0:29

Well. Welcome to the show

0:31

friends! Great cocoa here. shows called

0:33

stand to reason and I am

0:35

paging through a great little book

0:38

that I've had for while A

0:40

and just arg m getting back

0:42

to now on the for two

0:44

reasons. One, I finished a book

0:46

my daughter had given me. Titled.

0:49

The Fellowship And it's the

0:52

literary histories of the Inklings

0:54

particularly for Louis and Tolkien

0:56

of course at the top

0:59

And then know, oh, and

1:01

Barfield and Charles Williams and

1:03

that was five hundred pages

1:05

of text, but I kind

1:08

of worked my way through

1:10

it every evening as I

1:12

went to sleep and very

1:14

eye opening. If you're interested

1:17

in a The Inklings as.

1:19

A. Group. As a phenomenon,

1:21

whatever you need to read, this

1:23

book is a loose gay and

1:25

Zulu skier. The authors had just

1:27

simply called the Fellowship but Literary

1:29

Lives of The Inklings. Know

1:32

I'm done with. That's why we picked up.

1:35

Another book that I'd been spurned by my

1:38

bedside that I. Decided.

1:40

To. Get back. To and I'm

1:42

glad I did because I read some

1:44

things last night that on that I

1:46

want to talk to you about. The

1:48

book is called Scribes and Scripture. Scribes,

1:51

And scripture the amazing story. Of.

1:54

How we got the Bible John Meade

1:56

Md A D E and Peter Gurry

1:58

G You are or. The authors

2:01

and it in this

2:03

that the this single

2:05

book is superb. To.

2:07

Give you a great foundation in

2:09

are probably what might be called

2:11

lower criticism that is on how

2:14

the bible was assembled, how it

2:16

was transmitted, and in particular how

2:18

they can and was determined. One

2:20

of the reasons I was jumping

2:23

back into this material is because

2:25

Robbie last you a house on

2:27

it! Just finished filming for an

2:29

upcoming. Stand to

2:32

Reason University Video series that's on

2:34

the issue of Canon and we

2:36

have been talking about it and

2:38

working a little bit on his

2:40

script and so it is refreshed.

2:42

My mind is an issue that's

2:44

really important because we we make

2:46

the case for inspiration. This

2:49

book is God speaking to

2:51

us. but again sub category

2:54

of inspiration is the cannon.

2:56

That is what are those

2:58

books? That. Are

3:00

inspired that is given by

3:03

God for our authoritative instruction.

3:05

And there's some debate about

3:07

that. I'm in particular the

3:09

debate or the difference of

3:11

opinion. Are

3:13

between Protestant churches and Roman

3:16

Catholic churches about the status

3:18

of the apocrypha. Know the

3:20

apocrypha are books or that

3:22

that were written and therefore

3:25

nestle in between the two

3:27

ah testaments during the inner

3:29

Test a mental period. From

3:32

at least in our reckoning of

3:34

the way we organize our Hebrew

3:36

Bible. from Malik I, Ah, to

3:38

Matthew, that inner testimonial period of

3:40

prophetic silence before we hear the

3:42

voice of one crying in the

3:44

wilderness. And these are books that

3:46

were written during that time not

3:48

accepted by the way. By

3:50

the Jews as canon. Are.

3:53

these were helpful books the they just like

3:55

a lot of books you might read you

3:57

might read morning and evening by spurgeon these

4:01

are devotionals, right? Or you

4:04

in the wardrobe. And

4:07

this, of course, is a fictional

4:09

tale, but it has spiritual application.

4:12

I'm just using those as examples

4:14

of things that other Christians have

4:16

written that clearly are not inspired

4:18

writ, but at the same time

4:21

are useful for

4:23

our edification. And we

4:25

would recommend those things. And we have study

4:27

Bibles, too, where someone

4:30

has a

4:33

Bible includes other

4:36

material. For example, the John MacArthur Study

4:38

Bible has a lot of notes by

4:41

John MacArthur. There's a student

4:43

study Bible that has pieces in it

4:45

by me and Brett

4:48

Kunkle and Jay

4:51

Warner Wallace and anyway,

4:55

Mr. B, Tim Barnett,

4:57

etc. So the idea of

5:00

having a Bible that

5:02

also includes other helpful

5:07

writings, whether they're study or devotional

5:09

or whatever, is not unusual. And

5:12

so the majority

5:15

of Bibles, actually before the

5:18

more recent era that

5:20

were published, actually had the Apocrypha in

5:22

it. So, Sinaiticus,

5:24

which is a codex

5:27

of, I think, virtually the complete Bible that

5:29

was found in the monastery

5:32

there in Sinai. And let's

5:37

see, Alexandrinus, which is another famous

5:40

codex or full-bound

5:43

Bible, and these both go back to

5:46

around the fourth century AD.

5:49

These contain the

5:52

Apocrypha that the

5:54

Roman Catholic Bibles routinely contain and

5:56

Our Protestant Bibles no longer contain,

5:58

but even Mark. Losers German

6:01

translation contain the

6:03

apocrypha. Okay

6:05

now the the concern has

6:07

banned by by many in

6:09

the credit question comes up

6:11

in the program and sometimes.

6:15

There is a challenge that the

6:17

Protestants we don't have the same

6:19

bible as the Roman Catholics. and

6:21

course, what they're referring to is

6:23

the additional books. In

6:25

that the Roman Catholic Bibles did

6:27

what are called the Dude Row

6:29

canonical books or second canon that

6:31

are included of the Apocryphal books

6:33

or the Protestant Bibles don't have

6:35

that. An often times the way

6:38

the issue is raised is that

6:40

Protestants have removed books from the

6:42

Bible Will? This really isn't the

6:44

way it it happen and I

6:46

want to talk about this a

6:48

little bit just to give you

6:50

some perspective. But

6:52

are so regarding this issue, I want to see

6:54

a couple of. Things about canon. And

6:57

Robbie will go into detail the

6:59

course of course. His

7:01

as to are you a course on

7:03

the cannon but I'm. There

7:06

was a process of. Determining.

7:10

Which books were

7:12

properly understood? To.

7:14

Be authoritative Books that

7:16

that could be called

7:19

scripture. And God's

7:21

word. As. Given

7:24

by God through it's authors.

7:27

To. The Body of Christ

7:29

for authoritative education. And

7:32

that is. Those books that fell

7:34

under that category or canon I'm

7:36

are authoritative in themselves, and other

7:39

books may have truth in them,

7:41

but they are not authoritative in

7:43

the same way as biblical books

7:46

are. Because Biblical books are God

7:48

breathe. God is responsible for their

7:50

text through. The. Human

7:52

writers, but dog morning and

7:54

evening Sky Spurgeon has lots

7:56

of valuable truth in it.

