about that. Okay, go ahead and start. I'll cut all that out. Sure. How can a young man keep his way pure by living according to the word? I seek you with all my heart. Do not let me stray from your commands. I have hidden your word in my heart that I might not sin against you. Praise be to you, O Lord. Teach me your decrees. With my lips, I recount all the laws that come from your mouth. I rejoice in following your statutes as one rejoices in great riches. I meditate on your precepts and consider your ways. I delight in your decrees. I will not neglect your word. No way. We're not neglecting the word here. You want to neglect the word? There's a church right down the road where they neglect the word, and you can go to that church and they'll neglect all day. Okay? We don't do that here. Let's see here. Mom will be here eventually, so I'll leave this out. All right, let's see. Today is the 6th of March. It is March. Okay, let's see here. April, March, 25. Oops, too far. Okay, 6th of March. The Artist, 1475, March 6th. It's the birth date of the creator of David, Moses, and the Pieta. Also the Dome of St. Peter's. Michelangelo Buonarroti or something was born in a small Italian town. nursed in a marble quarry and raised in nearby Florence. He spent his leisure painting and drawing and was chosen at age 13 for admittance to a new art school established by Lorenzo de' Medici in the Medici Gardens. Between lessons he listened to the mighty Savonarola preaching his fiery gospel nearby. As a young man, Michelangelo gained rapid fame for his Pieta, the Madonna holding her crucified son, then for carving David from an 18-foot piece of discarded marble. Pope Julius next put him on his back atop scaffolding, painting the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. He was called a genius. But behind Michael, excuse me, Behind Michelangelo's genius resided a tragic figure. He didn't get along with people and frequently burned with jealousy, foul moods, and disdain for others. He wore old clothes that he seldom changed, and he never bathed. Though rich, he lived as a miser. He ate whatever he found, sometimes only crumbs, and he slept in his raiment and boots he hated small talk and preferred being alone he disliked women all his passion went into his work and he had little need for friends except for a servant who tended to him for 25 years and shared his bed Michelangelo's bed that was kind of normal back then it wasn't a you know wasn't one of those things if you went like to say on a ship and they would just bunk you in another bunk with a guy and that's where you stayed. So I mean that's how they did things back then. So Michelangelo's bad temper caused one pope to remark he is such an alarming man and there's no getting on with him. At times the artist was depressed to the edge of insanity and in his old age he became obsessed with the fear of hell. But in advancing age, his thoughts turned more and more to the Christ he had so frequently painted and to the sermons he had heard from the martyred Savonarola. Near the end of his life, Michelangelo wrote that painting nor sculpture can now lull to rest. my soul that turns to his great love on high, whose arms to clasp us on the cross are spread. He died in his 89th year." Psalm 62. Only God gives inward peace. Trust God, my friends, and always tell him each one of your concerns. God is our place of safety. We are humans. We humans are only a breath. None of us are truly great. All of us together weigh less than a puff of air. So they said he was nursed in a quarry? I think the idea is that he was brought up in... I've never heard anyone say, well, he was nursed in a quarry. I thought the same thing, but it has to be like they were saying that's where his father was in a quarry and he lived there. That would be my guess. Let's see here. This is something that everybody must listen to, write down, and then repeat it to himself at least three times in the next 12 hours, and then for the next two days you have to continuously repeat it to yourself. Daylight Savings Time is Saturday night. How'd you find out? Yeah, Linda. So you want to spring forward, spring forward. If anybody is late to church, and I'm talking to you especially with the green shirt on, buddy, if anybody is late to church on Sunday morning, you will be purgatory for like years, okay? No, just remember daylight savings time is a Saturday night and that there is no such thing as purgatory. But Gordon, a lot of people online know Gordon, his wife had hip surgery the same day he found out that he had heart problems, went to the hospital, needs a bypass, he's having that tomorrow, wants prayers for his family and friends, not himself, because he hasn't had success evangelizing them yet, and he wants them to come to know Jesus. So we want to pray for Gordon's health, obviously, but he asked for specific prayers for those around him that have not yet received Jesus. So there you go with that. Jill. A lot of people online know Jill. She's a very wonderful person. She is a widow that lives on very modest means. She had car troubles, and I don't have that message in front of me, but it was like she had to put everything on her credit card. Her social security each month is probably less than what you make going to 7-Eleven for, you know, two days of work or something. It's not a lot, in other words. So she needs help financially with getting her car. just so that she can get around, and it's probably about $1,500 if I remember right. Anybody wants to help, let me know and I can direct you to her. And like I say, most people online know Jill. She's very pleasant. She would not, when I said, how can we help? She said, no, I just need prayer. And I said, Prayer is to get people to act, okay? The money's not going to fall out of the sky. You need to let us know. And so, this is on my behalf. She did not ask for this. Okay, then I got one more thing. What is this? Oh, Remy in the Philippines. Another need. I'm writing to you with a request. I'm praying for support. A dear friend of ours who used to serve as a security guard at Marlowe's High School is facing a difficult and painful situation. He's battling prostate issues but unfortunately due to financial constraints he has to rely on self-diagnosis and self-medication. His condition is worsening and he is in dire need of proper diagnosis and treatment. Despite his health struggles, he continues to work as a tricycle driver to support his family. His resilience is truly inspiring, but it is heartbreaking to see him pushing through such pain just to make ends meet. Y'all know in the Philippines they have these trikes that they ride year-round on. He was also laid off from his position at the school after an unfortunate conflict with some Muslim parents. leaving him in a more precarious situation. Her son, Marlo, has been trying to raise 30,000 pesos to help him, which is like, I think it's $600 or something. It's not a lot of money. We could do that right now. Sergio could figure it out right now, Philippine conversion rate. But 30,000 pesos to help him with medical expenses and to provide some financial support during this challenging time. We're reaching out to see if there's any possible possibility that someone at the church might be able to help. Any contribution, no matter how small, would be a tremendous blessing. I can get money sent to her very quickly. It's no problem. $523. And they already, her son has raised about, I think, 11,000 pesos, so it's even less now. So if anybody wants to help with that, just email me. We can get that to her. No problem. I send her money anytime there's a need over there, whether it's for her ministry or whether it's from one of the people. So it's very easy. Just let me know. So those are the two financial needs. And okay, Heavenly Father, how grateful we are to be in your presence and to be able to come to you with these needs for people, physical needs, financial needs, and just Whatever other needs are out there that I happen to have forgotten, Lord, we just lift them up to you and we know that you are the one that spurs people to do things according to your will. So we'll just leave that in your capable hands, knowing that you will do even more than we ever imagined for the people that you love. And Lord, we thank you that we have a chance to come and have a class today and the cool weather, one reprieve. It's very nice. Thank you, Lord. And we'll remember it during the hot, long summer. And Lord, we pray for this class. We pray that it would be handled properly and that if there's something that is not right, that you would instruct us on that so that we would have that corrected. And Lord, we thank you, we praise you, we love you, we exalt you, and we do all of these things in Jesus' beautiful name. Amen. So there we are with those things, and we are in 2 Timothy, we're in verse 2, 7. So we're moving right along in 2 Timothy. I'll back up just to the beginning of 2, and I thought this was Sunday. Today? Yes! Oh, Rod Barias here. Yes, he decided to attend Bible class. He's pretty lax about coming to Bible class, but he decided to come today. