WEBVTT

1
00:00:02.000 --> 00:00:09.000
All right, we're live.

2
00:00:09.000 --> 00:00:29.000
My cat just suddenly wanted more attention. Um, well, welcome to the live stream. My name is Mike Winger. We're going to talk about name calling today. I've been calling people names. Um, uh, not just as, like a habitual thing I do all the time, but on occasion, I've been calling people names, and it is not something I do. I know some of you have been worried seeing me on X.

3
00:00:29.000 --> 00:00:42.000
What happened to Mike? Why is he being so aggress sometimes? I have done this in videos as well, but I think maybe it's more noticeable when you see it in a little snippet on a message on X.

4
00:00:42.000 --> 00:00:48.000
So when is it biblical to call people names? That's the first question we're going to deal with today.

5
00:00:48.000 --> 00:00:56.000
And I've definitely got pushback recently on this topic. Then I'll go to your guys. Questions. The goal is to think biblically about everything. That is our agenda.

6
00:00:56.000 --> 00:01:03.000
That's what we're going to try to accomplish. For, like, the last hour, she's been sitting in her little spot over here. Now she's, uh, Micah over here.

7
00:01:03.000 --> 00:01:33.000
She just wants some camera attention again, I guess. Um, so I called Sean Foyt names. Let me give you a specific example. I called Sean Foyt names. I called him, uh, Sean the fraud foight. Now, some who don't know, he's a worship leader. He's really connected politically. Um, I'm preparing to do a video on him. It's going to be like kind of a iceberg video on Sean Foyt. I think that's the best way to format it and present it. Um, and you'll understand why once you see the video. But it's going to be a bunch of work behind the scenes. That's what I'm working on.

8
00:01:33.000 --> 00:01:51.000
But I did go online and I called him, um, Sean the fraud foight. Because, uh, I'll tell you why at the end of this question. Then I'll get to your questions. I called him Sean. Someone get this on camera. Foight. And I called him Sean Firebomb foit. So it's like true name calling to call him these things.

9
00:01:51.000 --> 00:02:01.000
And I used to feel, uh, I used to feel conviction that name calling in general was wrong as a rule. Like, as a very, very, very broad rule, like you just don't call people names.

10
00:02:01.000 --> 00:02:34.000
But there are many instances, and this is where it kind of like got me sort of wondering if that was correct. There's a number of examples in the bible of people name calling. And it's clearly done in a way that is righteous. Like the context indicates that this is a godly name calling, that they're being called names in a way that is approved by God. In fact, God does some name calling. So let's give you an example. Probably one of the most stark examples of this, uh, on both sides, is where Jesus in Matthew, he actually says not to call people names, at least not to call them a fool.

11
00:02:34.000 --> 00:02:53.000
But then there's going to be some. I'm going to give some pushback on, uh, why that is not a rule for all people of all time in all scenarios. It is a general idea. You don't call names, generally speaking. But there are times when it's appropriate, and I'm going to talk about what those times are. Hopefully we can have some wisdom here. So Matthew, chapter 5, verse 22.

12
00:02:53.000 --> 00:03:12.000
Here we have on your screen, um, I didn't get to the verse for some reason. Matthew 5, 22. There we go. But I say to you that everyone who's angry with his brother will be liable to judgment. Whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council.

13
00:03:12.000 --> 00:03:19.000
And whoever says, you fool will be liable to the hell of fire.

14
00:03:19.000 --> 00:03:55.000
So you just say to somebody, you're a fool, like, you're potentially in serious trouble, like, liable to fire from hell. By the way, if you're watching this on the vertical live, go to my channel, go to the live streams. You'll see there's a widescreen version of it as well if you happen to see it on. Because YouTube's doing some new things with streaming. Apparently they stream vertical as well. So this would seem like, okay, problem solved. Mike, don't name call. Like, you will be judged for name calling. And see, I want to agree with you and say I'll be judged for name calling, but not probably in the way that many of us think. Many of us Christians in America in particular think.

15
00:03:55.000 --> 00:04:17.000
We, um, tend to think like, oh, any name calling is sin, and so you will be punished for it. But that is not the full council of scripture on the topic. So if we go in the same book, Matthew, to the same speaker, the Lord Jesus himself, who said, don't call anyone fool, right? Or whoever says, you fool will be liable to the hell of fire.

16
00:04:17.000 --> 00:04:24.000
He also says to the pharisees, in Matthew 23:17, you blind fools.

17
00:04:24.000 --> 00:04:33.000
Then in verse 18, he says, um, uh, he says, you blind men. Again, he's calling people names.

18
00:04:33.000 --> 00:04:36.000
He's calling them names.

19
00:04:36.000 --> 00:04:44.000
He calls them blind and not just fool. Right? He escalates it you're blind fools. You're not just fools, you're blind fools.

20
00:04:44.000 --> 00:04:53.000
He calls them other things too. Jesus calls these guys brood of vipers. That's why you are. He's calling them snakes. When you're a brood of vipers, you are small.

21
00:04:53.000 --> 00:05:03.000
A, uh, cluster of child snakes is what he's saying. Brood of vipers. You are whitewashed tombs, he calls them, full of dead men's bones.

22
00:05:03.000 --> 00:05:10.000
He says that they are hypocrites. He refers to them in Matthew 23:15 as sons of hell.

23
00:05:10.000 --> 00:05:36.000
I mean, this is so much bigger than anything I've ever said about Shaun Foyt or Benny Hinn or those guys. Um, Benny Hinn, I called him. I believe I called him a scumbag, I think was the term I used, which I 100% stand behind. And you'll understand why by the end of this first question. And you can disagree if you want. Of course, this is not learning how to think like Mike, but learning how to think biblically. So find scripture. This is the one thing I'll say, find scripture that shows me I'm wrong on this.

24
00:05:36.000 --> 00:05:43.000
I'm going to balance it out. I'm not just saying blanket. Call anybody any names you feel like. No, you will be judged for that.

25
00:05:43.000 --> 00:05:49.000
And I will be tested for the names I have used. And I stand soberly in awareness of that.

26
00:05:49.000 --> 00:05:51.000
But I think I did what was right.

27
00:05:51.000 --> 00:06:19.000
So Jesus also called Herod, who's one of the. One of the rulers, right? He's a ruler of the Jews at the time. He's the highest up, uh, underneath the Roman occupation. Roman, uh, uh, occupation is not the right word for it, um, whatever the term is. Basically, they're in the Roman Empire, which. Which they didn't have the full authority of their government. But Herod, King Herod had the most authority that any Jewish king was ever going to have. After he died, they never had that much authority again.

28
00:06:19.000 --> 00:06:24.000
Herod had a good thing going with Rome. So Jesus calls him a fox.

29
00:06:24.000 --> 00:06:26.000
A fox.

30
00:06:26.000 --> 00:06:44.000
You tell that fox, or. I think there was a different Herod. Never mind. Scratch that. The Herod, when Jesus was born is what I was thinking of anyways. There's multiple, um. But he calls him a fox. So it's a ruler of the Jewish people. He calls him a fox. That is not a compliment. He's crafty and deceitful and cunning in a bad way.

31
00:06:44.000 --> 00:07:13.000
So Jesus name called, but it wasn't just Jesus, but probably the most extreme example of Jesus name calling. And he does it not even to a True bad guy. It's in Matthew 16:23, because like Herod or the Pharisees, you could call them all bad guys, although some of those guys got saved and gave their lives to Jesus later on. But in Matthew 23:16, Jesus name calls Peter and he says to him, get behind me, Satan.

32
00:07:13.000 --> 00:07:21.000
Let me make sure. Okay, just making sure. I didn't have an emergency message. Um, so he calls him Satan.

33
00:07:21.000 --> 00:07:31.000
Now then it reinforces, you are a hindrance to me, for you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man.

34
00:07:31.000 --> 00:07:35.000
This is what he says. Sorry, I didn't put it on your screen there. There we go.

35
00:07:35.000 --> 00:08:03.000
Satan, he calls. He calls him. So clearly Jesus is okay with name calling, at least in certain circumstances, while he has a general rule that you will be judged for the names you use of people and don't do it as an expression of anger and stuff like that. But there is a, there is some appropriate name calling. Now some to this would respond and say, but, Mike, you're not Jesus. And I get this response all the time. Whenever Jesus does something that people in our sort of cultural version of Christianity that they're uncomfortable with our traditions.

36
00:08:03.000 --> 00:08:39.000
Um, and then you say, well, I think I'm following Jesus here. Sometimes people will argue and go, no, here's where you're not following Jesus. Let me explain where you're breaking from Scripture. Others will just say, you're not Jesus. So whatever Jesus did doesn't count for you. I'm just like, that's not a good hermeneutic. That's not like how we think biblically. To just tell people you're not Jesus, end of story. Tell me why the fact that I'm not Jesus means I shouldn't follow him in this example. That's what I want to ask. Right? That is what I want to ask. Why is the fact that I'm not Jesus bringing m the reality that I should not follow Jesus in his example in this area?

37
00:08:39.000 --> 00:08:48.000
That's what I want to know. And there can be answers to that. There's things that Jesus may do that I'm not going to do. Um, but generally speaking, I need to have an argument for it.

38
00:08:48.000 --> 00:08:54.000
So Jesus did it. But let's say those of you who feel that way and are like, yeah, but Mike, you're not Jesus.

39
00:08:54.000 --> 00:09:03.000
Well, we can go to some other passages of scripture. So in Isaiah, chapter 56, verse, chapter one. Excuse me, Isaiah.

40
00:09:03.000 --> 00:09:09.000
Oh, I have two different passages. Well, I guess we'll look at the 56:1. I forget why I wrote it down. We're about to find out.

41
00:09:09.000 --> 00:09:59.000
Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. So it says here, uh, his watchmen are blind. They are all without knowledge. They are silent dogs. They cannot bark. Dreaming, lying down, loving to slumber. It's a description. Description. Description sounds like something tasty. It's a description of the leaders that how they are, uh, watchmen who are blind. So they can't watch for anything. They won't protect anyone. They're silent dogs. That is, the dog is there to bring an alarm, raise an alarm, to yell, to, to bark so that people will be alerted that there's danger. And they're silent. Instead, they dream, they lay down, they love to slumber. The dogs have a mighty appetite. It goes on and says they never have enough. But they are shepherds who have no understanding. These are all name calling things that God is doing. But earlier in Isaiah, chapter one, check this out.

42
00:09:59.000 --> 00:10:08.000
Now, if you were going to bring a really hard message to the people of Israel, would you start it this way?

43
00:10:08.000 --> 00:10:12.000
Hear the word of the Lord, you rulers of Sodom.

44
00:10:12.000 --> 00:10:35.000
You're like, I know if I was to go preach somewhere and it was a really corrupt in church environment, and I got up on stage and I opened my mouth and the first thing I said was to the leaders of the church, hey, lead pastors, um, hear the word of the Lord, you rulers of Sodom. That I would definitely be greeted by many, many people saying, mike, that was not the most effective way to build a bridge to reach your audience.

