I benefit you spiritually.

But I surrender that right because I don't want anybody

else to say Paul's preaching to gain money from you.

And Paul's like, I'd rather glory in that than to demand

something of you. So I'm not going to ask you

anything for the gospel. And in the same chapter there he

tells the same church to give to ministers.

So Paul, he's, he's in a different world and his

thinking, he's in a different world constantly with any

situation or circumstances. He's always thinking this in the

forefront of his mind. What would bring most glory to

Christ in this? What would limit scandal?

What would protect my testimony ultimately, as I deal with the

situation and sometimes, depending on the situation, that

would require you to actually exercise your legal right.

And Paul does that. And we taught a Bible study on

that. Remember, in Act 16, him and him

and Silas were arrested. And then they go to the jailer's

house, they're converted. And then the magistrate come and

they say, hey, we were wrong. We're sorry, we didn't mean to

arrest you. You guys can leave now.

No issue, no court case. It's all done.

We dropped the case, right? We dropped all charges.

You know what Paul does? He goes, no, no, no, no, no.

You're not letting us go. Actually, we want you to escort

us out. And pious Christians in 2023

would say, Paul, that's not Christ.

Like we're people of peace. Go about your way and fulfill

your ministry. You know what Paul would say

with you? No, I'm not going anywhere.

Was Paul bitter? Did Paul want to get something

back? No, he was.

He's he was operating under the same principle and conviction as

he was when he told the believers that he would not

exercise his right to gain anything from the materially for

his spiritual service, in what sense?

What happened? What happened to Paul and Silas?

They were publicly condemned. They were publicly arrested.

They were publicly shamed and there was little information

given about their arrest. The last thing that the people

saw was that these missionaries who came into Phillip Eye are

now arrested. Surely did something wrong and

illegal to warrant that. And Paul knew that.

So Paul says, I'm not going to let the last thing that they saw

be us getting arrested. You have to bring us out and

show everybody that we were actually innocent.

Why? For the sake of the gospel.

For the sake of the testimony of Christ.

And so when it comes to promoting the gospel, when it

comes to protecting the gospel, protecting.

His, his, his glory, his name, his purpose on the earth.

Through the church, we should utilize the freedoms that we

have. I think the greatest example of

that is what we've been experiencing the past few years

when we've been told that you can't gather and meet under the

name of safety and healthcare and loving your neighbor even.

And many churches have taken the stand and and took the legal

route to say no, we have the right to meet.

This is our right. We should for what purpose?

In order for us to fulfill what God called us to fulfill.

In order for us to protect what God called us to protect an

honor, and that is to meet together as the church.

And so that is legitimate. God would applaud that according

to His word. That wisdom is granted through

Paul's example, many other incidents for us to be

encouraged to say, yes, this, this, this is something that we

can do for the good of our God and His glory.

Now, I know that this is probably more impersonal things,

personal matters. I understand that I would have

to hear the situation to give any kind of counsel or advice.

But I would say you're always safe by using Paul's mindset in

all situations. And at sometimes we'll call you

to say I'm letting this go. In other situations it would say

I can't let this, I can't let this go because this will cost

more for my faith and for others and for the wellbeing of the

church and the message of the church.

So we must fight. So we will fight.

That's how I would answer that. What would you add?

Yeah. You know, it's interesting in in

in I know this is talking about lawsuits against unbelievers,

but I I, I think it's important to talk about.

You know there's some some Christians who say that even if

a crime was committed against me by somebody, an unbeliever, I'm

not going to go to police. I'm not going to go to court

because I that's what the Bible says.

I I would just caution, especially when you're dealing

in crimes, right, whether it's spousal abuse, whether it's.

God forbid somebody murders someone that you know and you're

a witness to it or something, or whether you get called for jury

duty on a criminal case, believe it or not.

So one of the questions that I asked him in when I did criminal

juries is, do you have any religious beliefs that would

cause you to not be able to sit in judgment against someone

else? Because you have some Christians

who say I will not judge him because I'm a Christian and.

Judge not lest you be judged, right.

That's what they say. I I think that's a

misapplication of what of what Christ is saying there.

And I think actually as Christians we have a duty to to

work with the work with the government in criminal cases

because ultimately what what criminal cases are about is an

offense against the people around you, the people of the

state of Illinois. That's who's on the one side of

this, this criminal case, the people of the state of Illinois

versus the defendant. And I believe it's our job as

Christians to help the government do their job.

The government's job is to call good, good, call evil, evil,

punish the evil doer. Right.

And as good citizens, as Christian citizens, it is our

job to cooperate with that, whether it's being a witness in

a criminal case or a member of the jury in a criminal case.

Lawsuits against believers. You know, I, I, I know people

who love. Clear, Black and white.

Yes or no. Yes or no.

But it's not the case in in in most things, I would say, and I

absolutely agree sometimes, yeah, you do give up your right.

You say I'm not going to sue, but sometimes you do have to say

and looking at the Bible, yeah, it's actually my responsibility

to sue. How about the hospital?

Who's so negligent that they mess up something in your

surgery or something? Well, guess what?

If you don't pursue legal action against them, they're going to

do it to somebody else. So you might not be seeking

1,000,000 or $10 million, but I believe as the responsible

Christians, we have to make sure this wrong does not continue.

Or as Daniel said, you know, there's Christian law firms

every day suing, using the civil, criminal, civil court

system to advocate for the rights of the the.

The coach who wants to pray before a football game, Or the

nurse who won't do abortions and then gets fired, Or the cake

Baker who won't make a specially designed cake because it goes

against his Christian beliefs. These are absolutely legitimate

lawsuits. We see it in Paul, not just in

Philippians, but also in acts. Right as he was arrested.

I appeal to Caesar, right? What a Caesar.

You shall go. And then we see what the Lord

does. As Paul uses that system that's

in place, we see how the Lord uses Paul even for the good of

so many other people as he's following through in that

process. So, yeah, hope that helps.

I hope it helps to help me. Amen.

Well, that concludes our Q&A. I hope you guys are edified and

blessed. We love when questions come in

because it sharpens us and it encourages us to kind of examine

things in a deeper level. And so we were so blessed.

There are many, many other questions, obviously.

I mean it's it's close to 9:00. So we we enjoyed it.

We hope you didn't feel the the time when we just want to pray

and give God glory for all these things that were discussed.

Would you like to pray for us? Heavenly Father, you are good

and your mercy endorsed forever. Lord, your word is so good

sharper than any two edged sword.

Lord, your word gives life. Where else should we go?

Lord, you have the words of eternal life.

And thank you for the wisdom from Pastor Daniel and the

guidance. And thank you for the questions

where brothers and sisters are truly wanting to do what is

right according to your word. May you give us all wisdom.

May you give us all discernment. Supernatural understanding

illuminate our hearts and our minds as we read.

Lord, shower us with Your grace. May we live lives that are

pleasing to you, and may You transform us every day more into

the image of Christ in our thoughts and our words and our

actions. You are good, Lord, in Jesus

name we pray. Amen.

Amen. Well, why don't we sing one more

song and closing. Shall we do that?