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, he happens to be in the area right now for a reason. And so he's here with his wife, who's not actually yet here, but she is here. Somebody that I know, I know personally, is invited to go with them somewhere tomorrow. And so they're here to pick up this person that I know and take her somewhere. So there you go. Nobody can ever guess who that is. Okay, two, one, here we go. Starting at the top of the paragraph. You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Jesus Christ, Christ Jesus. and the thing you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses and trust to reliable men who will also be qualified to teach others. Endure hardship with us like a good soldier of Christ Jesus. No one serving as a soldier gets involved in civilian affairs. He wants to please his commanding officer. Similarly, if anyone competes as an athlete, he does not receive the victory's crown unless he competes according to the rules. The handiwork farmer the handy working farmer should be the first who to receive a share of the crops. Seven, reflect on what I am saying for the Lord will give you insight into all of this. Okay, consider what I say and may the Lord give you understanding in all things. So there you go with that and let's see here, we're in 2-7. Paul now gives an exhortation as to the words he just passed on to Timothy, which we went over last week. The words, consider what I say, are present, and they are active. It gives a sense of, consider what I am saying, okay? For this reason, some scholars tie his words not to what he has just said, concerning the comparisons, concerning the soldier, the athlete, and the farmer, but what he is about to say. So people argue one way or another, what is he directing your mind to? but to what he is about to say concerning great and theologically weighty words about Jesus Christ in the verse to come. Either way, Paul is asking Timothy to reflect heavily upon his words. It is something that Timothy would certainly do concerning what has been said and what will also be said. From there he says and may the Lord give you understanding in all things. Okay now the reason why this one says may he give you and his says I think will give or may the Lord give what not may read the Lord will give you the Lord will give okay a slight variation in the word will give in some manuscripts causes the sentence to read as yours does for the Lord will give you understanding in all these things. So it depends on what text you're reading and it's either a subjunctive verb or it is a, what would be, he would, anyway, he will give, so that would be future. So whether Paul is making a petition or whether he is stating this as a certainty doesn't actually change the intent of the words as much as some might argue, because people will argue, well see, that text is correct because, and you know, I mean, I tell you, I found this out a lot. When you translate something or when you transcribe something, it is so easy to make a an error. It is so easy. I have been shocked at how easy it is to go back and say, that's not what I meant and that's what I did anyway. Now imagine somebody one letter at a time going from word to word, line to line. You got lines that are very similar here and here and your eye goes up to this one or it goes down to that one and it's, hi Sham. When did you walk in? I didn't even see you walk in. Anyway, good to have you here. Were you here when I was talking? Oh, so she, no, no, no, behind you. I didn't even see you there. Mom was blocking you, so I didn't even see you, and then you're not sitting next to your husband, which, who would think? Okay, so anyway, um, uh, that was bizarre. I look up and I'm sitting there. It was bizarre because you're saying his wife's not even here yet, and I'm like going like, I never even saw her. Mom was in front of her. Never saw her. That was, you should have said, that was just plain old bizarre. Okay, well we got to get back to whatever we were saying. All right, so let's see here. Whether he's making a petition or whether he's stating as a certainty, it doesn't change the intent. And like I said, doing translations and stuff can be a little bit complicated. Doing copy, I understand perfectly why you can look at a text and you can make errors. After doing this myself, it just is so easy to do. And you go back and think, how did that even happen? It's just, you know. you think whatever so the reason that Paul began the sentence with consider what I say Timothy must first make an active attempt to think on Paul's words before a result will come. In doing so, he either prays for his protege to gain an understanding, something one would anticipate the Lord granting, or he confidently states that the Lord will provide needed understanding. Either way, Once again, you know, there are disputes as to what is on Paul's mind, and we find that all the time. We read something from somebody we know personally, and we think that they're angry at us when they're not, or we think that they're kidding when they're not, and, you know, misunderstandings happen all the time. Well, when you're reading words that are in a theological dissertation, basically, in this epistle, you don't really know what's on Paul's mind. So people argue over these things, but Timothy must first make an active attempt to think on Paul's words before a result will come. in doing so. He either prays for his protege to gain an understanding, which is something one would anticipate the Lord granting, or he confidently states that the Lord will provide needed understanding. Okay, so you got these the word there, will give or may he give, changes the entire thought in some sense. It doesn't change it in the overall sense, but it changes it in how you are perceiving what's being said. So, there you go. Either way, you know that the Lord is going to give Timothy the wisdom, or he has giving him the wisdom, whatever. Okay, so either way, Timothy is to reflect on the instruction of the apostle, setting the example for others in the ministry to act likewise. And like I say, this is a pastoral epistle. He is writing to Timothy. Timothy is going to be in charge. He already is, but he's going to continue to be a pastor in charge of the church, and he has to, you know, set the example for the next generation. but as we've talked about before, this epistle was eventually canonized. It was put into scripture, and we have it, and the Lord knew that would happen, but in the meantime, Timothy is the one each person that Paul wrote to, and I'm sure he wrote to other people, but there are certain epistles that God chose to insert into his word, but those people were given instruction in what to do. They didn't have New Testament instruction, so this is what's going on. Timothy, like I say, is supposed to pass this on to the next people, They probably never thought that 2,000 years later, on the other side of the world, people would be having a Bible study on Thursday night, 6 March of 2025, still talking about his words. They probably never in their imagination thought that. There are people over in Korea right now teaching on 2 Timothy, okay? Or hopefully they are. They're talking about it, they're learning about it, they're passing that on to other people for pastoral instruction. So the Lord will. He will, there's no doubt about it. He will. Yeah. He will give you insight. He will give you understanding. So there you go. But he's setting the example for others in the ministry to act likewise. One who is ordained to the ministry is expected to actively pursue the things of the ministry. first and foremost, that of knowing the set directions for ministering, okay? And you can't do that unless you're reading the Bible. You can't do that unless you have been in the Bible. You've thought about what is being said. You've rightly applied what is being said. I gave an example somewhere. I can't remember if it was a commentary or Maybe it's coming in, oh, it's coming in this week's sermon. You know, you can look at something in the Book of Acts and say, well, see, I'm going to teach that this means this, and the whole congregation says, oh yeah, okay, that makes sense. It says in the Book of Acts this, and so that is what is intended. Then you find out that the Book of Acts is actually tells a story. It tells a story. It's descriptive. It's not prescribing anything, and you find out that if you are using those verses from the book of Acts, like Acts 2.38, to justify baptism in a certain manner, then your doctrine is Incorrect, because that's not the intent of the Book of Acts. But there are churches all over the world that teach from the Book of Acts in a prescriptive manner, and their doctrine is flawed because of that. If you don't understand the purpose of the literature, you will not understand the proper doctrine to teach from the Bible. That is a given. So you have to understand the nuances of what God is doing in His Word. If you want to know proper doctrine on baptism, you have to kind of get a full picture of it from not only the Old Testament, not only the book of Acts, but even from Paul's epistles. There's nothing really explicitly stated. You have to infer it. and that is what is called, I can't remember the word right now, but you're taking a doctrine and you're getting all of the information out of it and you're making a decision based on that. You're not plagiarizing. That's an incorrect analysis. Go sit in the corner. So, but basically, what is normative? What is normative? You go through the book of Acts and you find out that every person that receives Jesus is baptized. Every one of them. That's a normative. Even though this account here is different from this account here is different from this account here, and you're going to make an error if you teach baptism mandated based on one of those accounts because they're all different. You get a normative understanding that every single person in Acts that comes to the Lord is then baptized. That's what's called normative. Not plagiarism. Plagiarism is stealing somebody else's ideas. Okay, but the basis for baptism is where? Jesus' words in Matthew 28, go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. We receive the Spirit when we believe, so it can't be speaking of Holy Spirit baptism, right? He's saying baptize, and they were baptizing all the way through Acts and into the epistles. Paul refers to baptism, okay? So, that is what is called normative. Jesus commanded it. He did it in the time of the New Covenant. It has nothing to do with the Old Covenant. It