45
00:10:35.000 --> 00:10:53.000
And I would say, you might be right, but you might be wrong. In this case, it's divinely orchestrated by God himself saying, you are rulers of Sodom. Give ear to the teaching of our God, you people of Gomorrah. They are compared directly to the most wicked people that they can think of in memory. That's what they're directed to.

46
00:10:53.000 --> 00:11:10.000
Why is he so harsh? Uh, because it was needful. God knew that that was the right moment, of course, the right time to bring that exact kind of accusation, to maybe shake people awake or, or maybe just as a proclamation of their wickedness so that they could not have an excuse because they'd been called out.

47
00:11:10.000 --> 00:11:23.000
So there's other stuff though. And it's not just God doing it, Jesus doing it, who's also God with us, but we see it like in Jude, In Jude, verses 12 and 13, you see this.

48
00:11:23.000 --> 00:12:08.000
These are hidden reefs at your love feasts. Uh, some translations say spots at your love feast. They're an insult to say this of them as they feast with you without fear. Shepherds feeding themselves. That's name calling, guys. Shepherds feeding themselves as opposed to feeding the flock. Waterless clouds, kind of like the, the blind guides, right? That the irony, the, the, the smack talk of scripture is often irony, juxtaposition of ironic ideas, right? Like waterless clouds swept along by winds. Fruitless trees in late autumn, twice dead, uprooted. They are wild waves of the sea casting up their foam, the foam of their own shame. Wandering stars for whom the gloom of utter darkness has been reserved forever.

49
00:12:08.000 --> 00:12:30.000
Now I think that this is true of some of the people, some, not all, some of the people I've made videos exposing. I would say this is a good description of them. But if I had used these words and people didn't realize I was quoting scripture, I would definitely have been rebuked for it by many, many people in the comments. What I'm saying is not that I'm mad at you for it. No, no, no. I think I would have felt the same way as you years ago.

50
00:12:30.000 --> 00:12:52.000
I want to help you think biblically. And so I encourage you that name calling is a biblical tradition. It goes into scripture. Name calling done properly, done appropriately, is something we see in the Bible. And a great example of it is in Acts, chapter seven. And again, this is another one where a guy is, um, interacting with a hostile crowd.

51
00:12:52.000 --> 00:13:45.000
So here we have Stephen standing before, uh, the Jews who are, I mean they're all Jews basically. In the church there's a bunch of Jews and outside the church is a bunch. But the Jews and the rulers and the mob that's coming against him right now, those guys are very hostile. They're very angry at Christians, they're very mad at these messianic believers, uh, these ones who think Jesus is the Messiah and all this other stuff. So he could give them a really nice, soft, happy, like bridge building sermon. And that's what 99.9% of people in Western communities would think to do. Build bridges, Be like friends, brothers, I love you so much and God loves you so much and just love, love, love, love, love, love, love. And then finally maybe get to the part where. But we feel like you've just missed it a little with the gospel. You've missed it with Jesus, you've missed it with the Messiah.

52
00:13:45.000 --> 00:14:44.000
And I'm not saying that it's evil to do that. What I'm saying is don't make that the rule that everyone has to obey. Right? You can do that. Maybe that's the wisdom the Holy Spirit gives you in the moment. Or maybe he gives you what he gave Stephen, which is totally different here. He says to them at the end of his thing where he's going through how many of the, uh, leaders of God, the prophets of God, that they have killed and stoned and rejected because they were rejecting Jesus. And he calls them here at the end. I'm going to read a bunch of verses here, then we're go back over it. So notice not only what he calls them, but also notice his heart towards them at the same time. He calls them names while he loves them at the same time. You, stiff necked, uncircumcised in heart and ears, you always resist the Holy Spirit as your fathers did. So do you. I can imagine him pointing at them. Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? And they killed those who announced beforehand the coming of the righteous one whom you have now betrayed and murdered. He uh, could be thinking of John the Baptist even specifically right there.

53
00:14:44.000 --> 00:14:57.000
And he says that they'd murdered the righteous one. You betrayed and murdered the righteous one for you who received the law as delivered by angels and did not keep it. This is smack talk, name calling, hardcore.

54
00:14:57.000 --> 00:15:00.000
Now when they heard these things, they were enraged.

55
00:15:00.000 --> 00:15:11.000
Stephen, I really feel like you blew it there. You had an opportunity to witness and you really enraged the crowd. That was evil of you, Stephen. That was wrong. You misrepresent the heart of Jesus. Don't you know that Jesus is lowly and gentle?

56
00:15:11.000 --> 00:15:18.000
Hey, he's also harsh and bold and able to say things in people's faces. You know, it's both things are true.

57
00:15:18.000 --> 00:15:57.000
Now when they heard these things, they were enraged and they ground their teeth at him. But he, full of the Holy Spirit gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. And he said, behold, I see the heavens open and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God. This to them would have been the most anger creating thing to declare that Jesus is, uh, the Son of man who's standing at the right hand of God like that. So they cried out with a loud voice and stopped their ears and rushed together at him. They cast him out of the city and stoned him. And their witnesses laid down their garments at the feet of a young man named Saul.

58
00:15:57.000 --> 00:16:09.000
And what did he do while he was being killed? And as they were stoning Stephen, he called out, lord Jesus, receive my spirit. And falling to his knees, he cried out with a loud voice, lord, do not hold this sin against them.

59
00:16:09.000 --> 00:16:12.000
And when he had said this. He fell asleep.

60
00:16:12.000 --> 00:16:44.000
The beautiful way of saying it, he fell asleep because he is not truly gone. Right? Yes. Yes, his body died, but he. Well, you know, he's dead. Yes, it's true. You could say he's dead, but he's also going to live forever in Christ. And, um, that example is beautiful because he straight up calls them exactly who they are. But he also. You could tell there's no bitterness in it. It's not. It's not just selfish anger. It is a proper, righteous declaration of truth to these people. It's a rebuke. But then he cries out, father, forgive them.

61
00:16:44.000 --> 00:16:46.000
He cries out, father, forgive them.

62
00:16:46.000 --> 00:17:20.000
And that's a beautiful thing to show what his heart really is towards these people. So when is name calling appropriate? When is it okay? I think that there's several rules I'm going to offer that I think are biblical. One is, it's obviously true, because any name calling that's not true is lying and slander, and that's evil and wicked. And so if I call someone a dirtbag and they're not actually a dirtbag, like, maybe they made some mistakes, but they're not like what we think of as, like, no, that guy's, like, evil. You know, if they're not like that, then I shouldn't actually call them that. That would be untrue, and I would be accountable for that.

63
00:17:20.000 --> 00:17:27.000
Um, so it's truth telling. And here's what hit my heart. Here's what changed my mind on this and made me actually start doing it more and more years ago.

64
00:17:27.000 --> 00:18:19.000
Um, I realized that too much niceness, too much decorum of niceness, is actually deceitful if you just do it all the time. What I mean is this. If I'm dealing with someone, like, let's say, Shaun the Fraud Voight, and I say I'm gonna treat him like I'm dealing with a brother who has just stumbled into some error, and he's just made some mistakes, and we want to restore him back, you know, and it's just like being really, really careful and using kid gloves on how I deal with this man and not realizing, like, no, this guy's, like, doing evil. He's doing. Actively doing evil. He's been rebuked and exposed, and he then attacks the people who try to expose him and continues doing his evil and lies about them publicly. And, no, no, he's an actual bad guy. Um, if I was to treat him with kid gloves, I'm actually deceiving the audience into thinking he's not as dangerous as he is.

65
00:18:19.000 --> 00:18:43.000
So I'm actually. Niceness can be a lie. And this reality hit me when I was reading, um, sometimes theologians or scholars, um, who would review the work of someone who is a wolf, like a wolf, an evil wolf who's harming the body of Christ and bringing them down, spiritually destroying people. And they would review their stuff, and they would just be like, well, his ministry style is not the same as what I would do.

66
00:18:43.000 --> 00:18:50.000
And I thought, I get the impulse to say that, but you have lied about the man.

67
00:18:50.000 --> 00:19:32.000
If you're going to evaluate them at all, you have to say the truth about them. You can't just say something soft like, this was an error I had in my, um. Which I've already talked about publicly in my first big video I did on Bethel. I was too nice. And I don't. When people say I was too nice, they mean it like they're patting themselves on the back, like they're so loving and kind. No, you see, being too nice to the leadership at Bethel was actually being mean to the audience. Now, the reason I was too nice is I actually didn't know nearly as much as I found out later. Okay. I didn't know things were as rough and bad as they were, that the teaching was as bad as it was. But there were some elements of their teaching that I did know were pretty messed up. And I definitely.

68
00:19:32.000 --> 00:19:53.000
I definitely called it out. But I think. I think that I just had too light of a hand. And I know a lot of people who saw my Bethel video from years ago. You really liked that way of handling things. And it is likable. It's desirable to see people being talked about that way, even with disagreement. And I want to try to do as much as I can. Don't get me wrong. I want to build bridges as much as I can.

69
00:19:53.000 --> 00:20:10.000
But it was also misleading. Like, I had to make other videos later, and I left it up for. For, uh. It doesn't get tons of views right now, but if for, um, historical. It's there, like, I made it. I want it to be there so people can see the whole product process of, uh, changing of thoughts.

70
00:20:10.000 --> 00:20:49.000
But, uh, in that video, that niceness was unwarranted. And what I should have done was just been, um, not let me assume the best publicly and then declare things that sound like you're better than you are, how about I just say nothing about certain things I know nothing about, and I just confront the stuff that I'm aware of that would have been a better approach, and that's what I should have done. And now I realize that, that when I knew more, I had to come out even stronger. I have to say I actually said, you know, Bill Johnson is deceitful. Um, and I know that really burned a lot of bridges. I am now viewed by many people in those circles as being carnal and unspiritual and ungodly for using the phrase.

71
00:20:49.000 --> 00:20:53.000
But it's true. He's a deceitful man.

72
00:20:53.000 --> 00:21:00.000
He is a deceitful man. You're like, no, Mike, you don't know him like I know him. You don't know him like you know him. I have the facts. I have the evidence.

73
00:21:00.000 --> 00:21:09.000
Um, even now, Bethel is deceiving its people, which that's not what this video is about, so I won't get into it. But, um, even now they're continuing.

74
00:21:09.000 --> 00:21:58.000
They have two faces. The one that you see publicly, and then there's the other one that people send me private messages about, and witnesses come forward privately and don't want to be named. So anyway, um, I realized that. So it's a truth telling thing. Name calling is about telling the truth. It's about helping clarify realities. When Herod is called a fox by Jesus, it's because that's exactly what he is. That was the perfect way of saying what he is. When Jesus calls the Pharisees blind guides, it's because, what a great way of helping others to know who he is. And here's one of the cool things that happens when Jesus calls the Pharisees blind guides, hypocrites, blind fools, um, um, whitewashed walls, sepulchers, um, with Debon's bones in them. When he calls them all these things, something amazing happens in the eyes of the people. And this is exactly why we don't name call normally.