8:00

But. That doesn't mean it's. God.

8:02

Breathed. It's just useful so you can

8:05

have books that have truth in it.

8:07

Spiritual truth that are not God breathed.

8:09

That's what Christian writers, right? We.

8:12

Right? Truth Books that have truth in

8:14

them that are not inspired text but

8:16

are helpful. Hopefully that's

8:18

what we're we're after. So

8:21

how do we distinguish state distinguish

8:23

between these two groups of people?

8:26

Or. Writing as I should say, Well,

8:29

the word cannon means rule.

8:33

Another words: it is the thing

8:35

that is the rule or the

8:37

measure or the authority regarding. That.

8:40

to which it speaks. All. Right?

8:42

So when Jesus was

8:44

teaching, he was the

8:47

authority. He was

8:49

the canon rule as it

8:51

were after Jesus last. Then

8:54

it was the disciples who he trained

8:56

to follow after him. That.

8:59

Where the canon rule these were

9:01

the ones who has the authority

9:03

to speak regarding the things that

9:05

Jesus had taught them. And so

9:07

when they read recorded the gospels

9:09

that that was record of would

9:11

Jesus taught so that was considered

9:14

the rule and then they're teaching

9:16

to the rest of the church.

9:18

And by the way when I

9:20

say that was considered the rule

9:22

it is the other Christians. The

9:24

early christians acknowledged that these were

9:26

the men's trained men trained by.

9:29

Jesus. These were the ones

9:31

that Jesus promised. That.

9:34

That after he was gone. That.

9:37

The spirit would bring it

9:39

to remembrance all that he

9:41

had taught them and would

9:43

guide them into all truth.

9:45

Now these two promises are

9:47

in the upper of discourse.

9:49

And John Thirteenth, you're seventeen

9:51

and I think move in

9:53

one isn't done. Fifteen

9:55

or one is John sixteen? So

9:57

the studio for references the spirit.

10:00

Will bring to remembers all that I have

10:02

I have taught you was one thing and

10:05

he will guide you and all truth Now

10:07

just as a point of information. I've.

10:09

Heard many christians claim. This.

10:12

Verse for themselves. While.

10:14

The Holy Spirit is going to guide

10:16

us christians, To. All truth.

10:19

Okay now the problem with understanding

10:21

that first to apply to all

10:24

christians. Is that

10:26

if that's the way God intended to

10:28

be understood, then the Holy Spirit has

10:30

failed. Because all

10:32

christians don't agree. As

10:34

to what the truth actually as he

10:36

of all regenerate people. You.

10:39

Could have good fine godly christians who

10:41

can read the same text to disagree.

10:45

So that promise obviously wasn't for

10:47

the rank and file christian. it

10:49

was for those Apostles who would,

10:51

In fact, To. The analogy

10:53

of faith is what we call it. Agree.

10:56

On the principal things pertaining to the

10:58

faith as they would communicate to us

11:01

that Jesus taught to them and whatever

11:03

revelation they would get in explaining death.

11:06

And End Arc Arc conviction is that

11:08

these authors are not contradicting each other,

11:10

cause they are all day. Of

11:13

writing scripture that is. God breathed

11:15

duchess making it up there. They

11:18

are right against their composer yet,

11:20

but God is working through them.

11:22

Okay, Is that the doctrine of

11:25

inspiration? And. So because

11:27

the early church understood that

11:29

when the disciples the apostles

11:31

rather. Spoke

11:33

on an issue that was

11:35

authoritative. So the

11:38

Living Apostles. Were. The

11:40

ones who adjudicated issues of

11:43

face and doctrine. They

11:45

were the ones who could tell you how it

11:47

was and how how it is and how it

11:49

should be hidden. Here's what's your what's true and

11:51

that know this is error. And

11:54

they did deal with that. In fact, we have. Examples.

11:57

Of that in the Book of

11:59

Acts, we see the preaching done

12:01

they are. and then as the

12:03

Apostles are writing to the different

12:05

churches, whether it's John or Peter

12:07

or Paul or look who is

12:09

a companion of Paul. In.

12:11

The Book of Acts and also the

12:13

Gospel of Luke. Writing that. Researching.

12:16

That are we have. We have all

12:18

the gospel of Mark who is the

12:20

companion of Peter. We know this because

12:22

early church fathers are recorded. This. That.

12:25

That peters. Recollections:

12:27

Were recorded by Mark and that's the gospel of

12:30

Mark. So we have. We

12:32

have these. Apis. Dalek

12:35

sources. That. Are

12:37

the cannon for the church and

12:39

then when they die, What? Amounted

12:43

to the canon. Of

12:45

the Church the authoritative Rule Where those

12:47

writings of these authoritative people left behind.

12:51

Okay, so this is Not. That tricky.

12:54

The. Main Test Or the

12:56

main? Ah, I'm. Requirement.

13:00

For a book to be

13:02

considered by the church as

13:04

authoritative. As

13:07

can scripture. As the rule is

13:09

if it came from an apostle

13:11

or us close associate of an

13:13

apostle that had an influence over

13:15

the final product. And

13:18

with that rule in mind,

13:20

virtually every New Testament book

13:22

was acknowledged to be authoritative.

13:24

Except for maybe five, we get twenty

13:26

seven New Testament books. There was questions

13:29

about revelation. It was weird, her questions

13:31

about Hebrews. They

13:33

weren't sure about the author, although the

13:35

content was incredible. And

13:37

there were questions about second Peter. There

13:40

are questions about as a second and

13:42

third John Button for the most part.

13:45

Everybody agreed.

13:48

On the bulk of the

13:50

New Testament books abbott as

13:53

having Apis Dalek authority and

13:55

therefore. Were.

13:57

can and scripture Now

14:00

notice, this is an

14:02

important fact that I'm or a feature that

14:04

I want you to get. Notice what was

14:06

going on here. The way

14:08

the canon was assembled and as time went

14:11

on in the beginning of the first, I'm

14:13

sorry, the second century and then on through,

14:15

there were different references that were

14:17

made by different writers to

14:20

books that they were quoting as

14:22

authoritative. And it

14:24

wasn't until a guy named

14:26

Marcion, M-A-R-C-I-O-N, started

14:29

tossing books that

14:32

everybody had been using that

14:35

Christians had to more formally say, wait a minute,

14:37

this guy's off the wall, he's

14:39

off the reservation, here

14:42

are the books that we use. And then they

14:44

started to more formally declare

14:46

the things that all

14:49

were acknowledging as canon

14:51

scripture. And like I said,

14:53

there were some that they were uncertain

14:55

about. And there were others, by the

14:58

way, that were acknowledged as being

15:00

useful and helpful for spiritual growth.