has to do with the New Covenant. And because he commanded it, we know that people should be baptized. That's right there. Now we have to discover what the proper procedure is. We don't want to take x2, we don't want to take x8, we don't want to take x10 and make a doctrine out of one of them. We want to find out what's normative. So even though it's not prescriptive, there is a normative value that comes out of all of the teachings about baptism, and so we can know that we are to be baptized. It should be full immersion, and it should only be after accepting the Lord, okay? Not baptizing little babies. There's nothing in Scripture to justify it, and taking circumcision from the Old Testament, saying, see, now this is the baptism of the New Testament, is a complete completely incorrect leap from one to the other. Okay, so there is a connection to it, but there is not the circumcising of a baby logically follows that you were to baptize a baby. That cannot be made. Okay, so anyway, here we go with this Timothy is instructed, reflected on the instruction of the apostles, setting the example for others in the ministry to act likewise. With the epistles, it is a little easier to do this now. One who's ordained to the ministry is expected to actively pursue the things of the ministry. I said that first and foremost, that of knowing the set directions for ministering. It is the words of Scripture which provide that knowledge, and so the man of God is to read contemplate and apply Scripture to his life. It is to be an active and ongoing part of his life at all times. If you have a pastor, you're in a church right now, and he is not reading the Bible, you shouldn't be in that church because he is not properly handling his job as a minister. That is the primary job of a pastor, is to be reading the Word every single day, evaluating the Word every single Sunday, without fail. There should be nothing else priority in his ministry above Scripture, because Scripture is the only way we are ever going to know Jesus Christ. You are never going to have a sound knowledge of Jesus Christ unless you are in the Word and conveying that Word to your people. It's never going to happen. It is impossible. Okay, now obviously, obviously, and I've said this before, you can get doctrine from theological instruction manuals like, you know, Charles Ryrie's book on Theology Proper. Okay, but how do you know that's right? You go to a seminary and they teach you Theology Proper out of Charles Ryrie's textbook. How do you know that he's teaching it properly? Okay? How do you know that this guy isn't right unless you are already aware of the Bible? If you're not aware of the Bible, you cannot know if what that guy is teaching you is right. He may be very insightful and he may be very wrong. So, do not trust your pastor if he is not reading the Word every day. Leave that church. Okay? That's what I would tell you. And I'm talking about anybody because there are people that watch this Bible study that don't attend this church. And that's fine. That doesn't bother me at all. But they should know what their pastor is doing, and they should be aware of it, and if not, they need to move to another church. They need to go somewhere where the Bible is the priority in that pastor's life. Okay, so it is to be an active and ongoing part of his life at all times, even if for the Lord will give you. is the true reading instead of, may the Lord give you. If it is, the Lord will give you. The words of Paul here cannot be carried around and misquoted as a talisman that someone will actually have understanding in all things, as if the Spirit simply illuminates the believer to be perfect in knowledge and doctrine. And that's what a lot of people do. They take verses from especially Jesus' words, and they say, okay, this is a promise, this is a guarantee that this will come about, okay, and that's not the intent of those words at all. As a matter of fact, somebody emailed me just this morning, and he asked a couple questions about verses from Scripture. One of them was, By his stripes you are healed." Okay, and is that a valid thing to say? Okay, is that speaking of healing? And I can claim that over somebody. The second one was Matthew 18. Let me find this. I'm going to make a point that I'm making based on what I just said. I think it was Matthew 18. Let me get there, and then don't rush me. Give me a second. Okay, here we go. Matthew 21 to 18, and I think it was verse 18 if I remember, but I don't. Yeah. Assuredly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loose in heaven. And people use that in churches, and they claim that that means they have authority to bind things in heaven. okay, and that when they proclaim something, it is done, and it is going to happen, and I proclaim healing over you, or I proclaim this or that to happen in church. I proclaim that this church is going to have a new building, and we're going to expand, and they use that verse in that way, and it has nothing to do with it. It has absolutely nothing to do with it. Jesus was speaking to his disciples, admittedly. Now, it says in this verse, assuredly I say to you, where is it? If you agree, if two of you agree on anything concerning anything that they ask me, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered in my name, there I am in the midst of them." Okay, and there's another one. Where is it? And if he refuses to hear them, tell it to the church, but if he refuses to hear even the church, let him be to you like a heathen and a tax collector. Okay, so the context of that verse is that he is speaking to Israel. He's speaking to them. They are still under the law. He hadn't fulfilled the law yet. He had not been yet crucified. So the church that he mentions in verse 17 that I read you last, but began the thought that I read you, I kind of went backwards, but the church he's speaking about is not the church that we are in today. Everybody see that? He hadn't been crucified. He is speaking to them and the word used is Ecclesia. Ecclesia means a called-out assembly. It can be the people in the synagogue. It can be anybody. It doesn't have to be the church. It's a called-out assembly. A called-out assembly can be something that happens in the Roman Forum. Okay? It doesn't mean a spiritual thing or religious thing. It's just an assembly that's called out. The people in, I think, Acts 16, when they were protesting in Ephesus, great as Artemis of the Ephesians, I think, I could be wrong in this, so don't make your brain squiggle, but I think they called that an ecclesia, called that assembly. There's one of them in Acts that is, has nothing to do with the church. Okay, so when they put the word church in there, it gives you a false sense of what's going on. It starts off everything right then. And then, they're saying, I claim this in Jesus' name, okay, you will be able to bind everything in heaven and on earth, and what you ask for will be done by them. He's giving them instruction as his disciples before he's crucified. What they are deciding will come about, but that doesn't logically carry on to the people after the the crucifixion, the resurrection, and the establishment of the church, because it's a different entity for a different purpose, okay? So if you're making claims, adamant claims about something, and they don't come about, you've just embarrassed your...we've seen this right in the projects. We've seen this many times where people use verses like this, claim things, and it doesn't happen. And now the people that they've claimed over are disaffected in their theology because of something that was taken out of context, okay? By his stripes we are healed is another one. I was asked about that also. By his stripes we are healed is speaking of Jesus's sacrifice. Yes, Peter directly equates that to sin. his words. Sin. He quotes that, and he says, he notes sin, and then he says, by his stripes we are healed. It is speaking of sin, and as a matter of fact, that's the context of Isaiah 53, is speaking of sin. Now, he does, that verse is kind of quoted in Matthew. Okay, he picked up our burdens and our sicknesses and he healed us, and he uses that thought from Isaiah in Matthew. Okay, it might be Luke. Anyway, that was, once again, it was before he was sacrificed for sin. They were making a general statement that Jesus carried the burdens of the people. The people that were being healed had what in their lives? sin, and that is what causes our defect. Good job. That's what causes our defect. So people get sick and they die, since the first person, because of sin. So if Jesus is picking up their sin, their burdens, their sicknesses, he's actually picking up their sin, the penalty for their sin. It has nothing to do with healing in the New Testament church, and Peter makes that explicit. If you can find that from Isaiah, it's 2 Peter, I'll be looking too long, but it's in 2 Peter. He cites Isaiah by his stripes. We just type in the word stripes and then read the surrounding verses and you'll see the context. It has nothing to do with physical healing. 