75
00:21:58.000 --> 00:22:09.000
It's that these people who they looked up as the lofty Pharisees, I mean, if you learned the Torah, you learned it from a Pharisee when you were a Jew. So these guys were your teachers, that you respected them.

76
00:22:09.000 --> 00:22:15.000
They were highly regarded in their culture. Highly regarded. They were good guys.

77
00:22:15.000 --> 00:22:25.000
And compared to the Sadducees, they were way better than the Sadducees. So, um, when Jesus calls them these names, it lowers their esteem in the eyes of the people.

78
00:22:25.000 --> 00:22:36.000
Now that's exactly why you don't normally name call, right? People casually throw all the time. Every Christian on YouTube is a grifter. They'll like, they're a grifter. They're a grifter, They're a grifter. And they casually throw it out. You're accountable to God for that.

79
00:22:36.000 --> 00:23:02.000
They're not all grifters. I'm not a grifter. Um, but you're accountable to God for saying, but if there's a guy that is a grifter, like Brandon Biggs, the false prophet Brandon Biggs, who is a grifter. Absolutely. He really is a grifter. Like, good. Call him a grifter. Tear down his reputation such that people realize who he really is. Such that. So he can't control and manipulate them. And that is what the Pharisees were having happen to them. The people were going, jesus called them these things.

80
00:23:02.000 --> 00:23:42.000
Doesn't mean I disrespect them like, they're not even humans. Doesn't mean I don't want them to know Christ and to be reached out to and to be saved. But it does mean that people are protected from the veneer of fakery that these people present while they manipulate and harm others. Benny Hinn should be known as having victims. Benny Hinn should be known as being an evil man who has hurt a lot of people, who has exploited the poor, especially old women, and has brought a lot of harm to them, who is a fake and false prophet many times over, who has used repentance. I know everybody's like, but he repented. No, he lied to you. I already shared the evidence. Go watch my Benny Hinn video. It's four hours long. I'll link it below when we're done.

81
00:23:42.000 --> 00:23:55.000
It's important to tear down the deceitful reputation people have been by giving them a true reputation, sometimes with proper name calling. Jesus did it. He did it.

82
00:23:55.000 --> 00:24:07.000
Um, Paul did it when he calls them super apostles. This is a mockery. Oh, you're super apostles, huh? Uh, so you're super. This is appropriate mockery that just immediately takes the strength away from these people. In a good way. That's appropriate.

83
00:24:07.000 --> 00:24:28.000
But you do it wrong. You're accountable to God because you're wielding a very strong weapon. It's kind of like with do not kill. That's the general rule. Don't name call. Yeah, yeah, yeah. General. There's times where it's appropriate. Murder is bad, but death penalty appropriate when it's done right. Self defense appropriate when it's done right. Um, there is name calling that's appropriate when it's done right.

84
00:24:28.000 --> 00:25:04.000
So there's a danger of carnality. Um, but softening our response to evil because we're not willing to say strong words. And I don't mean cursing and Some people will try to think I'm arguing for cussing, and no, I'm not. Um, but because we're not willing to say things that are in your face, realities that people don't like. They're uncomfortable. Um, that's deceitful. That's actually deceitful. And it can be fear, it can be cowardice. It can be a lack of moral clarity that allows us to do it. Okay, but when do we not call names? I'm gonna give seven times not to call names. So, number one, most of the time. Most of the time. And here's.

85
00:25:04.000 --> 00:25:09.000
It's a strategic reason and a character reason. But Philippians 4. 5 says the following.

86
00:25:09.000 --> 00:25:13.000
Let your reasonableness be known to everyone.

87
00:25:13.000 --> 00:25:21.000
I like that. Reasonableness be known to everyone. There's also what you guys may be familiar with, the new King James, let your gentleness be known to all men.

88
00:25:21.000 --> 00:25:39.000
Now, why is the same word translated reasonableness and gentleness? Well, let's just say both are options for translation. And when you have a man who is reasonable and gentle, that's his reputation. Your reputation should not be, oh, that guy goes around calling everyone names. Like, if that's your reputation, something's wrong with you.

89
00:25:39.000 --> 00:25:48.000
That's not good. And the name calling you do has no power. It's empty. It's powerless. Who cares? Who cares what names you call people? You always call people names.

90
00:25:48.000 --> 00:26:25.000
Your reputation should be, I am gentle and I'm reasonable. That is my normal thing. So when I raise my voice and, uh, make an accusation and call someone a name, you know that this is not just Mike being Mike. It is a person of conviction who does not normally do that. Right. Who normally tries to say, I think that what they're doing is bad. I think. I think they're in error. You know, they normally try to work through what someone's doing as gently as they're able to. That's honest. But there's times where they rise up and they go, that's a wolf. That's an evil man. And that is what gives credibility to it. So most of the time, you need to not name call for character reasons and for credibility reasons.

91
00:26:25.000 --> 00:27:13.000
And number two, when you don't call names is you don't really know. You don't really know. You're bandwagoning like, maybe I called someone a name online. But you don't. You don't know what I know, or you haven't watched the video, or you haven't seen a presentation, or you haven't listened to the witnesses at all. And you just know Mike called someone a name, so I'm going to call them a name too. I think that's inappropriate. I think you have to be informed. I think you can't just bandwagon. You need to actually know what you're talking about to some degree. And this is why there's a bunch of guys who are probably worth being called names at that. I don't call names online because I haven't looked into it personally. I just haven't. Um, even though they're, they're high profile guys and everybody knows about them, I have not personally examined the evidence. And I think it's irresponsible for me to go beyond what I know. Um, another third time you don't, uh, call names is when it's a personal grudge.

92
00:27:13.000 --> 00:27:47.000
Um, it can be tempting to call someone a name, you know, something they've done wrong, to do, name calling, to do, to assign them with a label of this is who they are and it's something bad, um, because you're just personally angry and hurt. And that is probably the worst time to do it. Wait until you're calm and then see if you're still, you know, you might have still anger in some sense, but make sure you're calm and that you're in your right mind. Here's the thing. Scripture tells us that your wrath is dangerous. And it tells us in James that, um, the wrath of man does not produce the righteousness of God.

93
00:27:47.000 --> 00:27:58.000
So let me read to you verse, uh, 20 of James 1. The anger of man, or New King James says, wrath of man, uh, it says, does not produce the righteousness of God.

94
00:27:58.000 --> 00:28:30.000
It's the produce of the anger of man. My anger does not lend me towards God's righteousness. It lends me towards vindicating, um, myself acting out to make myself feel better or just releasing anger that I have in my heart. And so I'll find that two people can do something wrong. And I would never call this person a name, but this person, when they did the wrong thing, they did it to me. And so now I'm in a name column. But I only busted out that more extreme reaction because it was a personal offense, not because it's who they are. And people need to be warned.

95
00:28:30.000 --> 00:28:41.000
Not because, uh, it would save others or that it would confront them and rebuke them properly and give them accountability before God. But I did it to make me feel good. I did it to alleviate my own anger.

96
00:28:41.000 --> 00:28:49.000
That kind of name calling is. I want us to be very cautious. Please don't step into it. Which is why verse 20 is prefaced with verse 19.

97
00:28:49.000 --> 00:28:54.000
Let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger.

98
00:28:54.000 --> 00:29:17.000
Right? Why? Because your anger doesn't produce. So if it's just coming out of impulse, sudden anger to call names. Slow down, slow down. Will you still feel this way in the cold light of day? That's the question. Will you still not feel this way? Will you still have conviction that this is right in the cold light of day? Um, so, um, number four, your name calling is not helping anybody.

99
00:29:17.000 --> 00:29:57.000
Um, it can help people by confronting the person, but it can also protect people. Like it took the Pharisees down a notch. And this is why I do it. Uh, this is why I name call, um, Sean the Fraud foight, because, um, I want to help people to see the truth and to derive him from more of his ability to, uh, get people's money. What he does routinely is, it seems to me, is, uh, get in between donors and ministry work that is good. And the ministry gets funneled through Sean. And he has tactics of doing that. And then, um, I don't believe that he's spending the money the way he should. And I'll give you evidence that makes me think that when I make my video.

100
00:29:57.000 --> 00:30:20.000
So, um, yeah, it can protect people. Um, and if you're not protecting anybody, you're not helping anything, you're not confronting in some sort of godly way, you're just venting, maybe don't do it. What's the point? What's the fruit of this? How is this distinguishable between I'm saying this righteously versus I'm just saying this because I'm venting and I'm just emoting my anger. If you can't tell the difference, then just don't do it.

101
00:30:20.000 --> 00:30:35.000
Um, also, if you just have a strong impulse to do it, Number five, when you don't name call is you have a strong impulse to do it. But if you're really honest with yourself, you're not sure that this is right.

102
00:30:35.000 --> 00:30:42.000
So then that may be driven by impulse, by gut reaction, even by carnality. So I would say hold off.

103
00:30:42.000 --> 00:30:48.000
Number six, don't name call when you would not say it to their face in a sober and honest way.

104
00:30:48.000 --> 00:31:00.000
Um, I would absolutely say all the names I've said of all these guys. Um, and it's not that many guys, but of all of them, the ones I use names for, I would absolutely say it to their face. I have no qualms about that.

105
00:31:00.000 --> 00:31:10.000
Um, I would do It. When, uh, I did my video on Chaon, um, I called him a liar in my video, But I said it to his face first, actually, when we had our meeting.

106
00:31:10.000 --> 00:31:15.000
And, um, I said, you're a liar. And then I gave him the evidence to show he was a liar.

107
00:31:15.000 --> 00:31:24.000
So that's important. And if you don't have the courage to say it to their face, I don't see why you would say it to, uh, anybody.

108
00:31:24.000 --> 00:31:31.000
That's just weird to me. Now, it's one thing to go, well, they would beat me up or something. Like, maybe you're worried about something.

109
00:31:31.000 --> 00:31:52.000
You can protect yourself. I get that. But to not have the courage to be able to have that person know what you're saying about them and be targeted, where if you commented and then they responded like, why are you saying that about me? And you would suddenly be like, oh, no, why are you saying anything? You should be like, oh, because of this, this and this. These things are true. You need to get right with God.

110
00:31:52.000 --> 00:31:55.000
Um, then it's appropriate.

111
00:31:55.000 --> 00:32:08.000
And the seventh one I'll say is it's the difference between a personal grudge, which is a violation against me, versus actual righteousness. Now, sometimes these things overlap, right? Because someone violated me in some way. That is a violation of righteousness.

112
00:32:08.000 --> 00:32:32.000
But here's the test. Um, maybe you have a friend, and you know that they lie to people all the time. You know they're a liar. They've always been a liar, but you didn't really care. And then one day you find out they've been lying to you for years about something important, and now you're mad. Now you're mad. That liar, he's a liar. And now after years of you knowing this person lies all the time, you find out they've lied to you, and now you want to tell people he's a liar.

113
00:32:32.000 --> 00:32:38.000
That is not righteousness on your part. That is personal grudge. You didn't care about lies. You care about yourself.