15:04

Books like The Dedecay or

15:06

The Shepherd of Hermas, for example, that

15:09

were also, there were some questions, should that be

15:11

in the canon? The problem

15:15

with those books is they weren't written

15:17

by apostles. And so

15:20

basically, the church acknowledged

15:23

their value for Christian instruction, but

15:25

they were not on

15:27

par with the canonical

15:29

works that were, had the

15:32

apostolic authority attached to them.

15:35

Okay, so that's the process. Now, notice

15:39

what's going on. It

15:41

wasn't an, what was

15:43

assembled or what emerged

15:45

from this, the

15:47

list that emerged of the 27 books.

15:50

It isn't an authoritative list

15:52

of books, but

15:55

rather a list of authoritative books. Let

16:00

me say that again because the

16:02

distinction is important. It wasn't an

16:04

authoritative list of books, but

16:06

a list of authoritative books. But

16:09

what's the difference? Well, in the

16:11

first case, you have someone with

16:13

authority, the vested authority, that

16:16

is declaring based on

16:18

their authority that

16:20

these books are the right books for the

16:22

canon. Now, that's the

16:24

kind of claim that Roman Catholicism makes.

16:28

We declare, since we are

16:30

the church and we're the true church and

16:32

we were the ones, and some have characterized

16:34

it this way, who

16:37

wrote the Bible so we get to

16:39

say what's in the Bible. We, as

16:41

an ecclesiastical structure, gets

16:43

to say. And so by their

16:45

authority, they declare certain books, eventually

16:48

including the Apocrypha. But

16:51

that's not the way it worked. It

16:53

wasn't any particular authority in

16:56

virtue of their authority declaring books

16:58

as canonical. It was the

17:00

body of Christ that was

17:02

recognized the authority already inherent

17:04

in the books because in

17:06

virtue of the

17:08

apostolic authorship or

17:11

association. Okay, so it's

17:13

not an authoritative list of books, but

17:15

it's a list of authoritative books. You

17:18

know, there was a book, I think it

17:20

was Walter Hooper discovered a manuscript in –

17:23

because he managed a lot of

17:25

C.S. Lewis' literary works after C.S.

17:27

Lewis passed away actually before

17:29

and then after. And he found a manuscript

17:32

in Lewis' stuff that was the beginning of

17:34

another book, what looked like that.

17:38

So they were thinking, oh, this is a lost

17:40

book of C.S. Lewis or a lost manuscript. Now,

17:44

no one was in a position to say, I

17:46

am in virtue

17:48

of my authority by fiat am

17:50

declaring this book to be C.S.

17:53

Lewis' work. Instead,

17:56

they looked at the work, the internal

17:58

evidence and anything other than that. details,

18:00

external evidence, where it was the

18:04

conclusion that this was or was not

18:07

authentic. And that's the process

18:09

by which the New Testament

18:11

was largely affirmed and assembled

18:13

as canon. Okay, so

18:15

it did take a period of time,

18:18

but the thing that took a period

18:20

of time was not like figuring out

18:22

what was actually New Testament canon, but

18:27

because most of it was already

18:29

acknowledged in practice to

18:32

be inspired by God. They still have

18:34

some others to figure out, but

18:36

they were facing these heretical characterizations,

18:39

people tossing books out, so

18:42

eventually by the end of the second century they

18:44

had pretty much nailed it down, but it not

18:47

that it was any mystery to

18:50

most of the Christians, because they were already

18:52

using these books that had apostolic

18:54

authority as

18:57

canon scripture. Now this

18:59

brings us to the question of

19:01

the Pentateuch—I'm sorry, not the Pentateuch,

19:03

the Apocrypha. And

19:06

this was something that I was reading last night.

19:08

I kind of stumbled upon

19:10

the detail in the

19:12

book Scribes and Scripture that

19:14

was—I knew some of the details, but

19:16

the change had not fallen into the

19:18

meter for me, because

19:21

on the Apocrypha from the very beginning

19:24

there was a mixed response.

19:28

Augustine, 4th century, thought

19:31

the Apocrypha was inspired

19:33

Scripture, but others

19:35

did not. Jerome did not. Eusebius

19:38

did not, the church historian.

19:41

Erasmus did not. And

19:43

so Jerome

19:46

translated the Latin Vulgate. And

19:51

Roman Catholic principles too,

19:53

Cardinal Tommaso Cajitán, he

19:56

did not. So You have

19:58

some that said yes. In some that

20:01

said no. And

20:03

and there was back and forth and back

20:05

and forth on this for a long time.

20:08

And finally. In

20:10

the fifteenth century, there was a

20:12

council call the Council of Florence.

20:14

that wasn't eight full church council,

20:16

just. Just. Say I'm. That

20:20

then declared. That the.

20:23

That. The apocrypha

20:25

was in fact something that ought

20:27

to be included. In

20:30

the out, the canon of Scripture and then.

20:33

A deck, or rather, a

20:35

hundred years later in the

20:37

Council of Trent. Yeah, now

20:39

sixteenth century. Ah, the Roman

20:41

Catholic Council of Trent. Don't

20:43

have a Defacto for all

20:45

intents and purposes included. The.

20:48

Apocryphal in it's canon know a

20:50

was going to officially say yeah, this

20:52

is part of the cannon but it

20:55

didn't do that, rather just anathema ties

20:57

to everybody who said a wasn't which

20:59

included prior Pope's would just curious to

21:02

me. Neither was. If

21:04

you don't believe the a park was part

21:06

of the cannon then be you're you're you're

21:08

You're a curse to before God. Here's

21:11

what's important about that. Council

21:14

of Florence was. Was.

21:16

Fifteenth. century. Trent.

21:18

Was sixteenth century. Pretty.

21:21

Much Fifteen Hundred years.

21:25

After the rest of the

21:27

cannon. Was. Practically.

21:30

Settled or settled for practical

21:32

purposes. You have this

21:34

these two council's Florence and

21:37

Friend declaring. The.

21:39

Canonical status of the

21:41

apocrypha. Why?

21:43

Wasn't done early on because there was

21:46

massive disagreement. Now you could go back

21:48

to the arguments that each offered a

21:50

gustin on the one hand, a drama

21:53

the other for example, to principles. Are.

21:55

you cbs harassment or some of

21:57

the others including the catholics about

22:00

why they thought it should be an or it should

22:02

be. Here's the key though. They didn't agree.

22:06

They didn't agree. And

22:10

if you don't agree, that

22:12

is evidence that the

22:14

texts are not canonical. One

22:19

of the standards for the

22:21

canon was

22:24

Catholicity, small c. That

22:26

is, they were essentially universally

22:29

acknowledged to be scripture by

22:32

all the Christians. And that's true of the 27 books,

22:35

though there were

22:38

handful, like I said, that took a little while for that

22:40

to come, people to come around on

22:42

them. But they were, it

22:45

was a modest grouping, frankly. No,

22:49

there was consistency almost from the beginning on most

22:51

of the books, except the

22:53

Apocrypha. One reason was is because these

22:56

are Jewish books, and

22:58

they were never included in the Jewish canon.

