Q & A

PDF

Well, this evening we want to do something a little different. It's been a while now, I don't know maybe, Rocky, has it been more than a year since we did a Q & A? I want to say maybe it has been. I used to do them a couple times a year. I just sort of lost track here and haven't done one in a while. And this was a good night to do that. So, here's how it works. If you have a question, you just get up and come up and stand in one of these isles behind these microphones. And don't be polite, (in other words, do be polite, but don't be polite in this way) In other words, don't wait until that person has had their question answered before you get up. Or I won't know that there are other questions, and believe me, I can talk a long time on one question. So, don't sit there and not get up because I don't have a verbal que, or excuse me, a visual que.

This might not go well based on how I am beginning here, I figured with the time change, this morning I got up at body time, 2:15, so I don't know exactly if this was a good idea or not, but we'll see by the time I am done. Anyway, I need a visual que from you that there are other questions. So don't wait until one person has had their question completely answered for you to get up. Instead, you just get up if you have question, and that will let me know how to kind of pace because if there are several people, then I'll know that I need to keep the answers a little shorter. And if there aren't as many, then I can wax as eloquent as I want on a particular answer.

Okay, alright, so go ahead if you have questions. Any question is fine. Just get up and come to the microphones, and we'll get started. The only other thing that I ask is that when you start, start by introducing yourselves so we know who you are and then ask your question, alright?

[I'm Michael Hansen] I had a question based on a church leader locally this last week stating on public television that he thinks that the big bang is a possibility, and that the universe is 13 billion years old, and he's a pastor. What would you say to any believer who subscribes to those views and the alternate view of creation.

Well, that's a great question. And frankly, this is a huge issue right now. You may not be aware of it, but in academic circles as well as in Pastors Speak across the blogosphere, there is a lot of discussion, not only about the age of the earth, essentially a six-day creation has been given up by much of evangelical Christianity. But now, and this is what we have predicted would happen.

Where do you stop, where do you stop that? If you give up what Scripture clearly teaches in Genesis 1 and 2? Where do you draw the line? Well, now the line is being extended. The Christian community, the evangelical community, historically has always believed in a historical Adam and Eve. That is that there were two people, a real person named Adam and a real person named Eve who were the starting place of the human race. And that's clear if you read your Bible. Our Lord affirms it. But in today's world, that is being seriously questioned in Christian academia. Is there a literal Adam and a literal Eve, or are they merely symbolic? And therefore somehow, we have to make that fit with the evolutionary theory. We have already given up the literal six-day creation. So now we have got to make Adam and Eve fit with that because it doesn't fit with it. And so, that's happening.

So, then let me answer the question. It's a huge issue. But what I would say is this. When you look at the history of the Christian church; when you look at the interpretive principles that we have, you come at the same place – that is a literal six-day creation. I understand the approaches to Genesis 1. People say, well listen Genesis 1 is, it's really just a historical description of sorts, but just to give us a framework, a framework for what God did, that God is the one who really created. It didn't just happen. It's poetic, would be another response. There is no evidence in Genesis 1 and 2 of poetry. Look there for a moment.

I just want you to look. The principles of Hebrew poetry are not in Genesis 1. Hebrew poetry is unlike our poetry in that it is characterized not by rhyme, but by parallelism. You see that in your Bible. You can see that for example in Proverbs. You can see it in other poetic sections. There is intentional parallelism.

On the other hand, you have narrative where simple history is recorded, a historical narrative, that's what Genesis 1 reads like. There is no poetry. It's not poetry. It's a historical narrative. In addition to that the clues here are very clear. I mean, what do you do with verse 5, "God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day."

Now what the evolutionists want to do with this, and that pattern, is to say well that day is representative, it's symbolic of a long period of time. Every time in the Old Testament an ordinal number, 1, 2, first, second, occurs with day it's always describing literal days. Yes, the word day, "yom" can refer to, the Hebrew word can refer to long periods of time, but never when it's with a number. It never happens.

So, here you have narrative, historical narrative, told like historical narrative. You have literal days described with morning and evening, one day, and that's how the whole passage unfolds. But I would say this. I think the really strong argument in favor of the historical position is our Lord Jesus Christ.

Read the gospels, and you will see that Jesus again and again affirms the first ten chapters of Genesis. He affirms a historical Adam and Eve. He talks about them being man and woman two people who were the first to be married. This is Jesus Christ. Believe Him, or don't believe Him, but don't act like you believe Him and then throw this out the window. You have Him affirming the literal creation of the world, God speaking the world into existence. You have Him affirming all of those things that have been traditionally taught in Genesis 1. So, you can't have it both ways.