114
00:32:38.000 --> 00:33:10.000
So when you're willing to do this to protect others, to not look out for your own interests only, but the interests of others, that's a good sign. If rather, my name calling comes only because of personal grudges. And I've absolutely done that. Not online, but I've done that. Like just driving down the street, yelling in my mind about a driver or something like that. Yeah, I've done that. Um, if they cut someone else off, I wouldn't be nearly as upset. They cut me off. Now I'm much more upset. This just shows this impulse. We have that I just love me and I'm the special one, and no one should hurt me. That all of us feel.

115
00:33:10.000 --> 00:33:27.000
Um, when someone steps on my neighbor's foot, I don't care as much as when they step on my foot. It is the love of Christ that compels me to be willing to give of myself and willing to care more about others. And I want to pursue that. So don't think personal grudges are a good reason.

116
00:33:27.000 --> 00:33:51.000
There will be a test. And this is the thing I'll end on, and then I'll explain, um, why I have those three names for Sean Foyt. So Matthew 26, verse 36. And I had posted about Shaun the fraud on Twitter, in case you didn't see it, but where I use those names. Um, but this is about us being tested.

117
00:33:51.000 --> 00:33:58.000
Then Jesus went with them to a place called Gethsemane, and he said to his disciples, this is not the passage I was looking for.

118
00:33:58.000 --> 00:34:05.000
Um, it wasn't Matthew. Hold on.

119
00:34:05.000 --> 00:34:13.000
Uh, 1236. Not 26.

120
00:34:13.000 --> 00:34:24.000
Jesus says, I tell you, on the day of judgment, people will give account for every careless word they speak. For by your words, you'll be justified, and by your words, you'll be condemned.

121
00:34:24.000 --> 00:34:33.000
Now, a, ah, kind of casual reading of this verse. These two verses may cause you to think, so don't ever call names, because you'll be given account. Actually, that's not what it says.

122
00:34:33.000 --> 00:34:46.000
It says, you'll be given account for every idle word, which would include if there was an evil man and someone asked you, what do you think about Benny Hinn? And you said, well, I think he's a nice man. He's doing the Lord's work. You're accountable for that, too.

123
00:34:46.000 --> 00:34:49.000
You're accountable for that, too.

124
00:34:49.000 --> 00:34:54.000
Yeah. Every idle word, including compliments, including empty compliments towards evil men.

125
00:34:54.000 --> 00:35:31.000
Every idle word, but also name calling. And so I have to give an account for the name calling. And was the name calling appropriate and right? I am accountable for that, and I do weigh that before I do it. And you should as well. So there is a biblical tradition of righteous name calling. Yet there is a lot of dangers along the way that you want to do it well. And hopefully we're thinking biblically about it. Here's the reasons why, and I'll go to your guys. Your guys. Questions. Here's the reasons why I called Sean those names, and it's the three names were Shawn the fraud. Foight, Shawn. Someone get this on camera. Foight. And Sean Firebomb. Foight. Here's why I did it. Number one, Shawn the fraud Foite.

126
00:35:31.000 --> 00:36:02.000
I think not in some technical legal sense. Uh, you know, someone else would have to have the wisdom to be able to prove those things. I think that when it comes to what people believe his ministry is. It's an Instagram ministry. It's not real. Um, he doesn't do all the things that you think he does. He doesn't do all the things that he pretends to do. And he collects money, and he moves it around in weird ways. And he's increasing his financial wealth incredibly over time, incredibly, in ways that do not seem right. And I'm saying that softly.

127
00:36:02.000 --> 00:36:28.000
Uh, I'll share the evidence. So I think that the image that he presents to the world is not real. The ministry he presents to the world is not doing what he thinks it is. And the donations he's receiving are for. For what they're supposed to be doing isn't really happening in full. And I do have evidence to back that up. So he. So it's fraudulent, it's fake. Um, is it legally? Is there fraud? I don't know if he has some workaround where he's somehow able to. I would imagine it's illegal, but I don't. I don't have that expertise.

128
00:36:28.000 --> 00:36:29.000
Um.

129
00:36:29.000 --> 00:37:07.000
Uh, so the next one was Sean. Someone get this on camera. Foight and Sean Firebomb Voight. Okay. This comes from an instant in instance in Canada. That was, I guess, was it last year or earlier this year? I don't recall now. And Sean, uh, Foyt was in Canada, and he was leading worship in this church. He's a worship leader and a political guy and all that stuff. And somebody came in, and the news report suddenly came out that they were attacked. And Sean goes immediately on camera, and he tells people that somebody threw two firebombs at them in church, and that someone threw a firebomb at. At his face.

130
00:37:07.000 --> 00:37:11.000
And then he says, good thing I worship with my eyes open.

131
00:37:11.000 --> 00:37:14.000
Uh, implications, so he could dodge the thing.

132
00:37:14.000 --> 00:37:19.000
So firebombs are like a real. Fire bombs are dangerous firebombs. That's like attempted murder.

133
00:37:19.000 --> 00:37:24.000
That's attempted mass murder in a church to do that.

134
00:37:24.000 --> 00:37:46.000
Well, not too long after this video footage surfaced showing exactly what happened. It wasn't firebombs. Uh, what was thrown was smoke bombs. Smoke is not fire, guys. Smoke bombs, like the ones they use at gender reveal parties. It's the same ones. And someone threw one on the far right side of the stage, not near anyone. And someone threw one on the Far left side of the stage.

135
00:37:46.000 --> 00:37:56.000
Neither was thrown at anybody. Sean didn't have to have his eyes open. He didn't dodge anything. He actually then asked, and this is where the. That's where Sean Firebomb Foite comes in, because he just lied.

136
00:37:56.000 --> 00:38:07.000
And then, uh, Sean went and grabbed one of them because he wasn't scared, because it's not a firebomb. And he held it in his hand and he held it up and he said, someone get this on camera.

137
00:38:07.000 --> 00:38:14.000
I thought that was such a good, perfect picture of his whole ministry. Someone get this on camera. That is the theme of his ministry.

138
00:38:14.000 --> 00:38:23.000
So these names are appropriate and I'll demonstrate why in the future. But we're going to go to your guys questions. Thinking biblically about everything, or at least trying to.

139
00:38:23.000 --> 00:38:50.000
Question number two. This comes from Berean street, who says, should churches avoid Bethel linked music, including songs by other musicians, but attributed to Brian Johnson because its use may promote questionable doctrine or financial support, financially support Bethel ministry. So I have been so torn on this question, like, should we not use Bethel's music? Um, and here's the reasons why I'm torn.

140
00:38:50.000 --> 00:39:17.000
There are a number of worship leaders that have signed and done music through Bethel or have worked alongside, say, Brian Johnson or something like that, co writing something. And it doesn't mean, like, they're all bad. And it's a bummer to, like, suggest that we shouldn't use their songs based upon an association that maybe is kind of casual, I don't know. And I'm nervous about that. Like, I'm nervous to pull that trigger. Then another reason not to worry about it is that some of the songs are great.

141
00:39:17.000 --> 00:39:31.000
I mean, not just, okay, great, all of them. No, of course not. But some of them are really great. I could, I could bring up the lyrics of a Bethel song and be like, tell me this isn't a great song. The lyrics are amazing on this particular song.

142
00:39:31.000 --> 00:40:16.000
But there's a problem. Of course, some of the lyrics are not great. Some of the lyrics are their theology. And they've expressly said in now, I think, deleted videos that they're trying to get their theology of their movement, which they're unique. The things that are unique about Bethel are problematic, aside from just trying to inspire people to seek, uh, the Lord to step out in faith in general. That's a good thing. But they've purposely put some stuff in their songs that is their theology. And when they're singing songs like, the sick are being healed right now, that is when you combine that with like, word of faith type views. That's a proclamation in there. And sometimes the things that they believe prophetically, extra biblical prophecies can be embedded into songs.

143
00:40:16.000 --> 00:40:27.000
So that's a real concern. It's not in every song, but it's definitely there. There's some songs that are just wrong. Um, then there's another layer of issue here. This is why I'm torn.

144
00:40:27.000 --> 00:40:40.000
I didn't realize until recently how much money they were actually making. Okay. I've written some worship songs, but I've never even registered them with ccli And I don't even know what churches might use them or not. I'm happy if people use them. And I don't care. And they don't need to give me credit, and I don't. I don't care.

145
00:40:40.000 --> 00:40:47.000
Um, so I have no idea, like, how much money is made. But Bethel Music made, like, I think it was $90 million in one year.

146
00:40:47.000 --> 00:40:52.000
$90 million. And Bethel Music's express.

147
00:40:52.000 --> 00:41:11.000
It's on their tax forms. Their express purpose of existence is to serve Bethel Church. Now they. To the public, they're acting like they're very separate entities, but that's because of the Sean Bulls fiasco. And they're trying to say, well, Jen Johnson, Bryant, uh, they didn't really know what was going on. Bethel Music, they didn't really know any updates on Sean Bowles. And I'm like, I think they.

148
00:41:11.000 --> 00:41:16.000
I think they are actually lying to everybody about that. I don't believe that for one second.

149
00:41:16.000 --> 00:41:24.000
Not one second. Oh, yeah, your son and daughter didn't know about. About this, even though you said, anyway, I'm not going to get into it.

150
00:41:24.000 --> 00:41:26.000
I don't believe that for one second.

151
00:41:26.000 --> 00:41:31.000
Um, and Bethel Music has been hostile.

152
00:41:31.000 --> 00:41:58.000
I can't even tell you the story. Never mind. What I'll tell you is this. Bethel Music is, um, as an entity, problematic for a couple reasons. One is it is the thing propping up so much of the financial prosperity that is allowing Bethel to continue having too much of an influence, a bad influence in the church. And for that reason, it would be better for the body of Christ if Bethel Music wasn't doing so great.

153
00:41:58.000 --> 00:43:07.000
Um, in addition to that, um, the, um, the impact, the. The fact that Bethel is not really reforming, even though they think they say they are, and they're. They'll talk about changes they've made and stuff like that, but I'm aware of those things, but I don't believe it's sufficient to fix anything. And, um, and because of that, the ongoing, Ongoing Influence of Bethel music is going to be the ongoing influence of Bethel and their whole thing. Their whole thing. It's just going to ramp back up. Even if it hits a low point, it'll ramp back up. And that's been the philosophy, um, of their church and their ministry for a long time is we celebrate people even if they fail, even if they've fallen, even if they did horrible things, we still celebrate them and we learn from them. And that's what they're going to want people to do from them, I believe so. A long time ago, Bill Johnson said that when people come to events and concerts for Bethel music, um, not bethelmusic.org but because of the music of Bethel, when they come to these events and concerts, that there they get a chance to bring their teaching into churches and into people around the world.

154
00:43:07.000 --> 00:43:13.000
And so you can't really divorce Bethel music from Bethel's influence.

155
00:43:13.000 --> 00:43:20.000
And for that reason, it would be, I think, wisdom to try to move away from their songs and away from their content.

156
00:43:20.000 --> 00:43:26.000
I, um, would not leave a whole church because they played a Bethel song. And I think that's divisive and an overreaction.