23:01

And in fact, in some of those Apocryphal books,

23:04

it's actually stated that the

23:06

prophetic word had ceased with the last

23:08

Jewish prophet. So

23:11

even they acknowledge, or some of them,

23:13

and their internal evidence that they are

23:15

not canonical.

23:18

Anyway, the big takeaway for me

23:20

was, yes, there's a difference

23:23

of opinion. Who's right? Well,

23:26

if there's a difference of opinion, that

23:28

itself is evidence that these books are

23:30

not canonical. That's

23:32

all we need. Okay.

23:36

And that was a big eye-opener for me. Okay, just

23:38

a little bit of information to help you on this

23:40

issue. Let's take a quick break, and then we got

23:42

a bunch of calls on board. Greg Coekle here, coming

23:45

back in just a moment. Would

23:47

you like a stand-to-reason speaker to speak at

23:49

your church or event? Greg,

23:52

Alan, Tim, John, and I,

23:54

Robbie Lashua, are available both in

23:56

person and online. Just

23:58

email bookingatst.com. We

24:03

can address a wide array of

24:05

topics, from bioethics, gender issues in

24:08

science, to theology, philosophy, and how

24:10

to respond to other worldviews, all

24:13

from a biblical perspective. Whether

24:15

it's a Sunday sermon, Zoom conference, or

24:17

YouTube Live event, our skilled and

24:19

engaging speakers can be there, either

24:22

physically or virtually, with the goal

24:24

of equipping Christians to effectively influence

24:26

the culture for Christ. To

24:29

read our bios and learn more about the

24:31

topics we cover, visit str.org. Then

24:34

email booking at str.org

24:36

to schedule Greg, Alan,

24:38

Tim, John, or me,

24:40

Robbie, today. Have

24:43

you ever wondered how Stand to Reason is

24:45

able to produce fresh, accessible content each week?

24:48

We rely on generous donors so that we

24:50

can provide you with the tools and tactics

24:52

you need to be an effective ambassador for

24:54

Christ. If you've benefited

24:56

from this podcast or any of

24:59

our donor-provided resources, including our apps,

25:01

blog posts, articles, and short videos,

25:03

consider making a financial contribution to

25:06

Stand to Reason today. Just

25:09

visit str.org-dot-org-slash-donate to show

25:11

your financial support. It

25:13

has been an honor providing you with a host

25:15

of free resources for more than 27 years to

25:18

help you give voice to the Christian worldview.

25:21

Help us continue by making a

25:23

financial gift today at str.org-slash-donate. All

25:26

right, A.

25:45

Let's see what

25:48

we've got here. A lot of callers on

25:50

board. That's fun. I think I'm going

25:52

to try this to see if it works in line

25:55

one, Amy. And no, it's not working for me. Can

25:57

you click it in for me? All right. Mark

26:00

and Shreve, Ohio. Mark, welcome to the show.

26:03

All right, Greg Kochel. Thanks for, thanks for

26:05

having me. You're welcome, sir. Hey,

26:08

okay. So a couple of three weeks

26:10

ago, I got the latest

26:12

mentoring letter. And

26:14

it was Sunday morning. I'm getting ready to go

26:16

to church. I'm reading it. And it was the

26:18

one about, um, um,

26:21

misinterpreting, uh, Jesus

26:23

coming to storm. Right. And

26:26

then, uh, Thomas, you know,

26:28

talking about doubting Thomas and that. So

26:31

I put this letter in my pocket

26:33

and, uh, I was been talking to

26:35

a guy about apologetics and I

26:38

thought, well, maybe I'll give him that. Maybe this will

26:40

give him a better idea. So

26:42

I'm sitting in church and the preacher gets

26:44

in a pastor gets up there and,

26:47

uh, he starts misinterpreting,

26:52

uh, Jesus coming to storm. Oh,

26:55

and I'm like, yeah, I got

26:57

this in my pocket here. And

27:00

then at the end of the, at the

27:02

end of the sermon, he goes, just

27:05

wait till next week, man,

27:07

I'm going to be preaching on Thomas and

27:09

I got a lot to say. Oh my

27:11

goodness. I'm like,

27:13

Oh my gosh. So I'm like,

27:15

kinda, kinda nervous. We're going out

27:17

of work. I'm leaving church and I bump

27:19

into him. I go, and I'm like, cause

27:22

I don't want to, I've been going there to church, let

27:24

me just, let me just clear this up. I've been going

27:26

there for over 20 years. Wow. My

27:29

family goes there. Uh,

27:32

they love them. I have a stepdaughter that's

27:34

married to his son. Um,

27:37

well, I guess that she'd be my

27:39

stepdaughter cause I'm divorced from her mother,

27:41

but, but anyhow, um,

27:44

I, uh, I love this guy. I

27:46

mean, he has been, he is very

27:48

wise and he is very kind

27:50

and, uh, and I'm not, I don't want

27:53

to, you know, I'm not mad, mad or anything, but

27:56

Sunday he was, when he was preaching

27:58

about Thomas, he started going into. saying,

28:01

well, you know, he was saying, he was

28:04

saying Thomas said he won't believe. And

28:07

he was like, like, kind of leaning towards

28:10

he was being rebellious

28:12

or something. And

28:14

then, and then he also kind of

28:17

fit in there, and Thomas

28:19

wasn't there. And I

28:22

think he was kind of trying to teach people that

28:24

if you're not going to church, you

28:27

know, you're missing something. Wait, what was it

28:29

that he said? Thomas? I missed that. Thomas

28:31

wasn't what? He wasn't. He

28:33

was because Thomas was absent.

28:36

Oh, he wasn't there. Yeah.

28:38

Okay. Yeah. So

28:40

he's relating to it like that. And

28:44

it's it's let me just ask you this. I

28:47

swear I was when I

28:50

was, you know, I started going

28:52

to church and I was

28:54

thinking about following Christ and

28:56

I had a barrier that came up. I

28:59

could not believe the

29:01

virgin birth. And

29:04

to me, that's kind of like where

29:06

Thomas was at. He was he couldn't

29:08

he wouldn't but by the mean he

29:10

was just being honest. He

29:12

couldn't because he he

29:15

had that it wasn't a

29:17

willful not doing it. It was

29:19

just the way it was. And

29:22

he needed help to get over that hump. Yeah.

