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

So as you know, we're doing a q and a, and, I'm gonna hand it off to Mark. But, before we do that, maybe we should pray. Ask the lord to help us. If you'd like to pray for

us, sure. Father, we thank you for blessing us with this time, Lord. What a privilege it is to gather here as blood bought saints to dive into your word, to know you better through your word, to live as Christians through your word. Lord, may you enlighten our eyes, enlighten our minds, and our hearts as we answer and talk about these sometimes difficult questions. Lord, may it propel us to greater greater faithfulness and greater love toward you.

In Jesus' name. Amen. Amen. Alright. Well, we have a few questions here.

I'm excited to really, just talk about them a little bit tonight. There's some very practical questions. There's some theological questions in there. But what I love about these questions that you all submitted, it's really it's it's not a stump the pastor type of questions. It's these are real questions that are on people's minds wanting to know what the word of God says about some hard to understand issues.

And, you know, I was reflecting on it earlier today in, you know, in Peter, second Peter, where he says that, you know, things that Paul says in the New Testament, hard to understand sometimes. Right? But ultimately and I love how Peter ends that. He says, even though these things are hard to understand, even though there's some people out there who will misuse and abuse these difficult scriptures to to bring doubt into your minds, Peter ends this with ends that passage with this. He prays for them and he says that he hopes they grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and savior Jesus Christ.

To him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity. Amen.

Amen.

And so that's that's really why I'm excited to really dive into these questions today. So let's start. You know, as Christians, Daniel, it's we we live in a society where all around us, the unbelieving world, there's conflict. There's arguments. There's just backbiting and hatred and, spitefulness.

But as Christians, in a Christian community of believers, not only in the local church, but in the wider Christian communities, we have to be different from the world. But as Christians, we still have sin. We still have disagreements. We still have conflict. So how do we as Christians confront a brother or sister in Christ when that brother or sister is in sin?

Yeah. That's a huge question because when you look at Jesus's instructions about the church, there are only two places in the entire gospels where Jesus refers to the church directly and clearly. Both are found in the gospel of Matthew in Matthew 16 where the revelation that Peter has concerning Christ, Jesus refers to the church being built upon that revelation. And then in Matthew 18, where Jesus instructs believers how to deal with a sinning believer, and he refers to the church in those set of instructions. Now here's what I find so significant about that.

The the fact that Jesus, out of all the things he could have said about the function of the church, the one thing that he wanted to touch on was that the purpose of the church in the believer's life is that there would be a mutual operation of accountability. Think about that. When you and I become followers of Jesus Christ and are joined to, yes, the universal church, but the universal church expressed in the local settings, the primary one of the primary reasons for that is that we would open our lives up to other Christians to speak into our lives. And also setting ourselves up to be ready to respectfully restore brother or sister if they've fallen into sin. I don't think that's how many believers view the local church.

I don't think that's how how many people view their relationship with other believers. That one of the top reasons for Christ bringing us together is that we would have an eye out for one another. And what that looks like once we've established that, once we realize the the great call that Christ has given us concerning what the church should function as, we have to then ask, how do we do that? Right? And that really depends on a case by case situation.

It would depend on the nature of the sin. It would depend on the setting of where that sin perhaps was committed. For example, you look at Paul with Cephas in Antioch. Peter is acting hypocritically, and he caused other Jewish believers to also follow in his example to treat the gentiles as lesser than. And so what does Paul do?

It says there he spoke before them all, and he confronts Peter to his face. That's not a rule for all of us to call out a believer and sin in front of everybody because you go back to what the actual rules are. And Jesus says, if a brother sins, you go to him privately. And so we know if you read Matthew eighteen fifteen down, you see the protocol given to believers. And yet, even though the protocol is there, there's still a call for wisdom, and that wisdom is our attitude towards other believers.

And I would say the best way in dealing with people, especially if they are caught in sin or if they've offended you, is to do so in a way in which you would like to be approached. If you were caught in sin, whether that sin is intentional or not. We have to also remember when people are in sin, sometimes they're not doing so intentionally. Maybe they're operating with a lesser revelation than you are. Maybe they're immature in the faith.

So you always have to put yourself in their shoes. And more than that, Galatians speaks about a spirit of gentleness. And so with that, I believe there is a necessity to approach a brother and here's here's my preference in doing that, to ask a lot of questions. So approach a believer asking questions, not coming with evidence and then saying, you know, you did this. This is this is your fault or whatever the case may be.

What you wanna do is you wanna love hopes for all things. Right? Hopes for the best. And so you wanna give them a chance to explain themselves. You wanna also give them a chance to be honest and to confess that sin.

And so the aim of our confrontation is not to demean or discourage, but always to restore. And even in the confrontation stage, you wanna win that brother or that sister. You don't wanna destroy them. And you don't want to push them off or give them the impression that you're not for them. Again, with that, because Jesus also said that he was gentle and lowly, there are moments and there are settings where a strong word needs to be given.

That serious rebuke needs to be offered. That doesn't exclude those potential confrontations. But we just need to be wise, and we need to consider the different facets of the circumstance and the situation always with the goal that I wanna redeem this brother. I wanna see this sister come back to the faith, come back to the will of God, come back to honoring the Lord in their lives. And so the way I've done it and I the way I've seen other people do it effectively is, hey.

I you did this, and I don't know if you I don't know if you meant it when you said it, but it it did hurt me. And I just want to ask, you know, do you have a reason behind what you said or what you didn't say? You didn't include me in this. You didn't ask questions because they could be operating under ignorance. They could have done something due to a blind spot.

That's not how we feel when we're offended. We always almost assume that they did it to intentionally hurt us. And that's just one scenario. There's different, again, scenarios that we have to consider. But I think as a general rule, ask questions, come in gentleness, and, always put yourself in their shoes.

If if you were caught in something, how would you wanna be approached?

It's wonderful. What what do you do, though, if you confront someone and they're like, I I didn't do anything wrong, or I did this, not a big deal. I don't understand what what what's the big deal? Like, if you have confronting somebody and they just there's no repentance, there's no remorse, what do you do then as a Christian?

That's a great question. Well, then Jesus provides the answer. Bring two or three other brothers. Let them begin to feel how serious this is. Bring in other witnesses to testify that this is indeed a sin.

And then if they still resist and they still or repeat that sin and the repentance is shallow and not true, then it comes to the point where Jesus says, then you have to treat them in a certain way. You have to treat them as a tax collector. You have to treat them as a gentile. In other words, you have to treat them as somebody who is not part of the community of faith. And at that point, they forfeit certain relational privileges in order for them to realize that there are consequences to a lack of repentance.

And so, again, the to approach somebody in their sin in the name of gentleness and kindness and respect does not disqualify the need to bring in a more, serious approach if it requires it. So I would say that Jesus had that in mind when he gave those instructions. Somebody dismisses it or says, that's just my personality. You're too sensitive. Okay.

Now you bring this before two o three other witnesses, and if it's legitimate, they'll agree with you. And then this person now has to deal with other believers who are confronting them. What are they gonna do then? And the whole point of that process that Jesus gives us is to keep the the sin issue of a person's, a person's fallen as as private as possible, and to and to allow them to be, in an honorable way, come to their senses before it becomes more public. And if it deserves a more public approach, then that's because of their unwillingness to ultimately repent.

Thank you. Last follow-up question. Because, you know, you you hear this a lot, especially in the in the wider Christian community, unfortunately, nowadays. Are there do you think there are any situations where Matthew 18 would not apply? Where you are not called to go one on one with the person who is sinning against you?

Absolutely. I love that follow-up question because Paul exercises that with the brother in the church of Corinth who was sinning, with his father's wife, and the church knew about it. And Paul skips all those steps and he says, get him out of there. Get him out of there. He needs to go.