157
00:43:26.000 --> 00:43:29.000
Um, I think you'd need more reasons than that.

158
00:43:29.000 --> 00:43:45.000
But I think it would be wisdom for Christians and churches to say, how do we move away from this? I feel like we're feeding a system that is unhealthy. And I didn't realize how much money they were getting from these worship songs.

159
00:43:45.000 --> 00:43:53.000
There are other worship songs out there, guys. You can find them. So I would. I would suggest that I think it's wisdom for the church to move away from their stuff.

160
00:43:53.000 --> 00:43:57.000
Question number three.

161
00:43:57.000 --> 00:44:24.000
Um, Hayden Ayers says, Considering passages like Isaiah 10, Leviticus 20, how can Christians support pro life legislation which enshrines into law basic blanket protections for mothers who sacrifice their preborn children? Okay, let me read those two passages and I'll tell you guys, we've already got all ten questions. Um, so I don't want you to, you know, keep punching your questions in and getting.

162
00:44:24.000 --> 00:44:45.000
It's kind of frustrating to keep punching a question and it's not getting answered. All 10 are already asked. And if you're ever thinking, like, I ask my question all the time, it never gets answered. Um, that does happen to some people. It's not intentional. Maybe try a different question because there's some questions that I've already answered them enough times, or we've already answered them. On the website BibleThinker you can find the question already answered.

163
00:44:45.000 --> 00:44:54.000
And then we don't want to keep repeating them. Um, so if you keep asking the same question never gets answered, it may just be that it's better to ask a different question.

164
00:44:54.000 --> 00:45:10.000
Isaiah, uh, 10, 1, 2. Woe to those who decree iniquitous decrees and the writers who keep writing oppression to turn aside the needy from justice and to rob the poor of my people of their right, that widows may be their spoil, and that they may make their fatherless prey.

165
00:45:10.000 --> 00:45:13.000
Uh, make the fatherless pray.

166
00:45:13.000 --> 00:45:25.000
Um, yeah, so evil decrees are evil. Um, Isaiah 10 for sure. And then we've got, um, Leviticus 20, verses one through five.

167
00:45:25.000 --> 00:45:40.000
The Lord spoke to Moses, uh, say, to the people of Israel. Any one of the people of Israel or of the strangers who sojourn in Israel, who gives any of his children to Molech shall surely be put to death.

168
00:45:40.000 --> 00:45:43.000
The people of the land shall stone him with stones.

169
00:45:43.000 --> 00:46:23.000
Isn't it interesting that. So this was. They would take their babies that were born, and they would, uh, offer them to Molech, um, to burn alive. Um, they would kill their children as a sacrifice to Molech, trying to get favor. Um, and you got to believe that in that culture, what they would do is likely, um, they would sacrifice and burn, especially kids if they were born with deformities or if they, like, already had a girl and they just wanted boys now so they might bring the girl forward, that that's just what would have happened. And it's the same thing people do with abortion is, you know, like, do I want this baby? And that kind of thing. So it is similar. It's not to Molech, but it is.

170
00:46:23.000 --> 00:46:44.000
It is similar if you take away the actual deity, you know, the acknowledgement of a deity, and you recognize that they're doing it for the idea of their own prosperity. My life will be better without this kid. That's what's generally believed. Even if they say, well, this kid's life is better if I kill them, nobody believes that, um, it's, my life will be better. I don't want to have to deal with them.

171
00:46:44.000 --> 00:47:39.000
Verse 3. I myself will set my face against that man and will cut him off from among his people because he has given one of his children to Molech to make my sanctuary unclean and to profane my holy name. It's interesting how the man is given primary responsibility here. Doesn't mean the woman's not responsible. Do not read that into what I'm saying. She's absolutely responsible. But he's the head of the household, and back then you wouldn't have a Mom doing it without the husband's permission. Right. That's a modern abortion reality. Um, where the father just gets no, say, um, so, uh, yeah, one, um, of his children to Molech, to make my sanctuary unclean and to profane my holy name. And if the people of the land do it all close their eyes to that man when he gives one of his children to Molech and do not put him to death, then I will set my face against that man and against his clan and will cut them off. The clan, the whole clan, from among their people, him and all who follow him in whoring after Molech.

172
00:47:39.000 --> 00:47:42.000
This is not just an issue of Molech.

173
00:47:42.000 --> 00:47:46.000
This is, uh. Oh, I'm sorry I haven't put it on screen for you guys.

174
00:47:46.000 --> 00:48:43.000
My bad. This is not just an issue of Molech. This is an issue of God, um, saying when you kill people, when you have a practice of murdering your children, if you do not do something to that person, uh, I don't want to say something. If you do not put them to death, life for life, if you not put them to death, then I will set my face against you. And that is absolutely what's happening in America. This is a great parallel for abortion now. And yes, it factors into the death penalty. God says to them, do the death penalty. And if you don't, not just punish them, but you don't kill them, I will come after. You actually said this is pretty extreme. Now you might be. We're not under the Old Testament law. Well, we're not. That's 100% right. We're not under the Old Testament law. But the Old Testament law still reveals things about righteousness and truth, does it not? Okay, to your question, considering those passages, how can Christians support pro life legislation which enshrines into law blanket protections for mothers who sacrifice their preborn children?

175
00:48:43.000 --> 00:48:57.000
Um, so I have not read the legislation you're referring to, and I'm a little bit like, I'm not as informed as I want to be on what's here is called the abolitionist movement versus the incrementalist.

176
00:48:57.000 --> 00:49:12.000
Um, I think a lot of the diary. I want to say this in preface. A lot of the dialogue I see online between abolitionists, especially coming from abolitionists, it sounds like, um, extreme talking points that.

177
00:49:12.000 --> 00:50:13.000
That just don't make a lot of sense to a lot of us. Doesn't mean you guys are wrong. But some of the talking points that you guys throw out there, you've drawn conclusions that you came to through some means you're not explaining. And you have these very strong conclusions that are mostly attacks on pro life groups and pro life orgs. And so if you're going to go against those groups strongly, you need to present the evidence too. Right. And um, otherwise it just sounds like you're unhinged. I'm not saying you're unhinged, but I'm saying as your brother, you guys often, not always often too much sound unhinged. Okay. That being said, but I'm open to your positions because if you're going to show me, and these are the things that I've heard claimed and I don't know what's behind exactly your question, but I've heard it claimed that there is legislation that could potentially pass in a state that would end uh, that would, that would make it so that anybody who commits abortion would be subject to criminal charges, doctor, mother, father, whoever.

178
00:50:13.000 --> 00:50:27.000
And that legislation could pass like in this particular state, this is what I've heard, that it could pass and that then pro life groups actually fight against the legislation. Like they advocate for people to not pass it, to not get it even tabled.

179
00:50:27.000 --> 00:50:36.000
So because these pro life groups think this will set us back, this will be strategically, it will set us back. That's what they say.

180
00:50:36.000 --> 00:50:39.000
Um, that to me seems wrong.

181
00:50:39.000 --> 00:51:00.000
Uh, that seems, and my understanding of this, maybe I'm wrong here, that seems immoral to have a potential of actually passing legislation that would criminalize abortion as it should be, as it absolutely should be for mothers, for anybody. You don't get a pass on killing your kids because they're your kids and you're their mom.

182
00:51:00.000 --> 00:51:10.000
It is obviously true. No rational argument exists that suggests that a woman should not be criminally charged for killing her own children in the womb.

183
00:51:10.000 --> 00:51:18.000
That is an absolute no brainer. Now here's where I would disagree with, I think I disagree with the abolitionists.

184
00:51:18.000 --> 00:51:23.000
There are other states where it's not politically feasible to pass a law like that right now.

185
00:51:23.000 --> 00:51:36.000
And you might in the meantime get a law through that makes abortions happen less as you are, you're baby stepping your way towards uh, ah, stronger laws against abortion and eventually even criminalization.

186
00:51:36.000 --> 00:51:49.000
Um, and there are some who think even that strategy is morally wrong and they will then actively fight against passing those laws that would actually protect some kids, just not as many as we need to.

187
00:51:49.000 --> 00:51:58.000
So is that like if we pass a law, let's say in California we pass a law that limits abortions more than they currently are, which would be significant.

188
00:51:58.000 --> 00:52:27.000
Let's say we just try to pass a law that says um, we're not going to affect other abortion stuff, but we want to say you can't ship abortion pills across state lines. That would be huge. That would save so many lives. And we're going to say you can't ship abortion pills across state lines. That, that's the law we want to push for, but it doesn't criminalize abortion itself. Is that worth doing? I would like, yeah, of course that's worth doing. That seems a no brainer to me. And I have watched debates, I've watched people, uh, discuss these things. I'm not ignorant of it.

189
00:52:27.000 --> 00:52:55.000
Um, so what I'm suggesting is that on one end, if it's true that the pro life establishment is fighting against things that will save babies lives, then they're doing evil. And their end game should be criminalization of abortion. Uh, for anybody who participates in one, that should be the end game of every pro life org. I think that's what's just, that's what's right. That's actually what leviticus requires. I'll put it back on your screen.

190
00:52:55.000 --> 00:53:08.000
They had to punish those people. They couldn't just stop them, they had to also penalize it. And I don't mean like 30, uh, days in local jail.

191
00:53:08.000 --> 00:53:43.000
Um, so that seems to me that should be the end goal of every pro life org. Now they may not want to say it because politically what happens is the minute you say we're going to criminalize, then it becomes everybody's out there up in arms. You want to put women in jail, like all poor women and women and women, women. And it becomes like this whole different discussion. But that discussion has to happen at some point. Strategically I'm okay with baby stepping on your way there as long as that's where you're on your way to and any pro life group that's fighting against such legislation. So how do I justify, um, supporting legislation that you say enshrines into law?

192
00:53:43.000 --> 00:53:47.000
You could call it that. Enshrines into law. But we have to put things in its proper context.

193
00:53:47.000 --> 00:54:00.000
Um, if currently the law is you can abort anytime you want, however you want, and then I pass a law that's like a heartbeat bill, and you could say, oh, Mike, you're enshrining into law that it's okay to kill a kid before the heartbeat.

194
00:54:00.000 --> 00:54:35.000
And I'll be like, no, no, it's already okay to kill a kid before the heartbeat. I'm making it so it's not okay to kill this group of kids. At least we're saving this many and then let's pass another law later that saves that many and saves that many. And I think that that is an okay way to do it, and that different, ah, states and different circumstances require different strategies. In principle, I think that's okay. And for those who want to say I'm wrong, um, I would just say try to articulate your case very carefully. If you just come, uh, out with fire and, um, declarations.

195
00:54:35.000 --> 00:54:45.000
It's not for me. It won't move me and a lot of others. It's not going to move them. It just seems like you guys are fighting and you're not sure why is what. It almost sounds like so hard words.

196
00:54:45.000 --> 00:54:51.000
But I love you abolitionists. You guys are fighting hard for the unborn, and you should.

197
00:54:51.000 --> 00:54:55.000
And, um, I want to work with you as much as I can.