29:24

I miss interpreting that. Well,

29:27

there's a couple of things going on

29:29

here. Just about Thomas. Keep

29:31

in mind that Jesus chastised

29:33

Thomas. So it isn't

29:35

like he had no responsibility at all.

29:38

Jesus, you know, I

29:40

hear pastors that that say, oh,

29:42

and he just let him down and he

29:44

was so kind and everything. No, he said,

29:46

hey, you know, stick your finger in

29:48

here. You know, that's making

29:51

Thomas go through the motions of

29:53

what he demanded. Okay.

29:55

And so I it

29:57

seems to me quite obvious that it's a

29:59

chastised. And Thomas ought

30:01

to have believed. in fact, I see

30:03

it mentioned in the letter. That.

30:05

You received that. I'm in

30:08

a parallel account and it

30:10

might have been in Luke.

30:12

I'm not sure. But as

30:14

as Jesus chastised those for

30:16

not believing their the other

30:19

disciples who had seen. So

30:22

did Thomas was asking

30:24

for proof if you

30:26

will, or evidence far

30:28

beyond what was appropriate.

30:31

Okay, And that's why he

30:33

was at. he was being chastise, so

30:35

I think that was the case. but

30:37

it was. But it's the kind of

30:39

thing where arms jesus wasn't saying. And

30:42

this was the point of my piece.

30:44

He wasn't. Commanding.

30:47

I'm blind faith. Thomas

30:50

your face should have been blind. Blessed

30:52

are those who believe we haven't seen

30:55

And people take the word scene there

30:57

is a metaphor for evidence. Blessed are

30:59

those who who believe who didn't have

31:01

any evidence. But that isn't

31:03

what Jesus says. He says blessed are those

31:06

who believe who haven't seen In other words.

31:08

Seen. With the eyes. You. Suitably

31:11

your of your friends who had seen

31:13

me, that is enough evidence you are

31:15

demanding too much of a sudden extreme.

31:18

Ah, it was over the top Thomas

31:20

and F reduces was saying, but he

31:22

wasn't saying. Don't. Ask

31:24

for good reasons. He. Him

31:27

in fact, he says there and the

31:29

parallel passages suitably. These guys. Not.

31:31

Issue to had blind faith but you should believe

31:34

these guys who had seen. And

31:36

when you think a Thomas' life. Serious.

31:38

Three and a half years with cheeses. And.

31:40

Jesus as Com and a storm, an

31:42

Isa raising the Dead and is feeding

31:45

thousands of people miraculously in his casting

31:47

out demons. And he's healing people left

31:49

and right. I mean, there's all this

31:51

stuff going on everywhere. and he also.

31:54

Predicted. His own death and resurrection.

31:56

But course, the disciples did understand

31:58

that, but never. The last. All.

32:01

Of this stuff that he saw. And.

32:03

Then when Jesus was crucified and

32:05

then his friend said we saw

32:08

the lord. We.

32:10

Saw the Lord. For.

32:12

Hims to say, I will believe unless I

32:14

stick my finger in the whole you know

32:16

and all that Well that's a bit much

32:18

and I think that was Jesus point. And

32:21

in fact, right after that account, the

32:23

very next verse. John.

32:25

Makes the point, That. The whole

32:27

reason he wrote the Gospel

32:29

of John was to include

32:31

miracles that gave evidence for

32:33

belief. And. People who

32:36

then believes base of the evidence

32:38

would. Have eternal

32:40

life from is right. There are

32:42

the next verse, so obviously in

32:44

the context. John.

32:47

Or rather, Jesus could not have

32:49

been condemning. A request

32:51

for evidence. A reasonable request for

32:54

evidence because John just says in

32:56

the next so high that that's

32:58

the whole reason he wrote the

33:01

Gospel Army was this extreme element

33:03

and that's why. Thomas.

33:05

Got chastised. So am I. I.

33:07

If if what's the pastor is

33:10

saying is something like well see,

33:12

Thomas wasn't with them and because

33:14

he was in with them the

33:16

first time he was absent, he's

33:19

a wall like people get a

33:21

wall from church. This is not

33:23

an appropriate application because that has

33:26

there is no evidence whatsoever that

33:28

that's the problem with Thomas and

33:30

to make that application is to

33:33

me in that case at it

33:35

as an upper deck and occasion

33:37

of a pastor just being over

33:39

creative and you eat his. You

33:42

find things in the text that

33:44

aren't in the tax and this

33:46

is not a good habit. Okay,

33:50

i'm gonna say something and just a moment

33:52

about if you know how to deal with

33:54

this or maybe a dresser with your pastor

33:56

but i'm that the i mean obviously that

33:58

isn't what was going on You have to

34:01

imagine this. And the problem

34:03

with, and I think I had somebody call last

34:05

week or the week before with a similar kind

34:07

of concern, where a

34:10

post resurrection appearance and Jesus is on the shore there

34:12

in Galilee and they go out in the boat and

34:14

the boat is in the church and they go out

34:16

in the water and that's the world and they're throwing

34:18

the nets and that's evangelism and Jesus

34:20

is there to help them catch the fish, which

34:23

is, they made a metaphor of the whole thing

34:25

for which there was no justification at all in

34:28

the text. The problem when

34:30

people start doing that, getting creative

34:32

and metaphorizing these things is that

34:34

there are no controls. People

34:36

can make anything up that they want.

34:39

They can assign any value to

34:41

the parts of the account they want

34:43

and it sounds authoritative, but it's not.

34:46

They're just getting too creative. Stick

34:48

with the text. All right, read and

34:50

explain as Alistair Begg puts it. Okay,

34:54

so now it comes with regards

34:56

to your pastor. Now, every

34:58

pastor gets goofy sooner or later

35:01

now and again. All right, they find things in

35:03

the text that aren't there. The

35:06

question I have is whether this is

35:08

a habit of your pastor

35:10

or is this

35:12

like an outlier? Does he generally

35:14

teach with substance? Making

35:17

an application of the actual teaching from the

35:20

text instead of getting creative. What do you

35:22

think? Well, yeah,

35:26

I'm sure you don't remember this, but probably

35:30

15 years ago I called in and

35:32

he was and he was you

35:37

know, we are God's ambassadors that Corinthians

35:40

is that right or whatever. Yeah,

35:42

and he was and he was

35:45

he was saying We

35:48

are God's parents and

35:50

he was trying to push a point, you

35:52

know, saying we have to be ambassadors Christ

35:55

as a parent. What you mean

35:57

parents like P-A-R-E-N-T-S? Yes,

36:00

that's goofy. We're God's parents? No,

36:03

no, no. We are Christ's ambassadors. And

36:12

the context that he was using

36:14

it in, I called you,

36:16

and don't talk too

36:18

soon, because you told me,

36:20

no, that's okay. It was

36:22

just a little...he was just...it

36:24

was several years ago. Okay,

36:27

so, well, I guess a lot...and

36:29

I can't remember the call, but if

36:32

he's saying that we are going

36:34

to take a parental role in a kind

36:36

of analogical sense towards other people, this is

36:38

maybe he's just using parent as

36:42

a synonym for ambassador.