And And the reason why he says that is because it was a public sin. The church indirectly affirmed it and tolerated it, and so there was no need to go through that protocol. And so it's not this black and white thing. There are gray areas. There are different situations that demand different responses, and there is license for that.

So absolutely, it depends on the nature of the sin, the circumstances, the situate the situation. If a leader sins, there's a different approach than if a believer in the congregation, a member sins. So, yeah, we can't just, we can't just take Matthew 18 and apply it to every single case. That might be unwise, and that's why there's always a call to wisdom concerning the nature of sin, the severity of it, how public is it, how dangerous it is. All those things need to be, put into factor.

Yeah.

Great. Okay. Let's move on to the next one. You know, many churches, preach primarily from the New Testament, and to the neglect of the Old Testament, whether it's Sunday morning, Sunday evening, other Bible study times. In fact, you do have some, well regarded or at least well known Christian leaders nowadays.

Thinking of Andy Stanley, large church in Georgia, Northpointe, who's on record as saying that Christians need to uncouple themselves from the Old Testament. What would you say to that? And and can we apply all of the Old Testament to us as New Testament believers? And how do we know what and what not to apply if we don't apply all of the Old Testament?

Yeah. It's unfortunate that many people, whether they like the situation you brought up, this is wanna disassociate themselves theologically with the Old Testament or those who are intimidated by the Old Testament and don't see the value of it choose not to teach on and expound on it. At the same time, there is concern because we realize that we are in a new covenant, so how does the old covenant apply to us? And that's a vital question. That's an important question.

I understand the the reasoning behind that. What we have to understand is even in the New Testament, we're told in Romans 15, believe verse four, told in first Corinthians 10, believe verse six and verse 11, that there is encouragement and instruction found in these Old Testament stories. And even in these laws and and these Psalms, there's value for our personal encouragement. And so people kind of, look down upon those who go to the story of David and the story of Joseph. And what they tend to say in defense of Christ being the theme of the Bible is, you can't put yourself in that story with Joseph.

You can't put yourself in that story of David. And I get that. You can stretch these stories to make it about you and not make it about God's glory. At the same time, Paul tells me I can go there for encouragement. I can go to how God dealt with Joseph's life with his perfect sovereign providential plan and believe the same for my life.

I can look at David's faith and say, yeah, God honors faith, and there is instruction and value there concerning my faith with the lens of the New Testament, of course. So it's a it's it's an unfortunate thing to hear people speak like that. I know their hearts are in the right place and that they want to defend the glory of Christ being the theme and the golden thread from beginning to end. But there is nothing illegitimate with me and for you, for anybody else, to go to the Old Testament with the boundaries of the New Testament to see how these things apply to me. In fact, the Old Testament is the best illustration book for New Testament principles.

However, I get the again, back to the original question, I get the argument of, well, we're in the new covenant, so how do we know what of the Old Testament? Maybe ceremonial laws, rituals, feasts. How do we know what transfers over and what is obsolete or what has ceased to be applicable? And there are two places that, help me when I look at that question. One is in Isaiah 42.

You're told there in, the first few verses a prophecy concerning the Messiah to come. And and in the first few verses, we are told that the coastlands will wait for his law. That's an interesting phrase. That as the messiah comes, the gentile nations themselves are awaiting a law to come from him. When you go to Hebrews seven, the author of Hebrews is arguing how the priesthood of Melchizedek is superior to the priesthood of Aaron, and he says something in that chapter, verse 12, I believe, where he mentions that if there is a new priesthood, then automatically that assumes that there is going to be a new law.

What does that mean? Well, that means is that in the new covenant, you have in a sense a law within that covenant. A new way of approaching worship, approaching sanctification, approaching our relationship with the Lord, and Christ brought that in. Not that he dismissed the old covenant, he was the fulfillment of it, but he brought about the true substance of the old testament. And that's what we would call the law of Christ.

So how do I identify the law of Christ in the new covenant? I think the best way to do it is to read the new covenant. Read the gospels. Read the epistles. The apostles who were given authority and the promise by Christ that the spirit would come and he would reveal everything that the Christ would want them to know and expound upon his teachings, because at that time, they weren't ready to receive all that Christ wanted them to know.

And what you'll see as you study the new covenant is that there is some overlap with the old covenant, and there are some things that don't apply anymore. So people often ask about the Sabbath. Right? They look at the 10 commandments, and they'll see that nine of those commandments resurface in the new covenant, but the the Sabbath, as the Jews observed, is not necessarily repeated. It's not emphasized as a teaching, as a practice for the church.

Well, why is that? Because Christ is the Sabbath, Hebrews four. He fulfilled that. But at the same time, there's a universal moral code that still applies in the new covenant. So the best way to know what applies to me and what doesn't is to simply study the new covenant, realize that there was a law there was a law from the Messiah that was anticipated, and that is what we are under.

That is what we are subject to. And then that that way you can properly interpret, the old covenant. So we know of a brother who's not here, but he loves the Lord, and I trust that he's still walking with the Lord. When when he first got saved, he didn't have that revelation. And so when he approached the Old Testament thinking, well, I'm supposed to read this from cover to cover, he looked at some of those Levitical laws concerning how men should dress and how they should not shave the the ends of their the sides of their beards, and he thought, okay.

Well, that's what I gotta do as a Christian. I gotta not shave here and dress this way. A wise believer approached him and says, no. That doesn't apply. You know?

That's not binding on us. And so that's the simplest answer, I think. Just consider the law of Christ, and that is what we are called to observe. Yeah.

Great. Love to spend more time on that one. Yeah. You know? Unfortunately, next question.

This is a good one. Some teach that Jesus went to hell after he died and before his resurrection. Where was Jesus during that interval?

That is a good question. And the only place where we are given clear insight concerning that period of time between his death and his resurrection, I believe, is first Peter three. That's the clearest place. And when you go to first Peter three, you get one idea of what took place during silent Saturday as some like to describe it. He says this in verse 19.

Well, I can read from verse 18. For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit, In which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison because they formally did not obey when God's patience waited in the days of Noah while the ark was being prepared in which a few, that is eight persons, were brought safely through water. So there isn't much given concerning that time, and where we are given little, we have to say little, not go beyond what is written. But based on this, what we can say is that Jesus in the spirit went to a particular spiritual place, and he proclaimed a message to certain spirits who were imprisoned, obviously imprisoned for many, many, many years, and we're we're told specifically since the days of Noah, and for a specific sin or series of sin during that time of Noah. And so these are commonly believed to be demon spirits who had a great influence upon the generation of Noah, and there's debate about the extent of their influence and how they interacted with the sons of of of men.

But what's Jesus here doing proclaiming to these spirits who are incarcerated and imprisoned until judgment? Right? Based on this, we can make the case in another places that there are some demons who are held captive until the day of judgment, and there are other demons who are let loose on the earth, obviously under God's sovereign will, for them to do their bidding. But at this time, Jesus comes into this holding place, and he preaches. He doesn't preach the gospel.

He's not evangelizing these spirits. But what he is doing is that he is making a triumphant declaration. That's what Christ is doing. And so there could be even the possibility that these spirits rejoiced at the sight of the death of the son of God. That that they probably thought, okay.

We did it. We we were able to overthrow prophecy. We were able to conquer the plan of salvation. And who comes in? Jesus Christ, declaring his victory, declaring his vicarious death, his triumphant success over the grave.

I would I would love to have seen those spirits' faces. And so all this is saying is that Jesus really came to declare his victory. And, one thing's for certain, he didn't go to hell to suffer for our sins. He didn't, he didn't do anything because it was finished on the cross. It was finished at the cross.