198
00:54:55.000 --> 00:55:00.000
Julia Larson has a question. Is it biblical for a Christian to say, I am a sinner?

199
00:55:00.000 --> 00:55:06.000
Does 1 Timothy 1:15 justify using that verbiage, or is it more correct to always say, I was a sinner?

200
00:55:06.000 --> 00:55:20.000
This is actually a little more challenging than I'd like it to be. Uh, first Timothy 1:15 says, the aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart. Was first Timothy 1:15 right?

201
00:55:20.000 --> 00:55:26.000
Um, love that issues from a pure heart, a good conscience, and a sincere faith.

202
00:55:26.000 --> 00:55:44.000
So I wonder how people use this to stop others from saying I'm a sinner. Like, why would you. Why would this passage. Is it the aim of our charge? The goal of the commands that we're being given are love from a pure heart, a good conscience, and sincere faith? Does that mean I'm not a sinner?

203
00:55:44.000 --> 00:55:49.000
No, um, no, I didn't m. Mean that.

204
00:55:49.000 --> 00:55:53.000
Um. So here's where this confusion comes in, I think.

205
00:55:53.000 --> 00:56:09.000
I don't know how that verse relates at all to what we're talking about, but I know how they'll say it does. It just doesn't. But, um, in Scripture, the term sinner may be being used in a way that's different than we popularly use it today.

206
00:56:09.000 --> 00:56:22.000
So in Scripture, when it says Jesus is eating with tax collectors and sinners, sinner was meant as a category of those who live godless lives.

207
00:56:22.000 --> 00:56:39.000
That was what it meant there. Now, it didn't mean someone who sins, which would apply to everyone except Jesus. Everyone's a sinner in that sense. And that's how we often use the phrase, I still have sins, I still sin, I still make mistakes, and I still even do things wrong knowing they're wrong sometimes.

208
00:56:39.000 --> 00:56:59.000
Um, that by modern vernacular, would make me a Sinner. But by biblical terminology, the word sinner, as you look at its actual usage, it's talking about categories of people who basically live godless lives, not individuals who, um, have sin that they commit on some occasions.

209
00:56:59.000 --> 00:57:12.000
So in one sense, I want to say, we're not sinners. Don't call yourself a sinner. But here's the problem. Modern vernacular, we don't use it to mean that. We don't use sinner to mean godless life. We use sinner to mean someone who still sins.

210
00:57:12.000 --> 00:57:43.000
And in that sense, yes, in the modern English usage of the term sinner, I'm a sinner, you're a sinner, we're all sinners. And when I hear the identity teaching of certain groups that want to get Christians to not call themselves sinners, don't call yourself a sinner. You're not a sinner. They don't mean you don't live in perpetual sin or you're not living a habitual, godless life. They don't mean that. They mean don't even acknowledge that you are flawed and have faults. And that seems deeply troublesome to me.

211
00:57:43.000 --> 00:58:05.000
We are continually plagued with our own faults and flaws. We are called to pray for forgiveness and repent on a regular basis, to confess our sins to each other. James says, confess your sins to each other. This isn't about priests. This is about Christians. How am I to confess my sins if I'm affirming to myself that I'm not a sinner in the sense of like a broad sweeping? I don't sin. It's not possible.

212
00:58:05.000 --> 00:58:29.000
So I know that I've met people who felt like, here's the testimony I've heard. There's a woman I met who was saying, you know, Bethel really blessed my heart. I hate to bring up Bethel again, but this is just. This is the story. And they said the reason why is because previously I had thought, um, I'd been to a church that really beat me down, you know, talked about our failures and flaws, and it just made me feel bad about myself and feel down.

213
00:58:29.000 --> 00:58:44.000
And then, um, in Bethel, I learned that, um, not to call myself a sinner, that we're not sinners, we're saints, we're sanctified, we're washed by the water of His Word, seeking to present himself to us, holy and blameless, above reproach. That's who we are. And there's a truth in that.

214
00:58:44.000 --> 00:58:51.000
But when this person, it just goes too far. It's just a step too far.

215
00:58:51.000 --> 00:59:05.000
I know I'm above reproach. And blameless. But that's because of his forgiveness, not because of my conduct. I'm above reproach. I'm washed by the water of, uh, yes, that's his grace poured out on me. That's not my conduct. That is always perfect.

216
00:59:05.000 --> 00:59:21.000
So I think it's healthy for us to be able to say, yeah, in the sense I still sin, I'm a sinner. I still actively have to deal with my sinful nature and the sins that I deal with and have to repent of and fight, uh, against and die to self. I have to die to myself daily.

217
00:59:21.000 --> 00:59:27.000
That's an ongoing battle in reality. And it may make you feel really good to be told, don't say you're a sinner.

218
00:59:27.000 --> 00:59:36.000
But if you stop being able to admit your sins, your spouse is going to really have a hard time living life because you're not willing to admit your own flaws.

219
00:59:36.000 --> 00:59:41.000
And that's hard on everybody. That makes everybody. It makes you feel good, but it's hard on everybody else.

220
00:59:41.000 --> 00:59:46.000
So I think, um, uh, that's why it's complicated.

221
00:59:46.000 --> 00:59:59.000
The biblical term sinner as a category of godless living. I'm not saying you're that as a Christian, but the concept of do I still have sin nature, do I still deal with sin, am I still failing on occasions? Yes.

222
00:59:59.000 --> 01:00:02.000
In that sense, I'm a sinner, and we don't want to fight against that.

223
01:00:02.000 --> 01:00:15.000
All right, next question. Number five. From Don Miguel Q. Who says or Don Miguel. I see. It's a question. Why do many modern prophecies seem to be guesswork?

224
01:00:15.000 --> 01:00:27.000
I feel like the Lord's telling me such and such. That doesn't appear to ever be the case in Scripture. Yeah, that's a cultural reality. Um, here's my theory as to why this is happening.

225
01:00:27.000 --> 01:00:35.000
Number one, you have a group of people who really, really want to push and are zealous for prophecy. That is not bad. I think that's a commendable thing.

226
01:00:35.000 --> 01:00:49.000
Number two, you have, um, the awareness that people often get things wrong and they're nervous and, and getting them to step out in faith and say, the Lord showed me something is extreme. That's a very high bar.

227
01:00:49.000 --> 01:01:11.000
Um, but if you simply say, just say I think, or God might be showing me this, or I feel like the Lord's telling me this, it then makes it tentative, and then I'm not on the hook for making a strong proclamation. So it lowers my accountability, which increases my courage, which gets more people to be active.

228
01:01:11.000 --> 01:01:19.000
Uh, this is a conundrum. You Know, we want more prophecy, we want more people stepping out, but we want it to be the Holy Spirit for sure.

229
01:01:19.000 --> 01:01:29.000
And when you lower the bar too much, you give people permission to share their own feelings as if it's from the Lord. With no accountability.

230
01:01:29.000 --> 01:01:32.000
How can you have accountability? When someone says, I feel like the Lord, blah, blah, blah.

231
01:01:32.000 --> 01:01:45.000
I think that maybe the Lord, blah, blah, blah, that I've wrestled with this, um, and more in recent years, where I'm going, like, yeah, how about you don't say, I feel like the Lord. How about you just say, hey, can I encourage you?

232
01:01:45.000 --> 01:01:53.000
Maybe I'm not going to even say, I feel like God's involved in it. Can I encourage you? I just wanted to share this with you. And if it's something good and true and helpful for them, great.

233
01:01:53.000 --> 01:02:44.000
But why put God's name on it with a maybe this is going to be controversial in the charismatic movement, um, that maybe this practice is not good and that the benefits it does bring, um, cause us to ignore the harms it brings. Because when someone says, I feel like the Lord's telling me, then you walk away. And maybe it's that the Lord's calling you to missions, and maybe he's not. But now you never forget that you're going to sleep that night. You're praying about it, and you're thinking, oh, I went home, and maybe the Lord is calling that guy to missions. I feel like the Lord maybe was calling him m. I don't know. I just shared. I was faithful, Lord. I just stepped out in faith. I feel good about myself. And this guy goes through three months of angst because he's not sure if it was from God or not. Finally, he steps out, maybe goes on the mission trip and on a mission journey, uh, for longer than a trip. Maybe it's a missionary lifestyle.

234
01:02:44.000 --> 01:02:52.000
And then over the next four years, realizes, like, this is not the thing. And then he goes back and you're like, dude, you did all that with a maybe the Lord.

235
01:02:52.000 --> 01:02:54.000
That's huge.

236
01:02:54.000 --> 01:03:00.000
What I'm going to suggest is that saying I feel like the Lord is telling me is not a low thing to say. It's a very high thing to say.

237
01:03:00.000 --> 01:03:05.000
Declaring to you that in my perception, God has revealed something to me, and I'm going to give it to you now.

238
01:03:05.000 --> 01:03:13.000
But the way it comes out is don't hold me accountable for what I'm about to say. And I think that that is not in Scripture.

239
01:03:13.000 --> 01:03:17.000
Let two or three prophets speak and let the others judge.

240
01:03:17.000 --> 01:03:21.000
The implication is that there should be accountability for our words.

241
01:03:21.000 --> 01:03:24.000
Our words are supposed to be judged.

242
01:03:24.000 --> 01:03:51.000
Um, now, I don't want to come too harsh against it, but in general, I'm going to say that I think that this has gone. It's at least gone too far in the charismatic culture. It's at least gone too far. I feel like the Lord. I feel like the Lord. It's gone too far. And this is why you get people who are the most steeped in environments where people are free to say, I feel like God showed me this. I feel like the Lord. Maybe the Lord's showing. They're also the same ones who will tell you that they discount and disregard prophecies all the time.

243
01:03:51.000 --> 01:04:01.000
They have learned over time to just ignore 90% of the prophetic things that they hear. And I'm going to suggest to you that is evidence that your bar is too low.

244
01:04:01.000 --> 01:04:18.000
Can you perhaps have a higher bar so that many fake, false, or I should say, wrong, uh, confused. Not from God. Prophecies come through. Not that many. All right, let's go to the next question, which is what number we're on? Six. Wow. I'm moving slow today.

245
01:04:18.000 --> 01:04:26.000
Wow. Okay, this comes in from, uh, Um.

246
01:04:26.000 --> 01:04:37.000
Explain and define how debauchery in a man's kids disqualifies him as an elder. I've been told that how he disciplines after the fact makes him eligible for the position.

247
01:04:37.000 --> 01:04:40.000
Um, is this unbiblical because of Titus 1:6?

248
01:04:40.000 --> 01:04:42.000
Let's look at this.

249
01:04:42.000 --> 01:04:59.000
This is actually a really challenging issue. It's not that the verse is so hard to understand, but, man, you may have a really wonderful pastor. Maybe there's, like, a local pastor who's amazing, um, and his kid's, like, 16 and goes through, like, a rebellious time.

250
01:04:59.000 --> 01:05:03.000
And then you're like, do we.

251
01:05:03.000 --> 01:05:05.000
Does he have to step down now?

252
01:05:05.000 --> 01:05:08.000
And it's a real struggle that people have.