If you want, if you want to look into this a little more, some of you. I did a couple messages back when I was doing the systematic theology series on creation, and looked at Genesis 1 and walked our way through it. You can go back and find that if you want to get a little more detail. But that's the big picture. I would say you can't, you can't have it both ways. And when do you draw that line? As I've said, it's moving. It used to be just Genesis 1 and specifically the first few days of creation and the literalness of those days. Now, it's a historical Adam and Eve, but why does it stop there? Who gets to decide it stops there? Why don't we say, well the resurrection of Jesus was just, you know, a spiritual resurrection?

There is no way to determine that except each person's own mind. Once you allow the literature of Scripture not to be taken in the literal way that you would take any other literature. You cannot read evolution into Genesis 1 and 2 without doing hermeneutic gymnastics. And that's why until Darwin and until his theory, the church has historically believed in a literal six-day creation. There have been those who have wavered on the length of time involved. Some have thought it was shorter, but you don't have this evolutionary idea of it being longer and sort of endless time launched into Genesis 1 and 2.

So, you can read on that. The ICR here in our own back yard has some great material on that, Institute for Creation Research. You can go back and listen to that series. But in the end, it is a capitulation. Understand what it is. It is desire to fit our faith into contemporary thinking. It's a compromise. Okay, let's just be honest about it. It's uncomfortable as Christians to stand up in the public square and say I believe in a literal six-day creation. Okay, I get that. I agree with that. It is uncomfortable. So, what? It's what our Lord taught. It's what Scripture clearly teaches. It's what the church has historically taught, and there is no legitimate reason to jettison that. The text will not lead you there. So, let God be true and every man a liar.

[My name is Marla Panarogi.] I didn't get a chance to say thank you for your Christmas message, but I liked the way that you made the connection between God loves us, and you need a Savior because the lost, a lot times hear, well if God's loves, why do I need a Savior? I like that you drew the connection because we've broken the law.

[Tom] Well thank you.

[Marla] My question is eschatology.

[Tom] Okay.

[Marla] I believe in a pretrib. And so, after the tribulation Christ comes back. Are we coming back with Him and if so, like the church, we get raptured with our glorified bodies, and we have the marriage supper with the Lamb? Will we come back with Christ? Are we going to live on this earth during the millennial kingdom? If so. And I know we won't be able to procreate, the procreators will be with the remnant, and then the Gentiles who survive the tribulation, but will we be here, one? Two, will we be able to sin? And how do we live in a world where there is sin when we've got a perfected body, and can you expand on that?

[Tom] Sure.

[Marla] Because I can't put, you know, that in my mind that we're going to be heavenly bodies, but we are back here on earth for a thousand years. And then, what will we be doing for a thousand years?

[Tom] Alright, Marla, you've got to hold those questions in your mind, because I don't think I can hold them in my mind, alright. So, let me start with ... stay up there for a second because I need you to help me with the other parts of the question, alright. I will forget. I will have to ask you, you know, what the second and third parts are there, but the big picture is yes. The way the Scripture lays out the end times is Christ returns for His church. First Thessalonians 4, and every, and by the way, every eschatological position believes in a rapture. There is no eschatological position that does not believe in a rapture. The question is when does it happen? Those who believe that Jesus comes once, the second coming is a single event at the end of the tribulation, they believe that Christ will come, that the believers will be raptured up to Him in the clouds and we'll all come immediately back to earth. That's what that position would hold.

We believe that instead there is a gap between those two. And the reason for that is because you don't find, you don't find God putting His people through His own wrath. And there are a number of passages that deal with that including Revelation 3 and others, but I think that, getting to your question. And that is, will we come back with Christ at the end of the tribulation? And the answer is yes. When you look at Revelation 19, it's very clear. By the way during the tribulation, if you read the book of Revelation, it's fascinating that from chapter 3 when you have the churches on earth, the seven churches, you get to the church in heaven, the believers in heaven, the elders before the throne in chapters 4 and 5, you don't find the church mentioned or on earth during that entire period of time. But when you come to chapter 19, you find them again. And in verse 7, you find them at the marriage of the Lamb in heaven.

Let us rejoice and be glad and give … glory to Him, [this is Revelation 19:7] for the marriage of the Lamb has come and His bride has made herself ready." It was given to her to clothe herself in fine linen, bright and clean; … [and so forth. And then it speaks of the marriage supper of the Lamb.] This is the celebration of Jesus having taken His bride to Himself.