36:46

So you're going out representing Christ,

36:49

and I guess you could...I mean, I would... To

36:51

your children, to your children. Yeah,

36:53

okay. Yeah, and I

36:56

don't think that's really problematic

36:58

as long as the general...I

37:00

wouldn't make that move, but

37:03

nevertheless, I don't think that distorts the meaning

37:05

of the text, and that's the key thing

37:07

here. So if

37:10

that was 15 years ago, and in 15 years, you

37:12

haven't had a lot of problems, and now this other

37:14

thing comes up, what this indicates

37:16

is this is probably just an

37:18

outlier. Okay, that this

37:21

is probably not the standard

37:23

way he teaches, and you said you've

37:26

enjoyed him, and you love him, and your family loves

37:29

him and everything. So I

37:31

guess from what I've heard so

37:34

far, I wouldn't worry too much

37:36

about him, but that doesn't mean

37:38

it's inappropriate to say something about

37:40

the pattern, at least

37:42

what happened last week, okay? Would

37:45

you say that based on what you know

37:47

about him, is he teachable? Is

37:49

he the kind of person

37:52

that would receive feedback

37:55

on his teaching? I

37:57

think he's... Mike.

38:00

I think he would be just, I

38:02

think he'd be like anybody. Like, I don't

38:04

always like when someone confronts me. Okay.

38:07

But then after it's all over, it's

38:09

like, well, you're

38:11

right. You know, you were

38:14

right on that point. Okay, well, good. And

38:16

then that would give him a chance to

38:18

maybe explain it back to me. Yeah. Well,

38:21

I think he's all for that. Okay,

38:24

well, that's good. That's a good sign.

38:26

All right, so here's, let me give

38:28

you a general thing and then your

38:30

specific circumstance. Generally, I think

38:32

it's fine to be able to go to the

38:34

pastor and talk to him about a concern. All

38:37

right. But the, but the posturing

38:39

is really important. Pastors

38:41

are going to hear from people all the time. And

38:44

a lot of times they hear complaints. Oh, I don't like

38:46

the music. I don't like this. I don't like that. I

38:48

don't like your point. And so they, you know, they, they

38:50

have to get a tough skin. And sometimes he's just tired

38:53

of hearing it. And, and

38:55

it's not always done in a gracious

38:57

fashion. So what

39:00

I would suggest, and this is the way I

39:03

manage, even in my own church, and

39:05

I was on, I was on staff at

39:07

my church there for eight years. And,

39:10

and before that, I would have occasions to

39:12

talk to the pastor. But if

39:15

you go to your pastor, you have to

39:17

ask permission, pastor, can I chat with you

39:19

about something? Something about the teaching that, you

39:22

know, I have some thoughts about or some

39:24

questions about, or I, in other

39:27

words, you want to let him know that you're maybe

39:29

some, some pushback, you know, some things

39:31

I want you to think about. Okay.

39:34

So you're letting him know that maybe you're going

39:36

to push back a little bit, but

39:39

you're asking permission. Okay.

39:41

You're not just charging in there. And

39:43

plus your posture is you're going with your hat and your hand. And

39:46

by the way, if you can do this in

39:48

a private circumstance, that's better. You

39:50

know, instead of he's shaking hands with everybody going out,

39:53

and then you start taking them to task. But if

39:55

you can, I would, yeah, I would go, I would,

39:57

I would have a meeting with him at his office.

40:00

or something. Yeah. And

40:02

maybe the way I'd say this is say,

40:04

I'd say, you know, I just have

40:06

some thoughts about some things that you taught that

40:09

maybe you could think about. And it's

40:11

not like a big deal, but

40:14

it is something that concerned me

40:16

about the way you understood or

40:18

the meaning of a certain text,

40:20

okay? And but notice

40:23

my posture is more hat in

40:25

my hand. He's my superior

40:27

because he's my pastor, right? So I'm

40:30

not going to be putting myself over him.

40:32

And I'm just going to

40:34

share some things with you, and then I'll just let you

40:36

think about it. I'll just let you

40:38

think about it. You don't even have to answer me right

40:40

now, okay? Now, what

40:43

that does is it takes the

40:45

pressure off of the pastor to

40:48

respond right away and possibly

40:50

respond in a defensive fashion.

40:53

So if you say, you know, you don't have to answer to me, but

40:55

I just want you to think about this. And

40:58

then, of course, when I

41:00

share, my attitude is now it's between

41:02

him and God, right?

41:04

I mean, unless it's if

41:06

things get really upside down,

41:09

then there may be occasion

41:12

for more conversation. But for

41:14

a thing like this, I just just have a thought

41:16

and I just want to

41:19

offer some thoughts about something. So then, whatever

41:21

it is, remember, this is the general

41:23

approach to go with your, in

41:25

a humble way, hat in your hand, but offer some

41:28

thoughts to let him think about, okay?

41:31

Now, in this particular instance,

41:33

though, you actually have a

41:36

letter from Stan DeReeson that

41:38

addresses these things. Yeah.

41:41

And you might say, I have something

41:43

I'd like you to read. It's only

41:45

a page long, where I talk about

41:47

this. And I wonder if you could

41:49

read this, and then maybe we

41:51

could talk a little bit about it, you

41:54

know, in a couple days. Hold

41:56

on, Greg. Greg, I must have I must

41:58

have not said it right. I

42:01

handed him that letter on

42:03

the way out of church that day. He

42:06

has it. And

42:08

he had it before he even preached. Oh,

42:11

no kidding. Yeah, and then he preached that.

42:14

Well, he had already preached about

42:16

coming to storm. Yeah. And

42:18

then, like, I asked him. I

42:20

was nervous. I said, Can

42:23

you read this? And he said, Yeah, I'll read it.

42:25

And I said, maybe we can talk about it later.

42:28

And then and then I waited and then and

42:31

then they kind of skipped a week because

42:33

we had a missionary come in. Yeah. And

42:36

then this this last Sunday, he

42:38

preached Thomas and he and he did it.

42:40

So apparently, apparently, that

42:42

letter didn't impress him or anything. Well,

42:45

I'm sorry to hear that. I'm sorry to

42:47

hear that. And and I, and

42:50

I mean, I know this may sound self

42:52

serving. But when people

42:54

preach Thomas, the way I

42:56

just described him, maybe somewhat the way your

42:58

pastor did, they're just getting it wrong. And

43:04

I argued my point there in that

43:06

in that letter. And then when you

43:08

do the cross reference to the other

43:10

gospel Luke or whatever there,

43:12

it explicitly makes the point that

43:15

I was making regarding Thomas

43:17

in John, Jesus is making

43:19

my point. So I think I'm on

43:22

pretty safe ground when Jesus is giving

43:24

it the same interpretation that I am.