2 Peter 3.9? No, just look up the word stripe. Yeah, stripes. And you can do it a lot faster than I can find it. And it's funny, I just typed this this morning, but it was like... 1 Peter 2.24. Go ahead and read it real loud. Go to the previous verse, starting 23. Okay, I won't hold it against you. He committed no sin and with no deceit was found in his mouth and when he hurled their insults at him he did not retaliate. when he suffered. He made no threats, insisted he entrusted himself to him who judges justly. He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree so that we might die to sin and live for righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed. Okay, so there you go. He's speaking about sin. He's speaking about the atoning sacrifice for sin, and then he says, by his stripes we are healed. It has nothing to do with physical healing, okay? But unfortunately, and the whole point... Yes, thank you. The whole point of what we're saying here is exactly that. You must be taught proper instruction. You have to be taught taught, above everything else, proper context. If something is taken out of its intended context, you can make anything say anything. I know I've said this before. It's just funny. I heard a pastor say it one time. I've repeated it many times. Pastor Ross said it. He said, you have the words over here that Judas hung himself. right? It says it right in the Bible. And it says over here, go and do likewise. It says that right in the Bible. Okay, so you can make anything say anything. Judas hung himself, go and do likewise. Okay, that's an improper handling of scripture, but that's exactly what we just saw with 1 Peter, by his stripes we are healed. It's taking a verse out of its intended context, the surrounding, and let's do this. Let's go even further with that so you can see that I'm not making this up. It says right here, too far Charlie, gotta go back, still go back, okay, we're in 42, we're gonna go to 40, 59, 53, okay, so we're in Isaiah 53, and it says here, I'm just going to read the whole thing so you can get a picture of what he's talking about. has no form or comeliness, and when we see him there is no beauty in him that we should desire him. He is despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief, and we hid, as it were, our faces from him. He was despised and we did not esteem him. And we're going through that right now in Matthew. The rulers and leaders of Israel are despising Jesus. He's doing miracles right in front of them, and they're despising him. Actually, you guys will get that in 20 days, because I'm typing the beginning of chapter 9, Matthew 9, right now. We're still back in I don't like 8-11 or something, so it'll be a while, but the rulers are already saying, this guy blasphemes, and they're despising him. Okay, so, surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows. We esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. Now, there you go with that. He's talking about during his ministry, he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows, and he did that for the people of Israel. The griefs and sorrows were the result of sin. That's why all the problems are in the world that we have is sin. But he was wounded, here it is, for our transgressions. That's speaking of sins, the transgression against the law. He was bruised for our iniquities. Once again, it's sin that is being dealt with. The chastisement for our peace was upon him, chastisement for our peace, that means he was beaten so that we could be reconciled to God. Our peace with God is through him. And by his stripes, We are healed. The entire context is sin. It has nothing to do with physical healing. Physical healing will come from a sinless state. We may not get it in this life, but we have been promised it in the next life. And I know that's going to offend somebody. I'm going to get this angry email saying, well, that's not true. That's the context. If you were teaching something else, you are out of context. The issue is dealing with sin, okay? Yes. Is that a reference to spiritual healing? Yeah, spiritual healing. Our peace is, that's exactly right, okay? So, and that's why when we were in the projects with one person for so long and he, every week he claimed this over people. By his stripes you are healed. And he'd say this and these people wouldn't be healed. And he's causing harm to people by doing that. He's actually causing harm to them because they come, they get all burned out hearing this week after week and nothing ever happens. You can't claim your way into physical healing. If the Lord wants to heal, we pray to ask Him. And if He does, He does. And if He doesn't, He doesn't. Okay? That's His prerogative. It's not ours, and we cannot snap our hands or our fingers and say, be healed. Okay? That's inappropriate. It is presumptuous, and it is sinful. Okay? We ask, and if He decides to heal, He will. I guarantee you that Johnny Erickson Tada has had people praying for her for years and years and years. and she's still in a wheelchair and she does more than most people will ever do for the cause of Jesus. whereas by his stripes she is healed, right? It doesn't work that way. So keep things in context. This is what Paul is telling them. I'll read it again. Even if for the Lord will give you, his words from this verse, from either that one, from that copy, mine says may he give you, even if that is the true reading, the words of Paul here cannot be carried around and misquoted as a talisman that someone will automatically have understanding in all things. That is not the case. You cannot take those words and say, well, I have been told in the Word that I will have understanding in all things and therefore God will lead me and I don't need to read the Word. You need to read the Word to have all understanding. It's not going to come by an injection down at the pharmacy. It's not going to come by placing the Bible under your pillow. It's not going to come by sprinkling something in your food and eating it. It's only going to come by reading the word, by analyzing the word, by listening to people that are analyzing the words. Because I learn from people all the time, all the time. I pull up commentaries and I read them before I engage in something just in case my thinking is wrong. Okay, I will say this though. I have read almost no commentaries for the Song of Solomon. Almost none. They're so bad. They're so bad. You know, I cite John Lang all the time. He's such a great scholar in analyzing, analytically analyzing things. He is so wrong in the Song of Solomon, I don't even bother reading it. I look at it and I'll think, And I'm not belittling him. It's just that hard of a book to get information. It is that difficult I'm not reading anything because people are just making stuff up as they go because they have no idea what that book is talking about It's unbelievable so you know and there you can only look at so many commentaries before you just run out of time and so I look around on the internet and nothing that makes any sense. It's all just people pulling stuff out and saying, well, this means this, and it's a very, very, very difficult book to analyze. One of my friends emailed me just this afternoon and he says, I'm really struggling. I'm not understanding your sermons. Well, it's going to be complicated. That's all there is to it. It's a complicated—but the main thing to get out of it, and we've already gone through this in all three sermons, is that it is about God's relationship with the redeemed through Jesus Christ, and that God loves you enough to give an example of a man and a woman in love. And we can understand that on a very basic level. that they are like a type or a picture of God expressing his love to us, and it only gets better. It gets clearer with each sermon I've typed, so the typology gets more and more precise, I guess I should say, but it is not an easy book to read. It is not, and I'm sorry to analyze. Easy to read, hard to analyze, but anyway, if the Spirit simply illuminates the believer to be perfect in knowledge and doctrine, as if he can claim it, you have to look at the Word, you have to contemplate the Word, you have to consider the Word, okay? Unfortunately, this is the attitude that many have, and it always leads to poor doctrine. Always. Rather, the words, consider what I say, are key. Be wise. Contemplate the word always and keep all things in their proper context. Proper context. Judas hung himself. Go and do likewise. It makes no sense because it is not what the Bible is telling us, okay? But that is essentially what people do when they take verses and words like that and they shout them out. They're just taking something that they heard in a church and they're applying it to other people. And once again, I'm not trying to belittle anybody. I hear people say that all the time. I never get in an argument with them. I'm not going to, you know, but if they ask me, I'm going to tell them this is what the Bible is telling us. But we didn't argue ever with the guy in the projects. We never said, well, you know, We didn't get into that type of an argument with them because people believe what they believe. The discussion came up once. Well, it came up, but it wasn't like we were like... No, you weren't down to them. No. So, it's just one of those things. You have to be careful about how you approach those things. So, some people just, they get in their heads and it doesn't matter what you say, all you're going to do is end up in an argument. There's no point in doing that. But if you want to know an evaluation of those verses, you now have them. Matthew 18 and the other one that's Luke 5 or something up by his stripes. We are healed That is not talking about what people claim today in the church. Okay, enough of that. Life application. There is no easy path to sound theology. After 11 or 12 years of being, I don't know how long we've been in this church, but presenting it, having people question you, and then you go back and you discuss it with them, it is never easy. There's no, okay, I got this. You know, yesterday, was it yesterday? Sunday. Sunday, I was on a Zoom meeting after I got done with everything, and somebody asked a question about John 3, verse 5. Okay, and I gave my analysis of it, and I said, take it with a grain of salt. I have not done the book of John yet. This is what I think based on what it says in one John. I could be completely wrong, but this, and then what he did is he sent me a big long analysis of it, and I sat down and I spent an entire day thinking about it, okay, and I went back and we talked about it a little