He he drank every drop of that cup. And so all he's doing here is letting people know that he did do that, letting specific spirits know. And even the ascension is a declaration of that. I'm looking forward to preaching one day purely on the ascension of Jesus Christ. We often hear about his his his incarnation.

We hear about his crucifixion. We hear about his resurrection, but very little is mentioned about his ascension. There is a message with that ascension. There's a reason why he bodily went up into the clouds, and the and the reason behind that is deeper than we would think. So you have to come to that sermon.

I'm not gonna share it why now.

So looking at the apostle's creed, where it says that Jesus was crucified, dead, and buried, he descended into hell, on the third day, rose again, Would you say Christians should not or should say that if they're saying the apostles creed? Because some churches say the apostles creed is part of their liturgy.

The word hell, is that the the point that you're bringing up?

Yes.

Yeah. That's a translation issue more than anything else. So especially with older translations, you'll see the word hell used, but in the original, it's really referring to Hades, the grave, Sheol. And so that comes really to a translation issue. If if what they mean by hell is what we see in Revelation 20 and, where the lake of fire will be created, where death and Hades will be thrown into, and everybody whose name is not written in the book of life, then, yes, don't use that word.

Jesus didn't enter into hell in that case, but he did enter into the underworld as we see here. And he did declare triumphantly how he conquered, not just death, but Satan himself. So just be careful with your terminology, whether it's a creed or, a verse concerning your translation, and, just make sure that you're not confused or people hearing it are confused.

Great. Alright. The next question. You know, in in many Christian colleges, it was the case when I was in Christian college and it's certainly the case now, you still have you do have people say, legitimately, I think sometimes, sometimes not legitimately, A guy goes up to a girl is most often the case and says, God told me to marry you. It happens.

Probably not the wisest thing to say sometimes, but should Christians and, I don't know if this is a man or a woman asking this question, but it says, should I wait for a prophetic word to tell me who to marry?

There's a common joke. I've said it before, so I apologize if you heard it before. But if you haven't, I'll I'll share it anyway. About this woman who was at a conference, and, after a few days, a man approaches this woman, obviously attracted, drawn to her, and says that very thing. He says, the Lord told me that you're supposed to be my wife.

And the woman gently looked at him and says, really? He says, yes. And she says, did the Lord tell that to my husband? So should you wait for a prophetic word to tell you who to marry? No.

Absolutely not. You should not wait for a prophetic word because there's no instruction for that in the bible when it comes to selecting a spouse. Let me broaden it. I think a lot of Christians even fall into the trap of waiting for any supernatural sign to indicate to them that somebody is a potential candidate or is supposed to be your spouse. Because, again, there is no scriptural mandate or even invitation to do that.

Now I know how some people feel. Are you saying that you shouldn't pray for God to reveal who that person should be? Absolutely not. You should. If there's anything to pray the most about, it's that.

More than your job, more than your car, more than where to move is, Lord, who would you have me marry? Who is the person that you would have me covenant with? But I I'm afraid that as people are praying for that, they're waiting for something that is not necessarily something that God has to grant. Can God supernaturally make something known? Yeah.

Who says that he can't? Is that the norm? I I say no. It's not the norm. And where people tend to go is the story with Isaac and Rebecca.

Genesis 24. Abraham sends his servant to find a wife for his son, Isaac, and he arrives at a specific well, and he seeks the Lord. And this is what he asked the Lord. He says, Lord, when a woman comes and if she asks if I wanna drink, let her also ask if she can feed my camels. And then I will know that my trip wasn't a waste, and this is the person that you have for my master's son.

And people tend to use that, and they get very creative in asking God for signs. Right? Lord, when she knocks on my door, let her wear this, or lord, let her order that, or lord, let her call me at this time. And so we make very specific demands, and we use Genesis 24 as a license to approach that decision or that kind of prayer in that way. But people miss what Abraham's servant even prayed about.

He wasn't asking for a random sign. Notice what he asked for. He asked that the Lord would reveal something about this woman's character. Right? Says, Lord, I I want her to not just do what's obvious and what's demanded of or what's the social norm.

I want her to go above and beyond. So Lord, if this woman goes above and beyond, then I'll know that she's someone special. Then I'll know. So there's something there in principle for us that if you're gonna be asking the Lord for anything is to open your eyes to that person's heart, to that person's inner beauty, to that person's fear of God, to that person's integrity. Right?

I think that's how we need to be praying. With that, don't get me wrong, pray, Lord, protect me from the wrong one. Because Ecclesiastes tells us that there's something worse than death, and that's a woman whose heart is chains and fetters. Right? In other words, out externally, she looks fine, but internally, she's a trap.

And he says the sinner is taken by her, but the one who pleases God escapes her. And so take that scripture and bring it before the lord. But, again, that's that's found in the word of God. Lord, as long as I walk in your way, in your will, as long as I'm honoring you, you promise me that I will not be in a trap. You won't put me in a relationship that I will later be like, what did I get myself into?

You promise me you promise here that you will guide me to the right person. And so open my eyes to the extent in which I can see this person as a potential partner for life. And so be careful asking for something so specific that would delay you or even cause you to miss out on potential candidates before you. And so, yeah, it breaks my heart to see people thinking that way that they that in order for them to find somebody they need this extravagant awesome story. And I get it, but, you know, you want God to be glorified in that story.

But, again, I'm afraid that people romanticize that story. They want this testimony so that when somebody that says, how how did you guys meet? You can say, oh, let me tell you how we met. And I remember we studied the book of Ruth when we did that few years back. And it dawned on me with the backdrop of Genesis 24 with Isaac and Rebecca, you can say that that was a supernatural story.

Right? It was still an answer to prayer, though the the request was very, very realistic. You look at Ruth and Boaz's story, and and you don't get any hint of that kind of intervention. You see providence. You see a woman who just wants to obey God, and so she does what she's called to do as a poor individual.

She goes and she gleans from, you know, the the the wheat fields. And as she's there just obeying what she's been given concerning God's revelation for her life in that season of her life, there's Boaz in the same field, and they meet. And they, reflect on the fact that there's a relationship here, so I can actually redeem you. I I can actually be kinsman redeemer, so they go to court. And they, figure it out, and there was a little bit of an obstacle, and they overcame the obstacle, and they got married.

That doesn't sound as exciting as Abraham's servant praying and God revealing it, and then them going back to Rebecca's house and sharing that story, and them all being like, wow. This has to be of God. But is is Boaz and Ruth's story any less God's will? Is it any less of God's leading? No.

It's not. So don't idolize or romanticize this Disney idea of Prince Charming meeting someone. Just just trust God's leading and believe that he can lead. If not, he tends to mostly lead through providence more than anything else. Okay?

Yeah. I love that. I and and just to add on that, I I love how you said that's normally, God works through ordinary means. That's not to say he doesn't work through supernatural means, like salvation. Right?

Could God could Christ appear visibly to everyone that he is going to save? Absolutely. Mhmm. But he does it through ordinary means through the preaching of God's word. And, like, when you're looking for a spouse, God has given you all of the means to choose a spouse, praying, seeking the wisdom of the Lord, reading your Bible.

Right? You would I I I'm surprised by how many people struggle, like, is this person for me? Is this person not for me? When one's a Christian and one's not a Christian.

Right.

It's not even a question. Right. So we don't need a supernatural sign for that. And also, wisdom from other believers Right.

I was going to say that, but go ahead. Please go. Yeah.

Yeah. Especially your parents. Are your parents believers? What do they think? Are your friends?

Are your older people in the church? They're believers. So get around these people with your potential girlfriend or boyfriend or future spouse so that they can see. They can speak into your life. They can see this other person probably clearer than you can because they're not distracted by, romance or love or anything like that.