43:26

And I didn't discover that cross

43:28

reference until till just recently,

43:30

though I had this understanding about

43:32

what was going on with Thomas

43:34

there before. Well, what

43:37

this tells me if you've already

43:39

given him this piece before he

43:41

taught, and he still went ahead

43:43

and did the teaching the

43:46

way he did contrary to kind

43:49

of the exegesis that I offered. Well, I

43:51

don't know what you can do. He's decided

43:54

not to engage it. And I think

43:57

probably the best thing to do is just let

43:59

this ride down. not talk

44:01

to him anymore. He's already given you an

44:03

answer in his actions and and it's

44:06

wait and see if this habit

44:08

continues because if this habit continues

44:11

people who are teaching things out

44:13

of context are no

44:15

longer teaching Scripture. They

44:17

are teaching their own ideas but they

44:20

are not teaching Scripture even if they're

44:22

using Scripture the words of Scripture

44:24

as a proof text. If

44:27

you're teaching the ideas that are not

44:29

the ideas that the writer intended when

44:31

he wrote it then you're missing it. And

44:35

when Jesus calmed the storm this

44:37

was not an occasion for his disciples to

44:40

wonder what kind of storms can Jesus calm

44:42

in my life. That isn't

44:44

the why that's given. What happened

44:46

when Jesus calmed the storm at least

44:48

one incident is they fell down

44:51

at their feet and worshiped him. They

44:54

said who is this man that commands

44:56

the wind of the seas? And

44:59

that's the message of the calming of the

45:01

storm. It isn't what about the storms in

45:03

your life? If you teach and what

45:06

about the storms in your life you're teaching a sermon

45:08

that's not in the text and

45:10

you're also missing the sermon that is

45:12

in the text. This is telling us

45:14

about Jesus and who he is. That's

45:18

what we're to take away from that. That's

45:20

the reason it's in the it's

45:22

in the the the

45:24

gospel. The writer put

45:26

it in the gospel to tell us

45:28

something about who this man is. And

45:30

if you don't preach that and you

45:33

preach something else you're not preaching the

45:35

gospel. So now look

45:37

at there's there's lots of

45:39

people, lots of pastors

45:41

that metaphorize passages. You know there's

45:43

David and the

45:45

pastor saying who are the Giants in your

45:48

life that you want God to defeat? That's

45:50

not the point of that passage. Nevertheless

45:52

they've gotten in this habit and you just do

45:54

the best you can. You can't beat up your

45:57

pastor every time he takes a word verse out

45:59

of context. But if you're

46:01

with a pastor who does this

46:03

consistently, well, you've been there for 20 years,

46:05

but if somebody—then maybe it's

46:07

time to find another source of

46:10

teaching. You know, I sit in my own church and I got

46:12

a good pastor who's a good teacher. It doesn't mean I agree

46:14

with everything that he's done. So—and

46:17

we have a really good relationship.

46:22

But sometimes, you know, there's

46:24

no perfect pastors out there, you know, and

46:28

so, you know, you're not

46:30

going to agree with everything. But—so we let

46:32

a lot of things slide, okay? But

46:34

sometimes it's fine to mention it. In this

46:37

case, though, you mentioned it by giving the

46:39

letter that has a very careful characterization. You're

46:42

not there for him to feel all defensive and

46:44

all—whatever. He doesn't have to defend his ego or

46:46

all that. There's not that dynamic because you handed

46:48

him a letter. He can read in private. And

46:51

then he still ignores it. Well,

46:53

that tells me that he's not that teachable, to be

46:55

honest with you. Okay. Oh,

46:58

okay. Yeah, that would be the

47:00

concern I'd have. And

47:03

I'm just like, you know, I don't know what else

47:05

to say. Yeah, well,

47:08

that was helpful. I

47:11

was kind of—it was really kind of

47:13

bumming me out a lot. And I

47:15

don't want to be—because I'll be honest with

47:18

you, years back when I first started

47:20

getting into the apologetics, I

47:23

was—I'm sure I was abrasive.

47:27

I'm sure. I mean, I tell him to

47:29

him. But—

47:32

Well, I hope he treated you right. He did. Yeah,

47:34

yeah, yeah. Yeah. He

47:36

was—yeah. And he was right. I

47:39

mean, he was right in some of the ways

47:41

because I was more—I don't

47:43

know what I was doing. I

47:45

was—I'd get fired up about something.

47:47

Yeah. And— Hey,

47:49

Mark. I got to jump to another

47:51

caller here because we're getting close to the end of

47:53

the show. But I hope that helps, okay? Yeah, thanks.

47:56

Thanks, Greg. Have a good one. Bye-bye. Bye-bye

47:58

now. Let's— go right

48:01

away to Justin and Amy you're gonna have to push that button there.

48:03

Oh no I got it it worked. Or

48:05

did you push it the same time I did? Oh

48:08

he did? Okay Kyle. Justin welcome to

48:10

the show. Hey

48:12

Greg thanks for taking my call.

48:14

Sure. So I'm kind

48:17

of new to the show. I

48:20

don't know that much about you still.

48:22

I've just recently seen some of your

48:24

videos on YouTube. I

48:26

do know that you're a trusted voice though

48:28

and I've really been enjoying watching

48:31

your videos. Thank you. Recently

48:34

just saw some videos you did

48:36

on your show dealing with original

48:38

sin and I found those very

48:41

helpful. Mm-hmm. And

48:43

in it you said that you were more

48:45

classical Augustinian in

48:48

your understanding of original sin

48:50

is that right? Yeah yeah

48:53

I think there's a I definitely believe in

48:55

original sin you know that

48:57

seems to be orthodoxy but how that

49:00

plays out in God's

49:03

judgment particularly the concern about those

49:05

who are children who die before

49:08

an age of accountability kind

49:10

of thing or those children who die in

49:12

the womb either through miscarriage or through abortion

49:16

then there's you know it gets a little tricky to try

49:18

to figure out how does that all play out. Oh

49:21

absolutely yeah. Okay

49:24

well so I

49:26

would consider myself more reformed

49:30

theologically and I don't know where

49:32

you stand like I said I'm just now

49:34

started with you. I'm reform I'm not confessional

49:37

but I do I hold

49:39

to sovereign grace. So

49:42

yeah so in that regard with

49:44

regards to soteriology I am reform.