more. I gave him a nice long email on it, but it's not easy. It's not easy to have sound theology. It takes contemplation. It takes consideration. It takes looking at different viewpoints and coming to a conclusion. Eventually you have to come down on something, or you can do what I do during sermons. Sometimes I say either way, and that means I don't know. I'm not going to say this when I don't know that it's this and it could be that. I will say either way, okay, because I don't want to mislead people. And that's the best way, in my opinion, to handle something that you're not sure about is to give people options and then say either way. It's this or it's this, but okay. Anyway, John 3, 5. I don't even remember what the verse is, but I'm just curious because, you know, People ask me, and then I have to move on to other things, but I'm trying to remember what John 3, 5 . . . Oh, it's about . . . the question was, does John 3, 5 have anything to do with baptism? That is the least of the worries of John 3, 5. The answer is no. It has absolutely zero to do with baptism, but John 3, 5 says Where are we? I'm one page back, Charlie. It says, this is 4, Nicodemus said to him, how can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born? Jesus answered, most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. And so people say, well, see, that proves you have to be baptized. If you're not baptized, you're not going to heaven. That has nothing, that has zero to do with baptism. You can't infer that in any way, shape, or form unless you are just got your mind presupposition. This is what I was told by a pastor somewhere that's speaking about baptism, and you carry it along with you the rest. It has nothing. you cannot get baptism out of that person in any way, shape, or form. What is being born of the water and spirit? That is what we talked about, and it took us probably, I don't know, an hour or two of back and forth to give him the answer that I thought was appropriate, and then to say, I would still recommend you take this with a grain of salt. I have not evaluated John line by line. That's coming in about eight more years. So, Reader's Digest version, what is that water that he talks about? Well, there's a couple options. It would take 40 minutes. Okay, but there are other options. There are a couple views on it and one of them would be, is it the ambiotic fluid? okay, of the birth. Okay, the second one would be, is it the Spirit, is the water being used in parallel? Water and Spirit, and it's saying it twice. Okay, so now I can tell you that in 1 John, when it speaks of He who is born of water and the blood, is speaking of Jesus' humanity and His deity. Okay, that is definitely speaking of the water of birth. Okay, it's not speaking of anything else. I can say it adamantly because his entire focus, John's entire focus in there is Christ's deity. This is the God-man, and he keeps saying it in so many different ways. So, that's why I say you could take that and move it back, but that's before, and it really doesn't have anything to do with Christ's birth. Okay, and because of that, you would have to make some conclusions based on it, but then people will say that it's speaking of the Spirit, And then the people that do that usually take verses that have nothing to do with that, and they apply it. Even if it is a spirit, they're misapplying verses. So it's a long study, and like I say, probably 45 minutes of us sitting here talking about it, but those are a couple of the options that have been given. Baptism is not a...it's a non-starter that has nothing to do with baptism. Let's see where somebody would think that, though. Well, yeah, when you want to justify your stand from Acts 2.38 that, you know, repent and be baptized and you will receive the Holy Spirit, which has nothing to do with us today, you could go back and you could say that. But it has nothing, zero, to do with baptism. But we'll go on. There's no easy path to sound theology. It takes a tremendous amount of reading the Word. From there, that knowledge of Scripture can be taken into consideration when being trained in theology. I said that earlier, and I'm glad I said this again so you can see the process. People go to seminary and they learn theology. Everybody agree with that? If you're going to seminary, you're going there to learn theology. If you don't already know the Bible, Before going to seminary, you are wasting your time, because you are going to believe what you are told in that instruction, and that's it. Your theology is now set based on what somebody taught you and not based on the Word of God. The worst thing you could do is have a child or a grandchild or a friend that says, I want to go to seminary. What should I do? And you say, well, go to this one. I would say the first thing you should do is spend at least two years reading this word every day, maybe more. Read this word until you can't read it anymore and then keep reading it. And then figure on a seminary that you think will have sound theology. But when you get there, they're going to teach you something that you may not agree with because you know the Word and what they taught is incorrect. I would never recommend somebody to go to seminary without knowing the Word fully, fully knowing it again and again and again from reading it before going to seminary. I would never recommend that to anybody. People do say, I want to go to seminary, which one should I go to? And I give them a list of them. But if they ask me, what should I do first? I will always say, you need to know the Bible. Okay? Because if not, you're just, you're spouting off whatever people have taught you. That's it. Okay? So... From there, that knowledge of Scripture can be taken into consideration when being trained in theology. One, and then two. As there are many views on major doctrines, not all can be correct. In fact, only one can be correct. In first knowing Scripture, one can more readily weed out that which is incorrect. Once again, you can't do that if you're taught this in seminary. One of the things that upset me more than anything else with R.C. Sproul, And I like the guy, I bring him up often. I will listen to him and enjoy it, even if he's wrong, because he does a good presentation. But one of the things he did that bothered me more than anything else is he said, I was in seminary, and all I wanted to do was read the Bible. I read the Bible, and when the professor was talking about something over here, I was reading the Bible. Everything's great, I'm loving that. And then he said, and then I went to a philosophy class. He said this, when I went to a philosophy class, I lifted up my head. He said it was like I was, how did he, he said it was like I was brain dead. I realized what my, I went and switched my major to philosophy. All of a sudden, he's been brain dead reading the Bible. and he said, now I know the truth. Philosophy is the answer. It was like he took the Bible and became a secondary thing. And I listened to that and I thought, what a terrible mistake he made. What an absolutely giant mistake he made. And I know two professors that were just like that at SES. Philosophy was almost their god. That's all they clung to was philosophy, all right? And the Bible was hardly even a secondary thought in their teachings. I mean hardly even a secondary thought. and that was R.C. Sproul. He started out well, he heard something that peaked his knowledge base, and I'm gonna go to that. And when he said, I was brain dead before that, I thought, what a tragedy. So that's why I have a real problem with him, is because he left the first discipline, the first doctrine, and he went to something less. But I still like the guy, I still like to listen to him, but that was the biggest error that he ever made in his life, was leaving Scripture and going first to philosophy and relegating Scripture to a secondary status. Anyway, I didn't say which teaching it was, but I wish I had that so I could just play it to people and tell them, never make this mistake. The Bible must come first, okay? Anyway, as there are many views on doctrines, not all can be correct. Got to know Scripture first. Read the Word. Read the Word and read the Word some more. after having this sound foundation, then study the doctrines of theology. This is a wise and sound course of obtaining proper theological knowledge. You must know the Word first because, worse, you know, I say this, I've said this in a couple commentaries in Matthew already, We're making the assumption that this is the Word of God. That's all we're doing right now. We're making the assumption that this is the Word of God. If this is not the Word of God, then why would you bother reading it? It's just another book. Read it once and then go and read something else. So we're making the assumption that this is the Word of God. And somebody asked me in that Zoom study this past Sunday, what about this? How do I know? And it was talking about, how do I talk to a Muslim about Christianity? And I said, I wouldn't try to convince them that they're wrong in, let them worry about their own Islamic doctrine. You don't need to learn Islamic doctrine in order to convince them that they're wrong. I said, what I recommend, because this person had watched the Genesis 1-1 sermon, it had been probably a year or two by then, I said, go back and watch the Genesis 1-1 sermon. You can know what is correct by knowing what is wrong, okay? And still, I better qualify that. I know this is wrong now. I know this is wrong. I know this is wrong. I know this is wrong. Okay, I know there's something correct. Now I need to find out what that is. What is it that matches what must logically be correct? come to this. This is the only book on the planet that everything else has been dismissed. I can know without ever picking up the Bible that there must