They can see it from a Christian wise perspective as also someone who cares about you as a brother or sister in Christ.

Absolutely. And and the counsel of many, there is safety, Proverbs says. Right? And, whenever it speaks about counselors, it's plural. So not just even one person.

You know, have a few people in your life that are mature spiritually that that you know are for you and love you and that you can open up about and say, this is what this person is like. And be honest in your assessment of that person. Right? Be honest. This is what this person is like.

You know, their spiritual condition, their actions, reactions, interactions, be honest so that you can have the best kind of counsel you can get with the clearest evidence that you provide. So, yeah, it's God has given us the same Holy Spirit who can speak prophetically is the same Holy Spirit who says, in many counselors there is security. Right? It's the same Holy Spirit who says, get get around believers who can speak into your life and guide you and help you see blind spots. Right?

Great question. Amen. Amen. I'll end it with this. Learn from Rehoboam.

Right? Don't pick all of your friends, people your own age, people with the same life experience as you as your only counselors. Learn from the wise, the older, the gray heads around you.

That's really good. Amen.

Okay. Next question. Why do you baptize in the name of the father, son, and holy spirit rather than baptizing in the name of Jesus as the apostles did?

Because Jesus said to. Matthew 28, we're commanded by Christ to baptize in the name of the father, son, holy spirit. Where this comes from though is when you read the book of Acts, you see this habit of the apostles in the early church baptizing purely and exclusively in the name of Jesus. And so that has created a trend among some specific denominations, namely, oneness Pentecostals will apply that where they will, baptize in Jesus' name only. Is this even a big deal?

Like, what's so important about that question? And it is a big deal. One, because it's a command that Jesus gave. Right? And two, there are massive implications in Jesus giving that specific set of instructions, the formula of our baptism.

One, it's it's one of the two ordinances. Right? And two, you are identifying with something in your baptism. And what Christ is saying there is very, special because he uses the singular noun for name. He doesn't say in the names of the father, son, and holy spirit.

He says singularly in the name of the father, son, and holy spirit, which solidifies our belief in our god being triune. Right? Muslims will often ask. They ask a lot of things, but they often ask, Show me where in the gospels Jesus ever taught the trinity, and I always go to that verse. I'll always go to Matthew 28.

I say, you tell me what it means to baptize in the name of the father, son, and holy spirit. What does that mean? And that pretty much ends the conversation, at least in with that question. And so those who who tend to say, you know, you should only baptize in Jesus' name because the early church and the apostles did, don't have a Trinitarian conviction. Not all, but most.

So it makes sense why they would use that as an argument. But it still begs a question. If Jesus commanded it, why do we not see that more often as a pattern in the New Testament, namely in in the book of Acts? And I think the reason is because Jesus Christ himself was rejected as the Messiah. And especially with the Jewish audience, the call to be baptized in his name was especially scandalous, and it reinforced the identity of Christ that demanded their allegiance to and their surrender to and their repentance to.

And so Jesus being at the forefront in the call for baptism was important because of what the nation of Israel had done concerning Jesus, what they thought about him. And so it was a call to acknowledge and pledge their allegiance to Christ, to him specifically, because of the recent events concerning him. And so that's, I think, the best way to explain why they emphasize Jesus, and it doesn't override what Christ had commanded.

Amen. Amen. Okay. The next question comes from, a sister. She says, why should I have an open womb instead of using contraceptives?

And I and I think even before you start answering contraceptives, I think we should be very clear on definitions. Right? There's those contraceptives that are abortifacients, plan b, other other contraceptives like that. And then there's other contraceptives that, prevent, conception. Right?

Prevent the egg and the sperm joining together. And there's also other contra contraceptives that aren't even medical per se.

Right. Natural.

Natural contraceptive. So what do you say?

This is, controversial. Some people feel very strongly about this topic and this question. And so let's just set a foundation in saying that any kind of contraceptive that would induce an abortion or miscarriage is wrong. Right? We don't want to kill anything because we believe that life is at conception, and so that's out of the question.

I think where the debate is, other means that don't necessarily do that, that not interfering with life necessarily, but interfering with God's sovereign will in that process. So here's what I would say, and we have to be careful because the Bible doesn't explicitly prohibit this. It doesn't give clear instructions about this. And so we have to operate with wisdom, and we have to take the whole counsel of God into consideration. Is the idea of family planning wrong?

I would argue no. Because if we use the same line of argumentations that people use to deny any kind of birth control, I'm I'm talking about the legitimate ideas, we wouldn't use in other facets of life. So one of the common, ideas concerning this is people would say, well, children are a gift of the lord. Why would you try to stop yourselves from receiving a gift from him? And I understand that sentiment, and we have to believe that children are a gift of of the lord.

But when we look at, for example, marriage, we see marriage as a gift as well. Right? Is it not? He who finds a wife finds a good thing and obtains favor from the Lord. But just because that in itself is a gift, we don't expect every single person to get married.

We don't demand marriage on everyone. In fact, Paul Paul in first Corinthians seven says that in the case that he was in, in the context he was in, it's better that you are as I. And he gives reasons for that. Yes. There was persecution that was arising that made marriage and and and that worldly care very difficult, but he also says, you know, you secure an undivided devotion to the lord in your singleness.

So is Paul contradicting what Genesis says? Right? Because Genesis is often alluded to. Be fruitful and multiply. Yes.

Be fruitful and multiply. But it also says in Genesis, it's not good for man to be alone. But we don't condemn anybody if they believe by God's leading that they are to be single. They are not dishonoring God in that. Right?

If they believe that this is something the Lord's called them to. And so we have to be careful in, using these ideas that are from a good place, but to condemn others for not having that same convictions as others would have. I think there is wisdom in regulation. There's wisdom in thinking and and praying. And I think where we have to check ourselves in this whole process, and I hope they're asking this within the context of marriage.

I'm assuming they are. Right? What are your reasons in delaying? And what is your attitude toward children? Now if you, as a believing husband and wife, look at children as a burden altogether, and you don't wanna have children because of your personal preferences and your ideas and your goals that are disassociated from the kingdom, then you have to actually evaluate your heart and ask yourself, am I operating under selfishness here, or are my reasons for delay legitimate?

But if you as a husband and wife are wanting to devote even as a couple time to serve the Lord at a certain capacity, or you're in a difficult place where you need to kind of put things in order before bringing a life into your home, But in your heart of hearts, you believe that God would want to expand your your home and to fill your quiver. That's a different mindset that has to be, it has to be considered even by those who feel very strongly that we should allow God's sovereign ways in that beautiful act and in our, in our covenant with another person. So I would say to to just sum everything up, I would say that it's not illegal. It's not ultimately wrong, but you have to examine your attitude and your reasons why. If they are righteous, if they are god centered, then you shouldn't feel condemned by planning when to have a child.

That's how I would answer that.

Amen. Amen. I love that that, you know, the world says children are a burden. Mhmm. It's the Christians who can stand out and say, children, no matter what I have them or how many I have, they're blessing from the Lord.

Healthy children, disabled children, adopted children, all a blessing from the Lord. That's what sets us apart.

Amen.

Okay. Next question. So what does Jesus mean when he repeatedly uses the term kingdom of God in the gospels? What must I do to enter it? Is it the same as going to heaven?

How will it arrive? Is it is it synonymous with the second coming of Christ? There's a lot of sub questions in there.

Yeah. There were and and I think there are more in the original question. So the best way to answer that, you read the gospels, you see Jesus speaking about the kingdom of God, even the kingdom of heaven. I believe that there aren't any significant differences between the kingdom of God and the kingdom of heaven. Some would say so.