Now after that you have in verse 11 you have the second coming at the end of the tribulation, the end of Jesus Christ breaking the seals, taking back possession of the title deed of the earth. He's taking back possession of what is rightfully His. What the usurper has taken, and He is breaking those seals, taking authority over, back from Satan all the earth and rendering His judgment on the earth as well. Now, at the end of that, here's what you have. This is Revelation 19:11, … "I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse, and He who sat on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and wages war."

The description here that's given, He's called The Word of God. He's called the KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS." There is no question about who this is. This is Christ returning. And it says in verse 14, "that the armies which are in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, were following Him on white horses." That description is used not of angels in other places in Revelation but of redeemed sinners, saints. And so, here you have the saints returning with Christ.

And oh, by the way, we won't do any fighting. We're with Him, but we're not fighting because "From His mouth comes a sharp sword, so that with it He may strike down the nations…." In other words, just as Jesus Christ spoke the universe into existence, just as He speaks light into our souls, He will speak, and through the word of His mouth, and He will destroy His enemies. And so, we're with Him, but He does the fighting. And it says, "He will rule them with a rod of iron; … He treads the wine press of the fierce wrath of God, the Almighty." So, we return then with Him. He cleans up from the judgment that He's brought on the earth. And we are ushered into a millennial period.

Now, to your question. I did remember this one. See if there's another one I missed. But to your question of what and how do you sort of juxtapose us as redeemed sinners living on the earth. Let me, first of all, mention that we will be glorified. Okay, even those who are now in heaven are called the spirits of just men made perfect in Hebrews 12 I think it is, 13 I guess, and no 12 it is, I was right the first time. And that you have a description of all the saints. When you died, the moment you died, and you are, and your soul is ushered into the presence of God, you are made perfect. You are perfectly sinless. You are fully justified. Glorification waits until you are reunited with your body; when Christ returns at the rapture, you He brings with Him those who are already there; you are reunited with your body; you are fully glorified. But you are made perfect at the moment of death. Your soul is made perfect. Hebrews "the spirits of just men made perfect in the presence of God." So, you are glorified at that point.

So, will you be able to sin? Will you be able to sin when we come back and live on this world renewed by Christ in the millennial period? The answer to that is absolutely not. There was a time with Adam when he was able to sin, and he was able not to sin. Right? He could chose to sin and did. But he could also, and did, for some period of time after his creation, chose not to sin. Then, when the fall came, we were all able only to sin. That was our problem, we were not able not to sin.

Now, when we are glorified, when we are made perfect as spirits, and then, of course, when we receive our glorified bodies, we are not able to sin. So, we are not even like Adam. We are in a new category where we are no longer able to sin at all. We are like Christ in the sense that we are perfect. We are perfectly righteous, perfectly holy. Alright, so not able to sin. Now what about those who have been perfected, who have been glorified living alongside those who are sinners, those who have come through, who have children and those children are sinners.

You know, I've had that question recently actually. Here's my answer to that. It's not as strange as you might think. I mean our Lord Jesus Christ was perfect in His soul and in His body, no sin whatsoever. He wasn't glorified when He was here on the planet. He didn't have a glorified body. That He got at the resurrection. And we're going to get a body like His when we are glorified. But He lived on this planet in perfect harmony with the people that were here even though He was perfected, no sin.

And so, it's happened. In God's economy, its already happened. And so, it's not as odd or strange as it might initially seem. It has transpired before. And so, I don't there's anything to really reconcile there except to acknowledge that it's going to be like that except there is only one of Him, and He was the only perfect one, and everybody around Him were sinners. The difference will be the planet will be populated with primarily with the righteous. And then out of those who were born, there will be a great number of sinners that live on this planet in conformity to Jesus Christ's will externally, but still rebels.

At the end a great multitude, Revelation 20 describes that at the end of the millennial period there is a there is a huge war against God. In fact, verse 8 of Revelation 20 describes that out of that millennial period there will still be a rebellion, notice the end of verse 8, "…the number of them is like the sand of the seashore." So, it will begin with primarily righteous people, but by the time the thousand years are over, the extent of life and those things tat are prophesied in the Old Testament, you will have a lot of people who are unredeemed and who are secretly rebels even living under the reign of Christ without a redeemed heart even though you see the righteousness; you see its effect; you see what will happen. It still produces rebels even though it's without redemption, only rebels. By the way, that's a great argument for not thinking that putting your kids in a certain environment is going to do the deal. That's not to say you should put them in a bad environment intentionally. I'm just saying, don't assume that putting your kids in the right environment is going to somehow make the outcome right. God has to change the heart. When sinners live under the reign of Jesus Christ on this planet, they will rebel given the chance. So, did I answer all the questions you had?