be a God who has a fullness in him, not a monad like Islam. Why? Because if he, you know, if God is a monad, There's not a plurality, meaning a duality, or a trinity, or a quadrinity. If he's just a monad, what will be the result of that? It needs nothing else, and it can have nothing else. He is fully contained in himself. He cannot go beyond himself. I love her. I love my mom, too. I love these ladies. If God is a monad, he cannot understand love. We cannot possess what God does not possess. If we possess love and he doesn't know love, it couldn't have come from him. Everybody see that? So you understand what cannot be, then you find out what matches what must be. this is the book. Okay, that's why I did what I did in the Genesis 1-1 sermon. Eliminate everything else. How can you know 100% that the Jehovah's Witnesses are wrong? And that goes to the principle of contingency. A contingent being cannot create a contingent being. Anything that's created is contingent. They say that Jesus was created and then he created everything else. That's their primary doctrine. There's God, Jesus is created, he created all other things according to Colossians chapter 1. It's impossible. It is impossible and therefore they are wrong. And you can dispel all of the cults in the world by simply thinking without the Bible, but you need the Bible to understand God that is described apart from all of those other things. Okay, so I hope I said that properly, but you need to make sure that, because I'm using this as a tool to instruct you, and I am assuming that it is correct. I can tell you that there is no other expression of God anywhere that matches what could be. This book does, and therefore I have put my faith and my trust in this book, because this book tells me of what God must be like, okay? And it highlights Jesus. And that's why I cling to Jesus, is because this book tells me that the God that must be like it has expressed himself in this way. Okay? You're never going to be able to find that out by logic. You will never find that out. You can never deduce that there will be a Jesus coming someday without the Bible. You will never deduce that the Gentiles will be brought into the covenant of Israel from the Old Testament. Okay? Or actually, I shouldn't say from the Old Testament. You can kind of get a picture of it. But Paul calls the church a mystery that was unknown. you wouldn't be able to figure out those type of things. So I am putting my stake in this book, that this is the book that reveals God, as we can know is correct. Okay, there you go. Okay, so read the Word, read the Word, read the Word. After you have this sound foundation, then go into theology. Go into the other things, okay? And, you know, while you're reading the Word, you're still going to be at church. You're still going to be listening to people, and you have to be careful to say, I'm not going to accept that until I've checked this. That's why I say it every week here. Now it's your turn to go home and make sure that what I've told you is correct, because I could be wrong, okay? was told about an error in Sunday's sermon. I said Proverbs will say 2.17 when it's actually Ecclesiastes 2.17. I love when people find those things because I hate saying something that's incorrect. So the first thing I'm going to do when I go home, I've already sent an email to arrive at my inbox as soon as I get home. And I'll be the first thing I say, it'll say, correct that sermon. I got corrected on the website, I've got to correct it in my computer, and then I've got to send a copy of that to my friend in Washington so he can take that and he can put it online where it's... Now, the video is always going to be wrong, okay? If I said Ecclesiastes, if I didn't, if I just read it, then that's fine, but if I said it, then the video is wrong. Sorry, but if you are reading that, I want people to know that that was incorrect. I do it all the time. I say Peter is Paul, you know. It's not intentional. It's just I got one thing on my mind and another comes out. So, check things out. Okay, check things out. 2A. Before you do that. Yes. Quickly, back to the difference between your translation and mine. The word may throws everyone off. Yeah. Everyone. Well, if it's a subjunctive verb, then it has to be may. Well, right. But, okay, is it subjunctive on 1 Corinthians chapter 5 where it's like this horrible person... I'd have to go and look. And then at the end, hand him over to the devil so his body will be destroyed, but yet... Oh, well, that wouldn't be... He may be saved on a day of the Lord. I understand. Well, that's a translational preference. People will say things like that. So, that one I would have to check, but I understand. You know what? Paul says he's saved. He will be saved. He says that. Okay, so if it says may, that was somebody translating it, assuming that people understood what Paul is saying. And it may rain today. Yeah. May the Lord be with you. It's like, okay, it's like, are these like iffy or? Well, yeah, and that's because languages evolve. You know what? I was, we were looking at a Korean show over the past couple days and there was a word I wanted to check. So I went, and I typed on Hangul, which is the Korean language, and I wanted to check it before it went away, because I put it on hold, and Hidiko was just coming at the time. And so I wanted to check this word, and instead up came the Wikipedia, and it was an analysis of the Korean language, not specifically the characters. And one of the things, it was so brilliant, the guy that developed the Korean language was, his name was Sejong. He was a king back in the 1400s, and Here's what he said, and this is going to answer your question kind of. The Koreans up until that time used the Chinese alphabet. Okay, now the Japanese do too, but they also insert their own alphabet so they can understand context based on what's in the Chinese as well. But the Koreans only used the Chinese, and what they did, he came out and he said, there are things in our languages, sounds and concepts that do not transfer from the Chinese. and therefore I am developing this alphabet in order to accommodate the people under my authority, his realm. And he did this beautiful alphabet. It's like the simplest alphabet in the world. If you look at it, it looks complicated, but as soon as you understand how it's broken down, it's simple. It's the simplest to get and to read. It just is so flowing. Okay, but this is why he said that. It's because we have nuances that are not understood, and I want it to be something that my subjects will be able to... their language will now make sense to them in a different way, instead of relying on this. And that's the problem, is as languages develop, may may mean this, and it may mean that. And when that happens, yeah, it may. So when that happens, we need to accommodate with the new changes in the language. And a lot of people don't. They stick with old thoughts, and so you get these variances in what is being conveyed. And that's why I say if you stick to one translation of the Bible, you're penalizing yourself. You are really harming yourself. So anyway, let's go on to it. Remember, Jesus Christ, raised from the dead, descended from David, this is my gospel. Okay, they got the clauses backwards in one of these. Remember that Jesus Christ, of the seed of David, was raised from the dead, according to my gospel. You know, people really, I don't know what I wrote here, but people really get upset at Paul saying, according to my gospel. What do you mean, my gospel? Anyway. There's a period here. Yeah. The way you've read it, it doesn't sound like it's a period, because it descended from David, period. Yeah. This is my gospel. Right. But then he goes on, through which I am suffering. Absolutely. It's just a different way of translating, and anyway, that's why we're reading two of them, so we can get an idea of what they're saying. But the King James Version and the New King James Version are incorrect in their translation of this verse. Here it is. The order is wrong, and the word that is incorrectly supplied. It should read, Remember Jesus Christ, raised out of the dead, of the seed of David, according to my good news. That's Young's literal translation. By diverting from the proper order of the Greek, the actual focus is wholly obscured. They've done this in the Song of Songs a couple times, and it completely changes the intent of what's being said. I get mad when I see that because it's fine if they want to translate it a certain way, but when they change the order of things, you lose everything. And so I especially highlight those as we're going to go through Song of Songs, where that order needs to be maintained because you lose everything. Okay, so It is first on Christ Jesus. That's the the focus. Remember Christ Jesus. That's the first focus of Paul's words. Christ means anybody? Messiah. And Messiah means, anybody? Anointed One. They both mean exactly the same thing. Mashiach. That's right. It's the Hebrew Mashiach, it's the Greek Christos, and they both mean Anointed One. Okay, so, He is the fulfillment of the messianic promises which existed from the very fall of man, beginning in Genesis 3 verse 15. From there, the focus is directed to the raising of Christ from the dead, The Anointed One is alive now and forever. That's what Paul is saying right here, okay? He's giving you Christ first. He's giving you the fact that He is the Christ. He's giving you the fact that He is now alive forever. He died for sin. He prevailed over death, and He is now alive forever. So, that's Paul saying. Before we go on, Genesis 3, 15, where he says that there's one coming who would defeat the devil. What is that called? I've given the name of it before. It's a long word. I'll even give you a hint. It begins with proto... Protosthesis. No, Protoevangelium, the