I don't believe so. The kingdom of God just speaks about the ruler of the kingdom. The kingdom of heaven just speaks about the kingdom itself. Let's define some terms. What is a kingdom?

A kingdom is any territory that is ruled by a monarch, a king. And so if you use that definition, then you can you can say the kingdom of God if God has created all things and he is sovereign over things, he sustains all things, and the kingdom of God is really everything. It's the universe itself. And there are Old Testament texts that would prove that, that would back that up. But you come into more problems when you read the gospels and you read things like, repent for the kingdom of God is what?

It's at hand. Well, hold on. If a kingdom is the region that a king rules over, God created all things, he rules over all things, surely then everything is his kingdom, then what does it mean that the kingdom of God is at hand? It's near. It's approaching.

Now we come to a more narrow and more specific answer. Surely the kingdom of God is about God's sovereign rule and reign, but more specifically his sovereign rule and reign through the Messiah himself being that ruler. In other words, the kingdom of God is the son of God ruling and reigning on the throne. And that helps clarify many things. So when Jesus in Luke 17 is confronted about the kingdom of God, he says, it's in the midst of you.

What do you mean it's in the midst of you? It's very simple because the king of the kingdom was in the midst of them. Right? And Jesus gave examples and he gave demonstrations by invading into his world at the time, by demonstrating what it's like for God to sovereignly rule through the Messiah by healing and delivering and forgiving and restoring. And so there is an aspect of the kingdom of God that has been inaugurated when Jesus came into the world.

It was inaugurated, but the fulfillment of it is not yet. The consummation of the kingdom is still to be awaited. So the same Jesus that the kingdom of God is in the midst of you is the same Jesus who told believers to pray, your kingdom come. Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven. So we are still awaiting the consummation of the kingdom where the Messiah, the son of God will enter into our world and establish a real throne in a real place for a thousand years.

So then how do we relate to this idea of the kingdom of God now? Well, I think there's an invisible aspect of the kingdom and then the physical aspect of the kingdom. We are enjoying and living under the invisible realities of the kingdom of God today. Jesus Christ is king. He's sitting at the right hand of God.

We are citizens of his kingdom. Now I wouldn't say that the church is the kingdom of God. Some would make that mistake that the church is the kingdom of God on earth. I wouldn't say that because you you start confusing things. We're asking for the kingdom of God to come.

Jesus inaugurated the kingdom when he came. I would say that the church is like the embassy of the kingdom of God. And that though we are citizens of the kingdom, we are ambassadors in a foreign land persuading and appealing to people to to gain their blood bought citizenship so that they would be prepared when the king does come and that they would be part of his kingdom. And through our lives and our example, our testimonies, we would show people to some extent what it's like to be kingdom citizens because he is king of our hearts. He rules in our hearts.

And so there's an aspect of us that shows what it's like to have the governance of God over us. And as the church, the bride of Christ, we are waiting for the kingdom to be ultimately manifest when Jesus Christ does return. So there is an aspect of us being part of the kingdom, Christ being king. We enjoy the invisible spiritual realities of that. Right?

Righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit. That's Romans fourteen seventeen. Where we hear about what the kingdom of God is about. And so yeah. Jesus inaugurates it.

We wait for it at the same time, and we do our best to represent it to the extent that we can to convince people to be ready for the king and to be citizens of his kingdom.

Amen. Beautiful. Okay. This question might lead to a little bit of squirming. So a couple years ago, the Barna Group did a survey and discovered that Christians in America on average gave 3% of their income to churches or ministries.

Which then leads to this question, how much should Christians and this question uses tithe or you could use give. And then why do many people within the church not tithe?

When we think about tithing, and that word, denotes a 10%. Right? A a portion of your income or your resources. That was an old testament principle. Actually, it was a law and it had an intention.

There was a goal with the tithe and the old covenant. It was this. The Levites had no inheritance. The the tribe of Levi had no land to their name. They were supposed to be devoted to the the house of God.

God was their inheritance, and so they did not have the same access to the resources as the other tribes that so what did God do in order to support the Levites? He called for a tithe from the other tribes, and it actually mounts up to more than 10%. If you do the calculations, it's more.

Close to 20.

Right. 23% even some would argue. And the idea is this. The the tribes would then, through their tides, support the Levites as they devoted their their time and their energy and their lives really to supervising and to serving in the temple. It was to support the Levites.

Now when you come to the new covenant, that idea of the people of God contributing in order to help those who have devoted their lives to full time ministry is still there. In fact, in first Corinthians nine, Paul goes back to the priesthood to make a case for the the the full time minister being taken care of through his gospel work. He should be compensated through his gospel work. The difference though is how that giving should occur. The goal is still the same.

Right? You have a people who work and they do other things and they benefit spiritually from those who have given their lives over to serving in the ministry, but the means and the way we approach that is different. There was an actual number given in the old, and I'm sure most of you in here know what the standard is according to the New Testament. What's the standard? Whatever is on your heart.

Second Corinthians nine. Second Corinthians nine tells us very plainly in verse seven, each one must give as he decided in his heart. That is the clearest instruction that we are given concerning how we should give. Here's where I would like to challenge people though, and this challenged me. If hearing that, you and I go, good.

I'm glad I don't have to give as much as they gave in the old testament. Thank God. I don't think we're thinking right about giving. If we're thinking, we're in the new covenant, so it's less burdensome to us now because we don't have to give as much as they had to give, We're not thinking right about giving. So that's second Corinthians nine seven.

Right? When you go to second Corinthians eight seven, Paul's speaking to the same people about the same thing. He says something that every single time I read it, convicts me. Every single time to this day. Let me read it to you.

He says here in verse seven, but as you excel in everything, he's speaking to the Corinthians, in faith, in speech, in knowledge, in all earnestness, and in our love for you, or some translations say in your love for us, see that you excel in this act of grace also. What act of grace is he speaking about? Giving. He's calling the Corinthian Christians to excel in giving, to be excellent in giving. Every time I read that, it convicts me.

So one preacher said something, and it, it just a light bulb went off. He said, if we are we claim to believe that we are under a better covenant, that Christ makes everything better, shouldn't that then demand of us better giving? Not less giving, but better giving. More rejoicing in our giving, more excitement in our giving, more intentionality in our giving. If our covenant is better, shouldn't our giving be better?

Oh, I heard that convicted me. And so we we should examine our hearts and we should think to ourselves constantly, what do I really believe about the gospel, about the local church that I'm part of, about the value that I receive from the ministries that I am connected to. And whether we like to acknowledge it or not, this is for all of us, our giving to some extent is an indication of that. It is. It's an indication of where our value is.

Where your heart is, there your treasure will be also. That's what Jesus said. Right? So if you wanna know where your heart is, what he's saying by that is, look where your money goes. And that is not to say that we should, not spend money on vacations or good food and events.

But if in our scope of giving, in our scope of how we manage and plan our money, investing in the proclamation, the advancement, the sustaining of the gospel and the ministries that we are part of is not there, then we have to ask ourselves how much do I really believe that I am under a better covenant and that I really I really do want this to continue and excel. Because whether we wanna acknowledge it or not, money is a real part of what we do. It's it's it's even here. Do we put our trust in money? No.

Do we need money in the sense of if we don't have money, we can't do the work of God? No. God is our ultimate source. But giving is not so much about, what God needs because he doesn't need anything. It's more for us, and you've said this before.

It's an invitation for us to participate in something, and it even trains us to be reminded that, life is beyond what I spend, what I save up for here. I wanna invest in eternal things and for things that will exceed my lifetime and exceed this world. So I would say look at your heart and and even look at your heart and ask the Lord to make you excited about it. Not to under compulsion or or merely under duty, but to to to operate under the revelation that this is a better covenant. I want to, as a result of that, worship and excel in this grace also.