49:47

Okay well good I think you're

49:50

the perfect person to ask about this then. I

49:53

listen to mostly reformed teachers

49:55

like R.C. Sproul and you

49:58

know John MacArthur I know he's not really

50:00

reform but more Calvinist. No, well

50:02

yeah, reform is the

50:05

larger category, Calvinism is a subset.

50:08

Right. So if you're Calvinist, you're reformed, and

50:10

John MacArthur's reformed. Yeah,

50:13

so I really enjoy listening to him,

50:15

Steve Lawson, those kinds of guys.

50:19

What I found though is by far

50:21

the majority of them are cessationists,

50:25

and I did not grow up that way. I'm from

50:27

South Carolina, I grew up at a Southern

50:30

Baptist Church. Really

50:33

didn't know what cessationism

50:35

or continuationism meant

50:38

until later

50:40

in life, but it's

50:42

really given me a good

50:44

deal of consternation the last few years

50:46

because these men that I respect so

50:49

much, I'm still trying

50:51

to chew through theology and kind

50:53

of find, develop

50:56

my own theology,

50:58

and for them, for someone

51:02

to say that the Holy Spirit speaks

51:04

to them or

51:06

you know all the

51:09

different terminology we like to use for

51:12

God leading us in a direction and

51:14

trying to follow His will. To

51:16

them, that's like an attack on the

51:18

sufficiency of Scripture. It's almost blasphemous to

51:20

say that God would speak to us,

51:23

and now I know that

51:25

there are some kooky charismatic out there who

51:29

would go as far as to say that God

51:31

audibly speaks to them and that they visit heaven,

51:33

and I think that's nonsense.

51:36

But for the majority of Christians, or

51:38

at least in my Southern Baptist circle,

51:41

it's not uncommon at all to say that

51:44

the Lord speaks to us and to pray

51:47

that voice and not

51:49

an audible voice, but just for the Spirit to

51:51

lead you. And so I

51:53

guess my question is, is

51:56

it merely semantics that the two

51:58

sides seem to be... arguing over

52:00

or because I hear the Spirit

52:05

impressing things on them. Surely

52:07

they wouldn't say that the Spirit doesn't communicate

52:09

at all or that the only way we

52:11

can kind of know God is I want

52:15

to be careful how it feels. Right. I'm

52:18

with you here. I do have some things

52:21

to say about this but I have more than

52:23

we have time in this hour

52:25

so I'll open up here and if you

52:27

don't mind holding on I'll carry you over

52:29

to the next hour because there's two different

52:32

aspects of this. Okay. There are the

52:35

cessationists and the continuationists.

52:38

Those categories have to do with

52:41

the role

52:43

of certain spiritual gifts in the life

52:45

of the church and

52:47

those gifts are usually what

52:49

are often characterized as sign

52:51

gifts and that would be

52:53

speaking in tongues. It would

52:56

be prophecy. That would be maybe

52:58

a word of wisdom or a

53:00

word of knowledge. Those

53:03

kinds of things but characteristically it's

53:07

speaking in tongues or prophecy. Now what

53:09

a person like John MacArthur would argue

53:11

is that these had a

53:13

role in the early church and

53:16

when the canon was complete when

53:18

all of God's Word was

53:21

available then those

53:23

kind of specialized

53:25

gifts were no longer necessary

53:27

and nor did they were

53:29

they required as sign gifts

53:31

so they were not necessary

53:34

to give contentful information from

53:36

God and they were no

53:38

longer give us there

53:40

were no longer need for signs to

53:43

affirm the teaching of the Apostles. That

53:46

had been accomplished. Now we got

53:48

the canon and therefore these

53:50

gifts just on their

53:53

own died away. Okay. Now

53:55

I'll just tell you whether

53:57

or not that means God could ever speak to you.

54:00

anyone, that's a different issue, but I'm

54:19

reformed. I have never heard

54:21

any of

54:30

those gifts. Those weren't

54:33

gifts like the prophetic word and speaking

54:35

in tongues. I have no sense that

54:37

when I read about those in the

54:39

book of Acts that what they're doing

54:41

is giving the kind of revelation that

54:43

now the Bible gives to us. I

54:46

mean we have Ag of the prophet, you know, binding

54:48

Paul's hands and saying, this is the way you're going

54:50

to be bound when you're in Jerusalem. Well,

54:53

that's a prophetic word and he was a

54:55

prophet. But that

54:57

wasn't a word for the whole church. That was

55:00

a word for Paul about what he was

55:02

about to face, you know, and

55:04

then there was a other prophetic word about a famine

55:08

that was going to take place. And

55:10

so they provided for that financially for

55:12

others. So it doesn't seem

55:14

like even the prophetic words were functioning

55:16

in the place of revealed scripture so

55:18

that once we have the revealed scripture

55:21

we don't need this other thing. It

55:23

just doesn't make sense to me. I mean,

55:25

it doesn't seem to fit. Now that doesn't

55:28

mean I'm affirming

55:30

every claim to

55:32

prophecy or tongue speaking or anything

55:35

like that. All I'm

55:37

saying is the doctrine of the end

55:39

of the gifts, the cessation of the

55:41

gifts, I have not been

55:43

persuaded by any argument that

55:46

this is obviously going

55:49

to fall away of its own

55:51

accord as the way rather

55:54

John McCarthy would put it. They would just

55:57

cease, you know, these gifts would just cease.

56:00

know. I don't have a

56:02

reason to believe that. And also

56:04

miracles would be another one, whether there

56:06

are gifts of miracles. It

56:08

seems to me there can be occasion of

56:10

miracles, even though there's not a

56:12

gift of miracles. I don't know. So I'll

56:15

just say for the record here, I got 45 seconds before we make

56:19

our transition to the next hour, but for the

56:21

record I would just say I am

56:23

not convinced at all

56:25

that these are the kinds of gifts

56:28

that cease. Paul says

56:30

specifically in 1 Thessalonians chapter

56:32

5, do not despise

56:35

prophetic utterance.

56:38

However, we need to examine everything

56:41

carefully. So

56:44

I do have concerns about all of

56:46

this language, about God speaking to all

56:48

these people the way they talk about

56:50

it. But

56:52

I, in fact, it's my

56:54

next book to be honest. But

56:56

even in spite of those concerns,

57:00

I mean, I'm not a

57:02

cessationist. So I'm not coming at

57:04

this issue as a

57:07

cessationist. So hang on here. We're going to

57:09

put you back on hold and then

57:11

we'll come back to you at the beginning of the

57:13

next hour and continue our conversation. Can you take care

57:15

of that for me, Kyle? Thanks. And

57:17

but for the rest of you, you're going to have to

57:20

wait until

57:22

the next show for

57:25

us to finish our discussion. Great cochlear for

57:27

stand to reason. Give them heaven, friends. Bye-bye.

57:47

Mm hmm.