first gospel. Evangelium, like to evangelize, the first gospel. Okay, don't forget that. You'll be quizzed on that next week. So, He is the fulfillment of the messianic promises. Yes, I read that. Okay, now Paul has been speaking of the hardships a minister will encounter and also of the responsibilities and benefits which go with the position. But things for a minister, by the very nature of the job, will be difficult on good days and almost overly burdensome on bad days. I can testify to that now. I don't know if I was preaching at the time, but I can tell you that that's true. On the best of days, things are difficult. On bad days, they're terrible. If the job were just a regular one, meaning with no connection to Jesus, he who filled it would surely become despondent rather quickly. but it is not. It is a job focused on Jesus. As a matter of fact, if this job wasn't dealing with what I'm doing, I'm not talking about the guy who talked about the Lutheran last week. I'm not talking about him. If the job that I did right now was something that wasn't focused on Jesus, I wouldn't be doing this job. I wouldn't be getting up at 3 30 in the morning and working until six o'clock, seven days a week. I wouldn't do that, okay? I would be doing other things. I wouldn't be killing myself, but this is a ministry job, and so I don't mind doing it. As a matter of fact, I love doing it. When I'm not doing it, I get kind of antsy, but you would be a really despondent person. You know, you hear about these people in New York. I've been reading about them for the past year. They're in these bank jobs. They get hired, and they're getting paid good salaries right off the bat, and they're working 100 hours a week. They're working all night. They're at home still working, and some of them go bonkers. Some of them killed themselves. Their lives are dysfunctional, all for money. If that is what you're doing for, why are you even bothering? You're just ruining yourself. But if you're doing that for Jesus, it's worth every bit of the pain and the punishment that comes with the job. The job of a minister is one which is based on factual history. I believe this book is true. I believe it with all of my heart that it is factual history. Just before this class, somebody emailed me about, and I'm glad it was early enough where I could respond really quickly. I'm not sure what he was asking it for, and so to preempt him, I gave him an answer that I've heard this question before, is that if God created everything perfectly, Okay, which the Bible claims he did, and it says in Genesis 1-1, God created the heavens and the earth, but in Genesis 1-2, there's darkness on the face of the void and it was, how is it, welter and waste. What is it that most people say? Void and the Spirit of God was brooding over the void. Okay, I'm forgetting it right now because I'm thinking of something else, but Genesis 1-2 seems to be chaos, right? So how can that be? Well, that's the first step in bringing harmony out of chaos. The reason why I went back and I said if you're thinking of recreation because people teach what's known as recreation, okay, is that everything was perfect and then it went into a state of chaos and God destroyed that world and then he created everything again. Okay, and I'll explain that in just a second. But the question doesn't have merit to begin with and the reason why is because it isn't until the end of the first day that it says it was good. Okay? He is taking chaos and he is making it good. First he made matter. Matter doesn't have anything. It's just chaotic. It's just there. He created the matter and then he formed the matter. So to say that that's not a good part of the creation is a false statement. It is a good part because he created it in the way that shaped into something else. He's making one thing good and then something else good and then when he gets to day six it says it was Tov me'od. It was very good. So he's doing, he's developing the goodness until it's pinnacle of goodness, okay? There's nothing wrong with that, but they use that. Recreation, I'm not going to get into this long, but it has bearing on what I just said. They use that to say that there was this thing that went on and then we got into what God did after Genesis 1-2. And why do they do that? Does anybody know why they do that? Because then God did not create everything. He came from someplace else. It allows for evolution. Sure. And this was developed by a Scottish minister. He was the original guy and other people developed on it. Guess when? when Darwin put out his theory of relativity. And everybody started saying, well, this must be the truth. And as soon as the weak Christians that hold on to science as the all-answering authority to everything, as soon as they came and they proposed that the earth must be billions and billions of years old, all of a sudden Christians got scared. And they said, we don't want to look stupid. We need to have an answer as to why the Bible can still be true. And so they made up an entire theology, shoved it into one verse of the Bible out of its intended context, and they came up with the theory of recreation, which is, by the way, a theories, because it can't be proven. It's no different than evolution. It's not true. The Bible never teaches anything but a six-day creation. It teaches nothing about recreation, and if you believe that, you've been deceived. Okay, I'll tell you that frankly, without any qualms at all. Jesus does not allude to it. He speaks of a literal creation. He speaks of a literal creator. He speaks of a literal second person after the first person. There were six days of creation, not billions of years. This is all taken as an axiom within Scripture. So, you don't have to believe that if you don't want. Believe evolution if you want, but you are believing something the Bible does not teach, and it does not allow. Anyway, I'm not going to get into that right now, but it goes with what I just said. It is factual history. This book, I believe, is factual history. If it says that the world was created in six days, I don't care what the left thinks about me. I don't care what other Christians think about me. I believe that that's what happened. There are answers to those things that can be found that are just as good, and I tell you, they are better than the answers that the evolutionists have. They're better. And the evolutionists hide so much information that is, that demonstrates Yeah, it demonstrates that they are wrong. Okay, I believe this book is factual. As this history is the basis for being a minister, unlike that person up in Scotland who says, you know, we've got to accommodate the Bible to evolution. Okay, he had no basis for being a minister because he departed from this, which is the basis for being a minister. All right, it is to be remembered and considered at all times. This book before anything else. Jesus Christ was raised out of the dead. I believe that. There is nothing I believe more firmly than that truth. I believe it, because if He was not raised out of the dead, then I am a sinner, and there is no answer to my sin. And I don't even know how sin came into the world in the first place, because if He didn't come out of the grave, then everything He said is untrue, and therefore I have no basis for even knowing why I do the things I do. It's false, okay? So, to be remembered and considered at all times. He was raised out of the dead. He is a literal, physical human being who suffered and died in the execution of his duties. Isaiah 53 said it would happen. The writers of the Gospels proclaim that it did happen. I believe that. I believe it 100 percent, okay? Those duties of Jesus Christ were given to Him to be performed by Him. They came from God. That is what the Bible teaches. God sent Jesus on a mission, okay? However, in properly performing His role, prevailed over death, having died without sin of his own. Thus it demonstrates that his death is sufficient for the removal of the sins of the people he died for. That is the doctrine of substitution, okay? That goes all the way back to the very beginning, but it is explicitly described in the book of Leviticus. We will take this animal. We will confess our sins over it. We will kill this animal. We'll spread his blood here. We'll do this with its blood there. We're going to do all these little things, every one of them, every single one of those things, picturing the work of Jesus Christ, and the substitution is now effected. He took my place. My sin is now on him, and I am over here in his place of righteousness. Okay, that is the doctrine of substitution. Christ did it for me personally, okay? substitution. As this is so, then death can no longer hold me either. I say them here because all of you, but it's personal for me. Death cannot hold me. I believe that with all of my heart. March 6th is the day that my best friend in high school, Jeff Berghorn, his daughter died in a hotel just down the road here. On the way home, I pass it every single time I come onto the island. which is every time I come on the island, which is any time I go off the island. I pass there and I think of Amanda. She died on March 6th, about 15 years ago now. Okay? I believe with every fiber in my being that she is going to come out of that grave and she is going to be raised at the rapture along with me if I'm dead or if I'm alive at the time. I believe that with all of my heart. Okay, they were so distraught when the day she died, Cindy picked up her phone and she called me and she said, Charlie, come over right now. And it was a long drive where they were living at the time. I didn't even know what she wanted. I got in my car and I drove over there and they were devastated. And the first thing I did was take them to John 11, and I read them the story of Lazarus coming out of the tomb, and I said, don't