And so let it come from that place, and the Holy Spirit will help us. He will.

Yeah. I'm wondering as you know, let's let's say there's a a Christian out there who really wants to do the right thing by the Lord, but they don't know how. Do you have any practical advice on giving, a percentage? You think that that's good to just an established percentage right from the beginning or, a regularity, just just to help people in that?

Yeah. That's a good question. Again, I think Paul's instruction here is clear. It will be subjective. Your income, your family situation, the season that you're in right now, might demand of you something else than to the next person.

Right? And giving should never put a strain on you. It should never cause you to, put yourself in a compromising situation at all. And so I would just say have converse if you're married, have conversations with your spouse about it. Pray about it.

Ask the lord, what is it that you would want us to give regularly? Would you want us to give, periodically? How is it that you would want us to do this? And let me also add this. I'm not one to just encourage people to throw their money at anything, even in the name of ministry.

Even if somebody it doesn't matter because I know there are a lot of sketchy things out there. And, you're not supposed to back up everything that comes your way just because it's been presented to you. You should be careful where your money goes. You should you should be able to invest again. Say, I trust this leadership.

I trust this their vision. I see how biblical they are. And so just to put anything in an offering plate to say that you give, I don't think the bible even encourages that kind of giving. Even if you're giving to a ministry, you have to be careful. You have to be wise.

You have to be steward of the resources that you have been granted by the Lord. And so be careful. Be strategic. Look into things. Ask questions.

And that's why even here, we wanna be as transparent as possible with our finances. That's why in our members meeting, we show you everything. And if you have even deeper questions, you have every right to come to our leadership and say, hey, we want because it's we don't see it as our money. This is God's money, and this is us as as a family coming together to put in our resources because we have this collective goal of advancing the kingdom. And advancing the kingdom, looks like at this point of our ministry, saving up for a building, because we want a place to host the ministries that we are enjoying here, and to make room for more people to enjoy it as well.

So, yeah, don't don't be naive in your giving. And I'll I'll give you proof of that. When you go to first Timothy five, there is a whole system established even back then about which widow should receive financial support. Paul didn't believe this idea where people can come in and just say, I'm in need. I'm a widow.

He goes, okay. Who are you? How have you served the saints? How old are you? There's this whole list of qualifications that Paul had in mind about where the money should go.

So not just anybody who comes in with rags or with a need demands the priority of our resources. We have to be very, very careful where that goes because people will manipulate. People are evil. People know the generosity and the charity of Christians that will take advantage of that. And so we have to be very, very cautious and wise in how we approach that, and and you should be just the same with your giving.

Okay.

Great. So we have several more. How many more do you think we

I don't know. How are you guys doing?

Alright.

Well,

keep going. In a premillennial view, some eschatology here now. Mhmm. The millennium includes a new temple with the reinstatement of animal sacrifices. Skeptics bring up four flaws with that delegitimit delegitimitize this view from being a viable base being viable based mainly on the sacrifices with some attention to the temple itself.

And And then they this person lists some of the objections.

Yeah. We can hear them. I think it's good. Well, can we just pause and is that already on catching on to what was just said. So there is a belief that during the millennial reign of Christ, after the tribulation period when Christ does return physically and establishes his kingdom on earth, many who hold to that view also would say that there will be a temple during the millennium.

And that temple will actually have a function, and in that function there will be a priesthood, and there will be animal sacrifices. And so the there are those who obviously oppose that view, and we're about to hear the main objections to that. What's the purpose of a temple being reintroduced when Jesus Christ comes to rule and reign on the earth? So we all understand the question so far? So now we're gonna hear the main objections, and they're they're good objections, but we'll we'll address them.

Yeah. The first one is, why do we have that if Christ's atonement being once and for all time was already accomplished?

Well, why don't we read all of them and maybe we'll just Sure.

Okay. So Christ's atonement being once and for all time. That's the first objection. The second one is God's displeasure with animal sacrifices. Three, God's establishment of his bride as the temple removes the possibility of a physical temple.

And then lastly, God instituted a proper way of remembrance known as communion.

Great question. I love this question. It's a deep question. The idea of a temple being erected during the millennium period is not a random thought. It comes from the book of Ezekiel.

So when if you if you've read Ezekiel, you know that Ezekiel 40 to 48 is dedicated to the detailed blueprint of this glorious temple. And it's so detailed. I mean, there's eight chapters dedicated to it. And within those chapters, you have even instructions of what is to be happening in that temple. For those who would not hold to that because of these arguments that there will be a physical temple during the millennium, they would say about Ezekiel 40 to 48 that it's allegorical.

It's speaking about the church. It's speaking about believers. It's speaking about Christ in some regard. It's it can't be literal because it just doesn't make sense in light of what Christ will accomplish and what he has instituted in the new covenant. And so they would say from 40 to 48, it's it's purely allegorical.

It's symbolic in its meaning. It's not to be taken literally. I am among those who would believe that Ezekiel's temple is literal for the simple reason that it is given to us to be understood literally. And so when you read Ezekiel 40 to 48, there's something interesting that pops up at Ezekiel 43 verse 10. I wanna read it to you.

And it says here, as for you, son of man, describe to the house of Israel the temple that they may be ashamed of their iniquities, and they shall measure the plan. And if they are ashamed of all that they have done, make known to them the design of the temple, its arrangements, its exits, and its entrances, that is its whole design, and make known to them as well all its statutes and its whole design and all its laws and write it down in their sight so that they may observe all its laws and all its statutes and carry them out. That can't that can't open up the possibility that what you see in Ezekiel 40 to 48 then is allegorical. Because Ezekiel was instructed to take the actual blueprint and to read it out loud and to make it known to the people of Israel to inspire holiness, to forsake their sin and say, we want that temple. We want that kind of glory.

So if we, because of those arguments, want to dismiss the literal interpretation, I think an allegorical interpretation opens you up to more questions than actual answers, personally. So then what do we do with this? Because I think the burden is not so much on those who would say that this is a reality. I believe the burden here based on those objections is okay. Fine.

It is literal. What's the purpose of it then? How do we understand its function? And how do we reconcile that with our faith and our covenant? And that's where I understand where the tension is.

There are many things to say about this, and I think the main problem that, people have is the idea of the sacrifices. More than an actual temple, it's the sacrifices themselves. And here's what I would say to somebody who would then if you first can say confidently, okay. This is a real temple. Ask yourself this question.

Has this temple ever been realized in history? No. It hasn't. It wasn't recognized in Solomon's temple. It wasn't recognized in Ezra's temple.

It wasn't recognized in Herod's temple. This kind of manifestation has never been known. More than that, when you read Revelation 21, you will see explicitly that there will be no temple. We're told that in Revelation 21. There will be no temple, but that's speaking about the eternal age because Christ will be there.

Right? We don't need a temple. So then we gotta fit this somewhere. If If it's never been recognized before, if it's not gonna be realized in the eternal age, then what what do we have left? The millennium.

The tribulation, there will be a temple. Right? Paul alludes to that when he speaks about the desecration of the temple in second Thessalonians. But the shifts that will happen geographically, the shifts that will happen in the world might demand that there would be a new temple, and that would fulfill what Ezekiel is prophesying. So okay.

It's there. So then why the sacrifices? Why all these different things that seem to contradict what Christ has done? And here's the thing that I would challenge you with, and this would maybe encourage you to do further bible study. When you look at even Paul as an example, maybe you've never thought about this.