253
01:05:08.000 --> 01:05:31.000
And, um, it's a real challenge. It's a real challenge for local churches. And how you answer this, it's easier for people on the Internet or distant to answer it. I always try to answer this thinking that, um, there's real world situations where there's, like, a real man who's serving the Lord. And I'm saying, yeah, get rid of him. And they're going to do it. Like, imagine if people took your advice. You know, don't give advice unless you have thought of the consequences of people actually following it.

254
01:05:31.000 --> 01:06:00.000
Um, and that makes it very heavy on my heart. So let's read it. Titus 1:6. If anyone here's I'll just back up a bit. Um, this is about, um, appointing elders in every town, which is what Paul directed Titus to do. And he says, here's the qualifications for elders. If anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination.

255
01:06:00.000 --> 01:06:12.000
So his children are supposed to be believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination.

256
01:06:12.000 --> 01:06:17.000
What if his kids are not?

257
01:06:17.000 --> 01:06:25.000
I mean, debauchery, that's not really like a, like a, like something a 4 year old does, right?

258
01:06:25.000 --> 01:06:29.000
Debauchery. Like, like getting drunk.

259
01:06:29.000 --> 01:06:37.000
Um, so it seems to be talking about a guy who has like a good family as a qualification for elders.

260
01:06:37.000 --> 01:06:43.000
Um, that, that's heavy. The justification for this is given to us in First Timothy.

261
01:06:43.000 --> 01:06:52.000
Um, let me see if I can find this.

262
01:06:52.000 --> 01:06:57.000
Um, First Timothy three. I think it's under the elders requirements. Yeah.

263
01:06:57.000 --> 01:07:01.000
So here's just the justification for it.

264
01:07:01.000 --> 01:07:31.000
Um, an overseer must be above reproach. The husband of one wife. Sober minded, self controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach. This is actually a quality. I would say there's some senior pastors who are not hospitable at all. They don't want to spend any time with their people. They don't want to. They just want to teach and then go out the back door, you know, um, and there's no hospitality. Um, but that's the thing. You should be hospitable, able to teach. Not a drunkard, not violent, but gentle, not quarrelsome, and not a lover of money.

265
01:07:31.000 --> 01:07:48.000
Oh, that would disqualify a number of guys I've seen online recently. He must manage his own household well, with all dignity. Keeping his children submissive for. And here's the justification. If someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God's church?

266
01:07:48.000 --> 01:08:15.000
So the logic is that there's a man who, if he can't properly take care of his kids, if he's failing in his role as a father, then we see this as reflecting that he is not going to be able to guide the people of God. Because it's not just that he teaches, it's that he's discipling. He's discipling the people. He's managing the household of God. And if he can't manage his own household, how's he going to manage God's?

267
01:08:15.000 --> 01:08:51.000
So this is where, um, the preacher's home life is the foundation for his public ministry. And um, then that brings you to circumstances where you go, okay, let's say you have a pastor who's by all accounts amazing pastor. Um, and maybe, uh, he has three kids, but one of them is like the black sheep of the family. One of them is rebellious, and one of them is just causing all kinds of harm. And, um, they're just in great sin in their life. And they're still in his household.

268
01:08:51.000 --> 01:08:58.000
Let's say they're 17, 18 years old, they're still in the home, but they're old enough to be doing adult type things. And they're doing them, and they're doing them bad.

269
01:08:58.000 --> 01:09:15.000
Um, so under what circumstances do you remove a pastor? Not admit, like, the guy's already. Like, this is about appointing pastors. Right? But what about removing pastors? At what point do you remove a pastor who no longer. Maybe he did have this qualification before.

270
01:09:15.000 --> 01:09:19.000
When they were younger, the kids all seemed to be believers, as far as you could tell. Right.

271
01:09:19.000 --> 01:09:24.000
Um, and were not insubordinate and debaucherous or anything.

272
01:09:24.000 --> 01:09:30.000
But as they got older, this one of the three just really went off the rails.

273
01:09:30.000 --> 01:10:36.000
Um, here's my personal thought on this, is that the logic behind the rule is if a man can't manage his house well, then he's not gonna be able to manage God's house well. That's the reason behind the rule. So if you've got, say two of the three kids serving the Lord, loving the Lord, they seem to be doing really well. You have one kid that's really gone off the rails, but as far as you can genuinely tell, it's not a failure of parenting, because that can happen. You know, Adam and Eve still rebelled against God. You know, you can have. There are circumstances where kids rebel and it's not a failure of parenting. There are times where it's totally a failure of parenting. And if it's a failure of parenting, I think you're going to more likely see it in multiple kids, not just one. Um, but if you ask the question, if this is no failure of parenting, then I don't think it reflects on the character of the man. And I don't think I will remove a man who's already been in position in ministry for many years and is otherwise serving very faithfully. And we look at this one thing and go, I don't think that this is actually reflecting on the reason that Paul gave the command.

274
01:10:36.000 --> 01:11:28.000
Um, but we can factor in those other things. Plus we have kids that come, uh, with more difficulty. Um, adopted kids inherently, there are challenges that will be there. Um, there's various. Life's complicated. The general rule is that the pastor must be able to manage his house well, otherwise he can't manage God's house. But there are times where things are happening in the home and it's not a result of mismanagement. And this would be up to the elders in the church and the community that's local to figure this out for that individual situation, being willing to step a man down if the scripture requires them to, but also being wise about the way in which they apply scripture. Just like Jesus healing a man on the Sabbath. This was not a violation of the Sabbath, but there were those who would have said it was because they were misapplying the text, not using wisdom. So that's my thoughts on that.

275
01:11:28.000 --> 01:11:30.000
Number seven.

276
01:11:30.000 --> 01:11:35.000
Michael Santoro says, do you think Abraham was regenerated, born again?

277
01:11:35.000 --> 01:11:43.000
Uh, John 3, 3 John 8, 56, Romans 4, 1 5, uh, and 22 24.

278
01:11:43.000 --> 01:11:54.000
This is a heavy question theologically and it's been years since it's even occurred to me. I'm m going to read the passages and we'll talk about it. And hopefully I can not make a dumb answer.

279
01:11:54.000 --> 01:12:00.000
So we'll see. Jesus answered him. Truly. Truly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

280
01:12:00.000 --> 01:12:21.000
Okay, so you've got to be born again or you're not going to be saved. Um, and this is talking, I think about the future kingdom of God. Um, some think it's perceiving the kingdom. You can't see that Jesus and what he's doing is the kingdom. But I think it's um, talking about entering the kingdom of God, seeing it like the future.

281
01:12:21.000 --> 01:12:27.000
Um, another verse you brought up was John, ah, 8, 56.

282
01:12:27.000 --> 01:12:33.000
Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad.

283
01:12:33.000 --> 01:12:50.000
Um, so I see the connection you're making. Like if I can't see God's kingdom, but Abraham saw Jesus's day, then he must have been born again or he wouldn't have been able to see Jesus's day. And I think we're just using different terms to talk about different things.

284
01:12:50.000 --> 01:13:03.000
So um, for instance, uh, everybody in Jesus time saw Jesus day. It's not the same as seeing the kingdom. Right? Everybody saw Jesus day. They didn't recognize him for who he was. They didn't do all that.

285
01:13:03.000 --> 01:13:46.000
Uh, Abraham rejoiced that he would future see his day. So Abraham had what he had prophecies that he believed right in your seed. All the nations of the earth shall be blessed. I'm going to do this. I'm going to multiply you. All these things he believed, the things that God said. But. And so he rejoiced that he would see the days of Jesus. And then you can have a whole side discussion on what do you mean he did see it? And where and how did he see it? Um, but I think that these are unrelated concepts and we're just taking the word see and we're drawing too much into it. Uh, Romans 4, 1, 5. So I wouldn't use that verse to say that. What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our father, according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about, but not before God.

286
01:13:46.000 --> 01:14:16.000
For what does the scripture say? Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness. Now, to the one who works, his wages are not counted as gift, but as his due. And to the one who does not work, but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, just as David also. I'm reading beyond, but you should read it. It's really good. So, um, in this verse, are we getting the idea that Abraham was born again while he was counted as righteous?

287
01:14:16.000 --> 01:14:27.000
Is that the same thing we mean theologically when we say born again? Because born again means that your heart has been regenerated and you are now indwelt by the Holy Spirit.

288
01:14:27.000 --> 01:14:44.000
And whatever experience Abraham had, I don't think it was indwelt by the Holy Spirit. That is a new thing that Jesus talks about in the Gospel of John. The Holy Spirit is with you, but he will be you. And he even says, if I don't go, if I don't go, then he won't come.

289
01:14:44.000 --> 01:15:15.000
Meaning that Jesus has to die on the cross, rise again, and then begins the new Covenant where he writes his law in our hearts and we become born again and we become regenerated and filled with the Holy Spirit. So I'm not saying that Abraham wasn't saved, like, in the sort of broad sense of what we mean. That, like, he's going to be with the Lord for all eternity. His sins are forgiven, but he wasn't yet indwelt by the Spirit. And this is, I think, why there's this whole, like, Abraham's bosom thing that I don't think is just a parable. My opinion here.

290
01:15:15.000 --> 01:15:43.000
Christians can disagree on this, of course, but that there was this delay for those who died ultimately in Christ, um, before the death of Christ, they waited upon him. And then after his death, he brings them to the Father. And now that now to be absent from the body, we will be present with the Lord. See, this is all about the changing of the covenant. That's how I would view that. You also had Romans 4, uh, 21, 24 through 24.

291
01:15:43.000 --> 01:15:48.000
And that is right here. Fully convinced that God was able to do what he had promised.

292
01:15:48.000 --> 01:16:32.000
That is why his faith was counted to him as righteousness. But the words it was counted to him were not written for his sake alone, but for ours also. It will be counted to us who believe in him, who raised from the dead Jesus our Lord, who has delivered us up, who was delivered, uh, up for our trespasses and raised for our justification. I think we're grabbing the wrong texts to answer this question. I think we need to go to John in Acts, and we need to look at how we are sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise. Now, wasn't before, um, how he won't come. He's with you, but he will be in you. And now this indwelling experience is something every Christian has because of Christ's finished work. God delayed that so he could show how much better the New Covenant is in Christ than that which came through Moses.

293
01:16:32.000 --> 01:16:35.000
That would be my response to that question. Number eight.

294
01:16:35.000 --> 01:16:48.000
Um, the thousandth man says, what classic Christian theological books would you direct me to as a Jehovah's Witness so I can get a good foundation of what the truth actually is?

295
01:16:48.000 --> 01:17:02.000
That's a huge question. Um, oh, as a Jehovah's Witness, um, I think one of the best things you can do as a Jehovah's Witness.

296
01:17:02.000 --> 01:17:10.000
Former Jehovah's Witness. Hopefully, um, hopefully soon would, uh, be reading the Bible without commentary.

297
01:17:10.000 --> 01:17:18.000
Um, but then reading, um, I m. Would encourage you reading Bible commentaries.

298
01:17:18.000 --> 01:17:20.000
So read the Bible without commentary.