[Marla] Yes, I guess, you know, one of the things that God has put in our heart is we long for heaven, and we can't wait. One of the reasons is no crying, no pain, and so it's not like we get up there and we get a taste of it, and then we have to go back down and deal with the same problem again, and I know that God's plan is perfect, and it will work out, but I just, I don't want to come back to sin.

[Tom] Well, just know this. It won' be the same. That's what I think you need to understand. I would encourage you again, I hate to direct you. I just can't answer as fully as I would like to the questions here. So let me just say this, go online, and again, in that Systematic Theology series, I did a message, maybe several, on the Millennium. And you can walk through that and see what the Scripture describes it as. It's not going to be the same as here, but it's not going to be the same as the eternal state because when you get to Revelation 20:11, there's an act of uncreation. I mean he says, "I saw a great white throne and Him who sat upon it, from whose presence earth and heaven fled away, and no place was found for them." You know what that's saying, at that moment the universe, as we know it, will be willed out of existence by God. There will be nothing but God and His throne and the intelligent creatures He's created. And those who are the unredeemed will stand before Him at the judgment. And they will be banished then to the lake of fire.

Out of that, verse 1 of chapter of 21 of Revelation, "Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth…." God will recreate the universe. And that's the one it says, "for the first heaven and the first earth passed away…." and what I love about the description of this new heaven and new earth is that it's described this way, in which righteousness is at home. When Jesus Christ reigns here in the millennium, it will be a reign of righteousness. It will not be like where we live now. It will not, it will be a renewed earth. The curse will be corrected, and there will be righteousness. He will insist, demand our righteousness, but for those who aren't redeemed, it will be external. And they will rebel at the end.

So, don't think like now. That's not what we are talking about at all. The millennium will not be that, this in any way. It's totally different. But it's still not equal to the eternal state when righteousness is perfectly at home, and all presence of any rebels is banished. Okay?

[Marla] Thank you sir.

[You are welcome. Yes, ma'am.]

[Judy Royble] [Tom] Judy

A proof text or defense that charismatics use for why they can use their gifts post apostolic days is John 14:(in particular) 12-14. What can I say to my friends, because I have a lot that go to church down there.

[Tom] John 14, What were the verses?

[Judy] John 14:12-14 about greater works.

[Tom] Right,

[Judy] where Jesus is talking … greater works than I can do …

[Tom] Sure, here's what I would say. In the upper room discourse, which is where this falls, Jesus is talking to the eleven. At this point Judas is gone. He's talking to the eleven faithful apostles. He says several things to them in this passage that are entirely for them. You know, we use them, and misuse them. But look at verse 25 for example. Here's a verse we often take out of context, John 14:25 [and 26]

These things I have spoken to you while abiding with you. But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.

Now, when I was in a Christian school, in a Christian college, this was like one of the favorite verses of students. You know, but usually what it meant was bring to my remembrance things that I didn't study. This has nothing to do with us. Jesus is here promising the apostles that He is going to supernaturally, through the work of the Spirit, teach them more than He has taught them, and through the Spirit, He's going to supernaturally enable them to remember all those things that happened while He was with them so that they can be written for us in this book. That's not about us. And there are several places like that in the upper room discourse.

And here's yet another one. "Greater works you will do." Because He empowered them to do those works. What you have, in fact, let me back up now and answer the question in a larger way.

What about these miraculous gifts? Are they still present for us today? Let me show you a couple of passages. Let's turn first to 2 Corinthians 12:12. Paul here is arguing about his apostleship, he's defending his apostleship. And he says in verse 11,

I have become foolish; [this is 2 Corinthians 12:11] I have become foolish; you yourselves compelled me. Actually I should have been commended by you, for in no respect was I inferior to the most eminent apostles, even though I am a nobody. The signs of a true apostle were performed among you with all perseverance, by signs and wonders and miracles.

Here you have the apostle Paul saying, what proved that I was an apostle and proved that the other apostles were apostles were these signs and wonders and miracles; the miraculous gifts. And this has been true throughout the history of God's work in redemption; have been, for limited periods of time, to establish the credibility of His messengers. You know, when you read the Old Testament, you sort of get the impression that miracles happened all the time. Miracles didn't happen all the time.

When you start looking at the windows of time when miracles occurred, they occurred around the time of Moses. Why? Because God was going to have Moses be His messenger, and He wanted to prove that Moses was His messenger. And so, when Moses did those signs, and particularly there at Mount Sinai, I mean God made it pretty clear. This is Me; I'm speaking to Moses. You better listen to Him.

But then you have the window of Elijah and Elisha. Again, what's going on there? You just have a short period of time in Israel's history when miracles were happening, and why? It's to confirm them as apostles in the darkest days of Israel's history.