If you read Acts carefully, there is an instance where Paul himself actually, post experience with Christ, participates in some of the rituals and ceremonies in the temple of his day. Does anybody know where where I'm thinking? Anybody know what I'm referring to? I mean, Dan, you've preached through the acts. Right?

So in acts 21, you read of James and you can turn there because I want you to see this, and I I wanna there's a reason why I'm bringing this to your attention. In acts 21, you read of James telling Paul and encouraging Paul to take four men who were under a vow, and it's believed that the vow was a Nazarite vow, and to go to the temple and to have them purified and to actually pay for their expenses concerning the purification procedure. So I wanna read that to you. Verse 23. Do therefore what we tell you.

He's speaking to Paul here. We have four men who are under a vow. Take these men and purify yourself along with them and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads. Thus all will know that there is nothing in what they have been told about you, but that you yourself also live in observance of the law. Here is James concerned.

There were all these rumors that Paul was going around preaching that he is anti law, he is anti Torah, that he wants to dismiss and cancel all that the covenants that the Jews have known. He he just now is presenting this new concept altogether, dismissing that. And James, like, for the sake of your testimony, would you just go ahead and do this to prove that that is not the case? And Paul agrees. He agrees.

You read in verse 26. Then Paul took the men, and the next day, he purified himself along with them and went into the temple giving notice when the days of purifications would be fulfilled and the offering presented for each one of them. Now if you look at if this is a Nazarite vow, if you go to numbers and you look at the whole protocol for a Nazarite, included in the Nazarite vow was not just to extend your hair length, but was also animal sacrifices. So what do we have here? We have Paul post salvation teaching others about the sufficiency of Christ's sacrifice, willing to partner with men who underwent a ceremonial law in the temple.

You know what some people say about Paul? He was wrong. Paul was actually in sin. That he caved under the pressure, and he did something that he shouldn't have done. You know why I have problems with that?

Because if Paul is wrong, James is wrong too, because he's the one who told him to do it. And if Paul is wrong, then why later in a couple of chapters when he gives testimony of what happened, he he speaks about this incident, and there is no sense that he's in the wrong for doing what he did. He speaks about him coming into the temple. He's he's disclosing the event that led to his arrest, and he speaks about this moment. So then what do we what do we have here?

I believe we have Paul who is able to, with a clear conscience, to some level, participate in these rituals and ceremonies because in his mind, he did not see redemptive qualities or properties in his participation of it. He does the same thing with Timothy with circumcision. Right? So here's what I wanna just propose as a possibility. If you see this example with Paul, in the temple, partnering with some of these Jewish believers in their participation of the rituals of the Levitical law, is it so hard to believe that in the millennium, there will be some of this?

Not to atone for sin, not to undermine the blood of Jesus Christ, but for other purposes. That's all I'm suggesting to you. Right? There is no way that Paul approached this because he thought that in doing so, he would have some of his sins cleansed. And when you when you think about it that way, then it opens up the the possibility that in the millennium because where people feel strongly about this is you're actually blaspheming Christ by thinking that you're reintroducing the Mosaic system when Christ is ruling and reigning.

He's the fulfillment of it, which I would also say if you read Ezekiel's instructions from 40 to 48 very carefully, you don't have a reintroduction to the Mosaic system. Do you know why? Because a lot of those feasts are not reintroduced, including the day of atonement. Some of the furnishings that were there in Solomon's temple and the tabernacle are not there again. So we're not reintroducing the Levitical law in the millennium.

We're not doing that. So we gotta eliminate that. And though we may not know the full answers to why those things will be in practice, we can be rest assured that Christ will be honored and glorified. His sacrifice, his atonement will reign triumphant as the reason why we glory in him, and that nothing will interfere or conflict with that. I mean, Paul did it even in acts 21 as a born again believer.

I hope that makes sense. At least entertain the possibility with the evidences throughout scripture.

Yeah. Thank you. Alright. This next question, I love the heart behind this question. I don't know who submitted it, but it it it really speaks to me as far as the the really concern this person has.

So when we look around the landscape of the church today, whether it be different churches, denominations, organizations, Christian colleges, and seminaries, some pastors, ministry leaders, even family members, we often see more secular and cultural ideologies permeating how people think, and what they practice, and preach, rather than the truth and the gospel of Christ. Here's the question. How do we best speak out against this when we see it? Here's the question. How do we best speak out against this when we see it?

I know every situation is different, but I wrestle at times with whether my discontent is of a holy indignation, and from a place of true love and zeal for the Lord and others, or if I am being self righteous or judgmental in a way that is not pleasing to God. Do you have any advice on how to react with practical wisdom in these situations with others, whether it be at home, work, or social media? When should we speak out, and when should we stay silent?

Such a good question. And in some way, it might tie into the first question of this session, though not entirely. But I would first say to this person's heart that you shouldn't condemn yourself for feeling this way about clear opposition and contradiction to the word of God being done in the name of Christ and among those who claim to be leaders for Christ. And I would say hone that, own that, praise God for that, and ask God to harness your feelings so that it wouldn't cause you to act in unrighteousness. But even the disciples, when they saw Jesus enter into that temple in John chapter two and overthrew the money changers, they saw that zeal and they realized zeal for his house will consume him.

So there is a righteous zeal that we should feel when it comes to the purity and the integrity and the honor that God should have in his house and with his word. And so if you feel that passion, I I applaud that because there are some people who care less, and they're so consumed with their own lives. They're not consumed with the glory of God. And so I applaud that, that heart for the honor of the Lord Jesus. But the question is followed up with how do I express this?

How do I deal with this? And that indicates that there are people in this person's life that are proposing this, that are preaching this, that are sharing this, that are teaching this. And so I would say as he said, and and he's on to something that the format will demand a different approach. Right? And so from a preaching standpoint, we gotta deal with it as clearly and as authoritatively as possible to call it out for what it is and to denounce it and to condemn it and to be very direct.

But that's not the case for many believers. So what the what should they do? I I would say in hearing that, depending on the extent of your relationship with other believers who might be entertaining these ideologies and these philosophies and these wrong doctrines, have conversations with them. Right? And so we're told there in second Timothy how the Lord's servant should be, and that includes being gentle and patiently enduring evil, and being able to interact with people in a certain way so that you would win them and that they would come to their senses and escape the snare of Satan.

So there is a call for conversational and respectable dialogue. And the best way to do it, again, is from Jesus' method to ask questions, to say, you know or to invite somebody out to say, you know, I I saw these things that you're posting, and I heard that you believe these things. I'm curious to know more. Can I ask more about that? And maybe it's a colleague from work where you take a lunch break and you have that time, or if it's a family member.

But you wanna have a conversation with them because those people, assumingly, believe that this whatever they're believing in is of God, is God's will, God's word, and they're interpreting things. So have that conversation with them and hear them out, and then, deal with it accordingly and, guide them. Usually, when you give people a chance to speak, they tend to give you a chance. Now I know some people are not like that, but some most are. And, have those conversations and trust that those conversations can be fruitful.

And that you and and here's what I always say, don't feel like you have to win that person in the first conversation or that first kind of interaction. Believe that the seed that you plant can actually be enough for them to wrestle with what they hold to. So be patient. Be patient with them. And I would say, just ask God to continue to fuel that passion in your heart and for platforms, feel to just testify of his truth and for divine appointments with people to hear what you have to say concerning the truth.

And I'm sure the Lord will honor that in a day of age where people are very afraid to speak out what God has to say. So

Wonderful. Alright. This is the last question. You know, I I don't think it's any shock to anybody that in America, we live in a very litigious society. People love to sue other people.

People love to threaten to sue other people. So this question says, when is it right for Christians to seek legal action? In scripture, we do not take our brothers to court, but instead forgive. But what about unbelievers? The word says, vengeance is the Lord.