299
01:17:20.000 --> 01:17:28.000
Just read on your own. Sit with it. Try to figure out what it means. Try to. Try to forget everything you've been taught about Scripture and just read it as it is.

300
01:17:28.000 --> 01:18:10.000
Then layer in actual commentary. And one source I would point you to. It's not classic Christian theological books. I think that you need to be grounded in the Word. I think you need to be grounded in understanding Scripture better and going plodding through Scripture where you're reading it thoughtfully. And then after you've figured out what you think it means, you read a commentary. That's not Jehovah's Witness. That can be very, very powerful in your life. And it'll take years, but it'll be super worthwhile. So I would. I'd recommend that blueletterbible.org has a lot of good free resources you can use, and some of them are classic and older and some of them are newer. Um, I recommend do that and read at least. At least two different commentary authors, not just one. That'd be my encouragement to you and God bless you.

301
01:18:10.000 --> 01:18:22.000
It can take years to, like, recover from the brainwashing that comes from Jehovah's Witness teaching. You'll still think things and not realize that it came from them years down the road. That's okay. That's normal. That is normal. That's the process.

302
01:18:22.000 --> 01:18:26.000
But this will help you out of that.

303
01:18:26.000 --> 01:18:29.000
All right, question number nine.

304
01:18:29.000 --> 01:18:40.000
Question nine comes in from Fat Man Rollins, who says, so in the book of Job, Job one and two. Do you think God brought up Job to Satan because he knew Satan was already watching Job?

305
01:18:40.000 --> 01:18:45.000
I would example more, but I don't have room. Please answer this.

306
01:18:45.000 --> 01:18:53.000
So, yeah, why did God bring up Job? Why did he say, consider my servant Job?

307
01:18:53.000 --> 01:19:27.000
I think the book of Job kind of gives us sort of an answer. Um, so he's this blameless man, Job. He's upright. He fears God. He turns away from evil. Um, and, uh, he has seven sons, and he's got. He's rich. He's doing great. And then verse 6. Now, there was a day when the sons of God, probably referring to angels here, came to present themselves before the Lord. And Satan or some being, some creatures God has made, um, not humans, also came among them.

308
01:19:27.000 --> 01:19:46.000
And the Lord said to Satan, from where have you come? Satan answered the Lord and said, from going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down and down on it. And the Lord said to Satan, have you considered my servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, A blameless and upright man who fears God and turns away from evil.

309
01:19:46.000 --> 01:19:49.000
Why did God say that?

310
01:19:49.000 --> 01:19:55.000
Why would he bring up Job?

311
01:19:55.000 --> 01:20:01.000
Do you know, I think that that question is kind of what the book of Job struggles with. The whole book.

312
01:20:01.000 --> 01:20:16.000
Job's like, why? Why is this happening to me? Why is this evil happening to me? And planting this in chapter one, verse six, through whatever is giving us this feeling that Job has. Why would you do this?

313
01:20:16.000 --> 01:20:44.000
He brings it up. Then Satan answered the Lord and said, does Job fear God for no reason? Have you not put a hedge around him? In other words, he wouldn't let Satan mess with him, um, and his house and all that he has on every side. You've blessed the work of his hands. And his possessions have increased, uh, in the land. But stretch out your hand and touch all that he has, and he will curse you to your face. So this is now a challenge about the goodness of God, his worth of being worshiped, and the integrity, uh, of Job and his actual faith.

314
01:20:44.000 --> 01:20:48.000
And then God says, go ahead. You can strike him, Satan.

315
01:20:48.000 --> 01:21:11.000
I think that readers struggle with chapter one, and it's probably intentional. God wants you to struggle with it. I think you're supposed to see Job suffering like he is and see this debate, and you're supposed to kind of feel a little bit like Job does. Which means that when you get to the end of the Book of Job, what God says to Job, you should feel that, too.

316
01:21:11.000 --> 01:21:26.000
And what happens is God just starts asking questions. He goes, were you there when I founded the earth? Now, that is something that I think most of us, we just don't even pay attention to. Were you there when I founded the earth? This is a serious question. God's like, were you there when I created the world?

317
01:21:26.000 --> 01:21:33.000
When I designed all things? When I decided how much water would be in the ocean and set its boundaries and limits?

318
01:21:33.000 --> 01:21:35.000
Were you there?

319
01:21:35.000 --> 01:21:49.000
Why is he doing this? You realize that Job asks questions, and instead of getting answers, he gets questions. And the questions answer him. And he ends in the Book of Job by saying, I have been a fool.

320
01:21:49.000 --> 01:21:57.000
I've spoken words I didn't understand. I repent in dust and ashes. And he apologized to God.

321
01:21:57.000 --> 01:22:15.000
The lesson of Job, in part, is this very still offensive idea to many, even many Christians, sadly, because your mind is not wrapped around Scripture here, is that when you go, why would God allow this? Why did God allow that? And you have to look at yourself and say, who am I to challenge God?

322
01:22:15.000 --> 01:22:28.000
That is the right answer to that question. Who am I to challenge God? Who am I to think I know more than the Lord of Glory? Who am I to think that I can question the decisions and actions of the Creator of all things? That is an entirely appropriate thing.

323
01:22:28.000 --> 01:22:34.000
I repent in dust and ashes. I've spoken words, uh, without counsel, without knowledge. I said things I didn't understand.

324
01:22:34.000 --> 01:22:49.000
So the answer is not. Well, God, uh, told Satan because of this reason. Here was his motive. I think the better response is, Christians, you have to learn the lesson that God is actually God.

325
01:22:49.000 --> 01:23:07.000
He's not just an idea in your head. He is God. He is the One who holds your life and breath in his hands. He is the one who designed your existence. Your soul only exists because he made it. All things were made for Him. And all things have come from him, and all glory will be given to Him.

326
01:23:07.000 --> 01:23:10.000
That's the lesson. That's the lesson of Job.

327
01:23:10.000 --> 01:23:16.000
And it either hits your heart and humbles you, or it makes you mad and reveals what's really going on.

328
01:23:16.000 --> 01:23:20.000
Last question for today. Long stream.

329
01:23:20.000 --> 01:23:38.000
Why does God portray Himself as a husband to an unfaithful Israel, a role mocked today as cuckoldry? I've heard of cuckold. I haven't heard of cuckoldry. Um, as a term, uh, does this imply men should remain with adulterous wives to imitate God's love for Israel?

330
01:23:38.000 --> 01:23:43.000
Um, two questions here. So first off, why does God portray himself as a husband to an unfaithful Israel?

331
01:23:43.000 --> 01:23:49.000
Um, when we today mock that role? Um, yes, we mock that role.

332
01:23:49.000 --> 01:23:55.000
Um, I think that's really interesting.

333
01:23:55.000 --> 01:24:08.000
Uh, I think that when people mock it and it has teeth to it, it's when a husband is okay with his wife cheating on him, that's when it has teeth. A man's okay with it. He agrees to an open marriage or something like that.

334
01:24:08.000 --> 01:24:11.000
That's mock worthy.

335
01:24:11.000 --> 01:24:24.000
Um, but in my opinion, if a woman cheated on her husband and then he forgave her and that marriage was restored, that could be a beautiful thing. And I would never mock that.

336
01:24:24.000 --> 01:24:27.000
And that's what God demonstrates.

337
01:24:27.000 --> 01:24:46.000
Yes, she was unfaithful. Yes, she was evil. Yes, she was bad. But it demonstrates the incredible love of the husband, incredible love of the Father for us, that God loves us. He's like, even so return to me, he says. He's saying, in violation of all that is righteous. I'm asking you to come back to me because I love you.

338
01:24:46.000 --> 01:24:58.000
That's why Jesus has to die on the cross for our sins. Because it is in violation of all that is righteous for us to return to God, for Him to take us back. There must be justice meted out upon the cross because we shouldn't be welcomed back. We shouldn't be loved.

339
01:24:58.000 --> 01:25:34.000
So the picture of God loving someone who should not be loved like that, like, it's almost. It's wrong. It's actually wrong. A woman leaves, marries someone else, and then tries to go back to her husband afterwards. The law says you can't do that. So this is a perfect illustration of the fact that, like, we are, by our sin broken in our relationship with God. We're distant from him because we've sinned against Him. He is holy and he cannot just welcome us back like, oh, come on in, don't worry about it. I won't worry about what's righteous and good, but we are still welcome back in his love. And it's the cross that creates the bridge that brings us back to God. So I think it's a beautiful picture of that.

340
01:25:34.000 --> 01:25:51.000
Um, and the mockery in our modern culture, a lot of it is like people trying to zing each other and get points against each other online, and it dulls our wisdom. Um, so that's where the mockery doesn't have wisdom. Um, if you're ever going to mock something, mock with wisdom. Don't just mock like a fool.

341
01:25:51.000 --> 01:26:03.000
Does this imply men should remain with adulterous wives to imitate God's love for Israel? Um, no. Uh, it doesn't mean that, uh, Jesus himself said that adultery was justification for divorce.

342
01:26:03.000 --> 01:26:38.000
So if we weren't supposed to do it, uh, for that purpose. No. Um, it's up to the individual. It's up to the person. They should pray about it. They should seek the Lord. They should look at the circumstances. And I would encourage. I have encouraged people who've experienced adultery, like a husband whose wife cheated or a wife whose husband cheated, and said to them when they called me up, um, uh, that they are just. Yes, this justifies. Because that's the ask. Is this justified divorce? Now, Mike, I'd be like, it is justified divorce, but I'd encourage you to take some time. You can do that. You don't have to do that.

343
01:26:38.000 --> 01:26:54.000
And that's the encouragement I would give. Um, you can do that. You don't have to do that. And I wouldn't criticize you for doing it. Um, I'd support them, but I wouldn't want them to immediately rush to it. Okay. Justification for divorce doesn't mean necessitates divorce in this case.

344
01:26:54.000 --> 01:27:17.000
So it could be a great demonstration of God's incredible love. And there are marriages that have suffered through adultery, and then there's been restoration over time. That has been beautiful. That is just such an amazing, wonderful thing. And was better for the kids and was better for the husband and the wife and better for everybody in the community, um, that they were able to have restoration. And there's been times where it couldn't happen. And it was the right thing to separate, uh, to divorce.

345
01:27:17.000 --> 01:27:20.000
So, Lord, give us wisdom. That's what we need most of all.

346
01:27:20.000 --> 01:28:30.000
Anyway, let's pray. Um, Father, we thank you for your word and the clarity of your word. Uh, we desperately seek your wisdom, and we pray for it now in our lives, in all that we have going on right now. Um, just this week or from whenever someone's watching this replay of this video. We pray right now. Help us have wisdom. Help us be those who walk in wisdom, who don't just know the policies of scripture or the policies of whatever. We know the wisdom of your word to guide and direct us to apply things. Well, in Jesus name, amen. Amen. All right, God bless you guys. I'll be seeing you next Friday for the live stream, 1pm Pacific time. Pretty much every Friday. Most Fridays. Sometimes we don't do it. Usually we do. All right, God bless you, Sa.