you worry about this. And then they were going through those low spots about two weeks later, and I was over at their house, and I found her Bible, and it says, I received Jesus on this day. He is my Savior. I gave that to them, and all their low spots were gone. And so I called Jeff to tell him the day that I love him and that I'm thinking of him. But I believe with all of my heart that that girl is going to come out of the grave and she is going to meet all of us up there in the presence of Jesus. So I wouldn't be doing this job if I didn't believe that. He prevailed over death, having died without sin of his own. It thus demonstrates that his death is sufficient for the removal of arson, substitution, then death can no longer hold us either. It is a one-time act with eternal ramifications for anybody, including Amanda. Paul is telling Timothy that his duties as a minister have eternal significance. and that should prompt him on during even the lowest moments of his ministerial life. That is why he's giving him this encouragement in this talk, is to tell him, you're going to go through things that are difficult, they're burdening, they're almost overwhelming at times, but you are doing it for an eternal purpose, by helping people to understand proper doctrine and helping people to understand their position before a holy God that demands a reckoning for our sin. from this remarkable point of surety, he then says that Jesus Christ is of the seed of David. Okay, people say, what's his name, Jacob Presch, one of these prophecy guys. He teaches that Jesus was created in Mary's womb. created. That's a heresy known as valentarianism. Anyway, okay, Jesus wasn't created in Mary's womb. God united with humanity in Mary's womb. Okay, that's what happened. And how do we know it? If I believe this book is the Word of God, it says right here that Jesus is the seed of David. He can't be the seed of anybody if he wasn't united in the womb of Mary. She is of the seed of David. It says it right there in Luke 3. Go read it. Or Luke 1, I'm sorry. Go read it. Okay? And it also says Luke 3 because that's his genealogy, right? So anyway, he is of the seed of David. The promise was to David that one of your descendants, what is it, 2 Samuel 7 14, let me read it to you, I'm sure it's 2 Samuel 7, I could be wrong, so we're gonna see, we're in 1 Samuel, we're in 2 Samuel, We're in chapter 3, chapter 4, 7. Okay, I think it's 40. Yes, here it is. 12. When your days are fulfilled and you rest with your fathers, I will set up your seed after you, who will come from your body. Doesn't mean directly, it means one of his descendants. And I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for me. Speaking of Solomon, but typologically anticipating Christ. house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever." Here it is, 14. I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commits iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men and with blows of sons of men. But my mercy shall not depart from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I removed from before you. Jesus Christ was imputed our sin. He became sin who knew no sin so that we might become the righteousness of God in him. And that's what that is referring to. People get tripped up over that. They shouldn't. It is just a veiled way of saying that I will chastise him, and he did. But it was because of you, not because of his own son. It was because of what his son would do for you, okay? So, here it is, 2 Samuel 7. I wrote it down. Here I'm looking for it. Okay, he's of the seed of David. His words here are given to substitute and validate Christ's human nature. He's dealing with Christ's human nature at this time. He also deals with his deity throughout his writings, but here it's his human nature, both before and after the resurrection. He didn't stop being a man after the resurrection. As a human, he truly died. As a human, he truly rose. Being of the seed of David also confirms his acceptability as the Messiah. The Lord's promise to and covenant with David concerning the Messiah, here it is 2 Samuel 7, is that he would come from David's line. Every single one of these things is prophesied in the Old Testament. Every one of them keeps pointing us to one thing. Jesus. Jesus. Jesus. It's all about Jesus. The ancestral line of Christ, which is clearly recorded in the Gospels, the work he performed, the death he died, and the resurrection he was given, all point to his fulfillment of Scripture. We can't know that if we don't know that. Okay, this is what Timothy is being asked to remember when he is downtrodden and worn out from the battle. The remembrance of these truths is to be the elixir which will pick him up and set him on his feet once again. Paul then, you know what? It was either this Monday or last Monday. I can't remember. I think it was last Monday. Anyway, I was so tired. I was so tired. Maybe it was this Monday, but you know what happened? I got into the Word, evaluating the Song of Songs, Chapter 7. I was so excited through the entire... It was like It was like, you know, going on a Ferris wheel ride or something. It was unbelievable. As soon as I was done, I was completely drained again. But it was so exciting. When I say it's the elixir, it's just the thing. It's telling me about Jesus. All this information just keeps coming out about what He did. Just unbelievable. Unbelievable. So when I said this all these years ago, it's true. It's the elixir that will keep Timothy going in his times of difficulty. Okay, so now where was I? don't even know where I was. Come on, Charlie. Timothy's asked to be remembered. Okay, the remembrance of these truths is, there it is. Paul then finishes up with, according to my gospel, the message he preached was committed to him by Christ personally. It was a bestowal which is in accord with the sound doctrine anticipated in the Old Testament and which is realized in the work of Jesus Christ. He calls it my gospel because it is a personal gospel to him as much as it is a proclamation for others to hear. He's not saying this is my gospel different from Peter's gospel, but that's what hyper-dispensationalists say. They say that Paul had his gospel and Peter had his gospel. They had two different gospels. Saying that is actually a heresy. They were united in their proclamation of Jesus Christ. There is one gospel, and taking that verse, or these words out of that verse, and saying that there are two gospels is heretical. It is a heretical doctrine. There is one gospel, okay? It is personal to him as much as it is a proclamation to others to hear. And yet, elsewhere Paul speaks of Our Gospel. It is in the plural in 1 Thessalonians 1.5 and 2 Thessalonians 2.14. In this he shows that though the gospel is personal, it is not his any more than it is any other minister's. They all preach the same gospel. The thought is similar to saying, I love my Jesus, right? It's the same thing, and yet a group can say, oh how we love our Jesus. It's the same Jesus. It's the same love. It's just me personally expressing it, and then us personally expressing it, right? Okay? And like the Gospel message, He is both a personal Savior and the Savior of all who are saved. Okay, unless you're a hyper-dispensationalist, then He saves these people differently than He saves these people, and they're in a different category, and we don't need to worry about them. Okay, it's just an abandonment of the Jews is all that doctrine is. It's a heresy. It's not even worth discussing. If you want to know my thoughts on it, I've got, just type it in, Superior Word Hyperdispensationalism. Watch that sermon. That's all you need to know about how I think about those people. Okay, Paul's words here in 2 Timothy are reflected by his opening words of Romans chapter 1 in verse, let me see here, Romans chapter 1. Oh boy. Romans, here, okay, we're almost there, one, one page back, one through four. Paul, a bondservant of Jesus Christ to be an apostle, separated to the gospel of God which he promised before through his prophets in the holy scriptures concerning his son Jesus Christ our Lord, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh, and declared to be the son of God with power according to the spirit of holiness by the resurrection from the dead." He's repeating himself and he's being more specific with Timothy so that Timothy remembers this forever. Just in time, life application. Paul is speaking to Timothy as a minister who will surely face immense difficulties in times of great trial. But the words of this verse belong to all in Christ. We should remember Christ Jesus raised from the dead, of the seed of David, at all times. What God has done in him is something we can reflect on and hold securely in our hearts at all times. Woo-hoo! It is the greatest reassurance that all is okay. Jesus. Heavenly Father, thank you so much for the chance to come and talk about Jesus today and to revel in what He has done. Lord, I pray for Jeff and Cindy and the day that they remember each year and the difficult things that her sisters and brother have to remember as they are missing their sister, and yet at the same time, they know that they are going to see her again because of what Jesus did Lord, thank you for that assurance that we possess, and thank you that we can pray for the people we mentioned at the beginning of the service, the people with needs that need to be met. Lord, we just ask that you be with your people, help them to get through their difficulties or to get the needs met so that they can press on with life in a fair way, a happy way, a way that is pleasing to them and to those around them. Lord, thank you. We just love you so much. You're so good to us and this word is so special. It tells us of Jesus. Thank you. And it's in his name we pray. Amen. All right, let me back this up here.