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

I think you you should answer that question too with your history and your background. And I will ask that. I'll give an answer, and please add on to it. Here's what I would say based on scripture. There is a clear call that believers should suffer wrong instead of taking each other to court because protecting the testimony is the testimony of Christ is far greater than you gaining extra money or getting payback.

But what do we do with unbelievers? And I would say that Paul's mentality with the believers, the principle that he's operating under, overlaps even with how we interact with unbelievers to some extent. What was Paul's mindset when he talked taught that in first Corinthians six? Your rights, no matter how strongly you feel about them, should be in subject to the greater cause of the the person, the nature, and the message of Jesus Christ. And so if you surrendering your rights protects and shields from an unbelieving world, possible scorn, mockery, disdain, then sacrifice your rights.

And Paul did that for himself. In first Corinthians nine, he said, I have the right to demand material benefit from you as I benefit you spiritually, but I surrender that right. Because I don't want anybody else to say, Paul is preaching to gain money from you. And Paul's like, I rather glory in that than to demand something of you, so I'm not gonna ask you anything for the gospel. And in the same chapter there, he tells the same church to give to ministers.

So Paul he's he's in a different world than his thinking. He's in a different world. Constantly with any situation or circumstance, he's always thinking this in the forefront of his mind. What would bring most glory to Christ in this? What would limit scandal?

What would protect my testimony ultimately as I deal with the situation? And sometimes, depending on the situation, that would require you to actually exercise your legal right. And Paul does that, and we taught a bible study on that. Remember in act 16, him and Paul him and Silas were arrested, and then they go to the jailer's house, they're converted, and then the magistrate come and they say, hey. We're we're wrong.

We're sorry. We didn't mean to arrest you. You guys can leave now. No issue. No court case.

It's all done. We dropped the case. Right? We dropped all charges. You know what Paul does?

He goes, no. No. No. No. No.

No. You're not letting us go. Actually, we want you to escort us out. And pious Christians in 2023 would say, Paul, that's not Christ like. We're people of peace.

Go about your way and fulfill your ministry. You know what Paul would say with you? No. I'm not going anywhere. Was Paul bitter?

Did Paul wanna get something back? No. He was he's he was operating under the same principle and conviction as he was when he told the believers that he would not exercise his right to gain anything from them materially for his spiritual service. In what sense? What happened?

What happened to Paul and Silas? They were publicly condemned. They were publicly arrested. They were publicly shamed, and there was little information given about their arrest. The last thing that the people saw was that these missionaries who came into Philippi are now arrested.

Surely, they did something wrong and illegal to warrant that. And Paul knew that. So Paul says, I'm not gonna let the last thing that they saw be us getting arrested. You have to bring us out and show everybody that we were actually innocent. Why?

For the sake of the gospel. For the sake of the testimony of Christ. And so when it comes to promoting the gospel, when it comes to protecting the gospel, protecting, his his his glory, his name, his purpose on the earth through the church, we should utilize the freedoms that we have. I think the greatest example of that is what we've been experiencing the past few years when we've been told that you can't gather and meet under the name of safety and health care and loving your neighbor even. And many churches have taken the stand and and took the legal route to say, no.

We have the right to meet. This is our right. We should. For what purpose? In order for us to fulfill what God called us to fulfill.

In order for us to protect what God called us to protect and honor, and that is to meet together as the church. And so that is legitimate. God would applaud that according to his word. That wisdom is granted through Paul's example, many other instances for us to be encouraged to say, yes. This this this is something that we can do for the good of our God and his glory.

Now I know that this is probably more on personal things, personal matters. I understand that I would have to hear the situation to give any kind of counsel or advice. But I would say you're always safe by using Paul's mindset in all situations. And at sometimes, it'll call you to say, I'm letting this go. In other situations, it would say, I can't let this I can't let this go because this will cost more for my faith and for others and for the well-being of the church and the message of the church, so we must fight.

So we will fight. That's how I would answer that.

What would you add? Yeah. You know, it's interesting in in in I know this is talking about lawsuits against unbelievers, but I I I think it's important to talk about you know, there's some some Christians who say that even if a crime was committed against me by somebody, an unbeliever, I'm not gonna go to the police. I'm not gonna go to court because, that's what the Bible says. And I I would just caution, especially when you're dealing in crimes.

Right? Whether it's spousal abuse, whether it's, god forbid, somebody murders someone that you know when you're a witness to it or something, or whether you get called for jury duty on a criminal case. Believe it or not, so one of the questions that I asked in in when I did criminal juries is, do you have any religious beliefs that would cause you to not be able to sit in judgment against someone else? Because you have some Christians who say, I will not judge him because I'm a Christian and judge not lest you be judged. Right?

That's what they say. I I think that's a misapplication of what, of what Christ is saying there. And I think actually as Christians, we have a duty to to work with the work with the government in criminal cases because ultimately what what criminal cases are about is an offense against the people around you. The people of the state of Illinois. That's who's on the one side of this this criminal case.

The people of the state of Illinois versus the defendant. And I believe it's our job as Christians to help the government do their job. The government's job is to call good good, call evil evil, punish the evil doer. Right? And as good citizens, as Christian citizens, it is our job to cooperate with that, whether it's being a witness in a criminal case, or a member of the jury in a criminal case.

Lawsuits against believers, you know, I I I know people who love clear black and white. Yes or no? Yes or no? But it's not the case in in in most things, I would say. And I absolutely agree.

Sometimes, yeah, you do give up your rights. You say, I'm not going to sue. But sometimes you do have to say and looking at the Bible, yeah, it's actually my responsibility to sue. How about the hospital who's so negligent that they mess up something in your surgery or something? Well, guess what?

If you don't pursue legal action against them, they're gonna do it to somebody else. So you might not be seeking a million or $10,000,000, but I believe as responsible Christians, we have to make sure this wrong does not continue. Or as Daniel said, you know, there's Christian law firms every day suing, using the civil criminal or civil court system to advocate for the rights of the the the coach who wants to pray before a football game, or the nurse who won't do abortions and then gets fired, or the cake baker who won't make, a specially designed cake because it goes against his Christian beliefs. These are absolutely legitimate lawsuits. We see it in Paul, not just in Philippians, but also in Acts.

Right? As he was arrested, I appeal to Caesar. Right? What a Caesar you shall go. And then we see what the Lord does as Paul uses that system that's in place.

We see how the Lord uses Paul even for the good of so many other people as he's following through in that process. So, yeah, hope that helps.

I hope it helps too. It helped me. Amen. Well, that concludes our q and a. I hope you guys are edified and blessed.

We love when questions come in because it sharpens us, and it it encourages us to kind of examine things in a deeper level. And so we were so blessed. There are many, many other questions, obviously. I mean, it's it's close to nine. So we, we enjoyed it.

We hope you didn't feel the the time. And we just wanna pray and and give God glory for all these things that were discussed. Would you like to pray for us?

Sure. Heavenly father, you are good, and your mercy endures forever. Lord, your word is so good, sharper than any two edged sword. Lord, your word gives life. Where else should we go, Lord?

You have the words of eternal life. And thank you for the wisdom from, pastor Daniel and the guidance, and thank you for the questions where, our brothers and sisters are truly wanting to do what is right according to your word. May you give us all wisdom. May you give us all discernment, supernatural understanding. Illuminate our hearts and our minds as we read.

Lord, shower us with your grace. May we live lives that are pleasing to you, and may you transform us every day more into the image of Christ in our thoughts, in our words, and our actions. You are good, Lord. In Jesus' name we pray. Amen.

Amen. Well, why don't we sing one more song in closing? Shall we do that?