Now, you come to the New Testament. You see this same pattern. Miracles came for a time for a specific period. Those miraculous gifts were serving the same purpose. God has always used miraculous gifts for and that was to confirm His messengers. He did it with Jesus. Jesus said if you don't believe, you know, My words, at least believe Me because of the miracles I have done. Look at what God has enabled me to do, and see the validation that makes on My ministry. The same thing was true with the apostles. And that's what Paul is saying here in 2 Corinthians 12:12. He's saying, listen I did the signs of an apostle. This shows you that I am, in fact, an apostle, miracles and these various works.

Now, did that last? Did the miraculous last even in the first century? The answer to that is no. Let me show you. Even Hebrews, look at Hebrews 2 and look at verse 3, go back to verse 2.

For if the word spoken through angels proved unalterable, and every transgression and disobedience received a just penalty, [He's talking here about the law.] how will we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? [this message of the gospel and salvation that's been brought by Christ, now watch what he says here in verse 3] After it was at the first spoken through the Lord, it was confirmed to us by those who heard, God also testifying with them, both by signs and wonders and by various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit according to His own will.

Here you have the same thing. The writer of Hebrews, and by the way, Hebrews was written just before the destruction of the temple in 70 AD. He doesn't mention the destruction of the temple. So clearly, it's still standing at this point. This is toward the end of New Testament history. You only have the apostle John writing later. But notice what he says. By nearly 70 he's referring in the past tense to those miraculous works.

In fact, notice the generations he describes here. He said in verse 3, "it was first spoken through the Lord…" Jesus gave us the message of the gospel and communicated it. It was confirmed, that message was confirmed to us by those who heard. Who's that? The apostles. He's saying, the Lord spoke it; He spoke it to the apostles; the apostles had their words confirmed to us, God (verse 4) testifying with them [that is the apostles] "both by signs and wonders and by various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit according to His own will."

Here's the writer of Hebrews, and there's some debate about who that is, (and my favorite candidate is Apollos, but you can pick yours because we don't know.) The writer of Hebrews saying, by my day, near 70 AD, I'm talking in the past tense about the miracles and the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit, and signs and wonders. They are already past tense. And why did God allow the apostles to do that? … in order to confirm the word they were speaking. And so, already in biblical history. Now, we can go into church history and see that the miraculous gifts by the church fathers, we already have the church fathers saying they ceased with the apostles. But even in biblical history, forget the church fathers, even in biblical history we have one of the authors of Scripture saying those things were in the past. And they were given through the apostles in order to confirm their word to us.

And, by the way, you see the same pattern with tongues. If you look at the gift of tongues? And this is a different question. Sorry, Rod, let me just a second. With the gift on tongues, you have the same basic pattern. You have Acts 2, the day of Pentecost, speaking known languages, by the way, it didn't happen miraculously, but it happened at the Shepherd's Conference. It was amazing all these guys with headsets on with simultaneous translation as we were speaking. I was translated while we were speaking. People were simultaneously, which is an incredibly difficult thing, translating us into Russian, and I think Italian, and you know, Spanish. And I had a guy come up to me after my message and thank me and said he was in a booth somewhere translating my message into Portuguese.

So, but what happened at Pentecost is people were speaking, the apostles were speaking languages they had never studied, and the words used there are dialects, languages, they were known languages. That's clearly what happened at Pentecost. When you come to the other occurrences of tongues in the book of Acts, in Acts 10, in Acts 19. It always says this is what happened to us at the beginning. So, whatever happened at Pentecost, had to be what was happening in the book of Acts. And you go to Pentecost, read that passage, and it couldn't be clearer. So, the miraculous gifts were given for a specific purpose. Even in the Scriptures you have them ceasing, spoken of in the past tense and given for a particular reason, that was to confirm the word of the apostles. And church history confirms that as well.

There have been, unfortunately, with the modern charismatic movement, this has all come back up. You understand the modern charismatic movement is very young. It's a little over a hundred years old. By the way, you have to get, I've read several prepublication chapters John gave me. You have to get a copy of his new book that's coming out later this year called Strange Fire. It's about the charismatic movement. It's totally different from Charismatic Chaos. But he goes back, and he looks at its foundations. Parham and some of the incredibly licentious lifestyle that he lived out.

John also does what I think is a great thing. He says, let's take the measurement that Scripture gives us that Jonathan Edwards gave. Is this a work of the Spirit? You remember back in the Great Awakening, is this the work of the Spirit or not? He came up with these tests, scriptural tests. John simply raises those. Whenever the Spirit is present, what does the Spirit do? He produces a focus on Jesus Christ. He produces a focus on the Scripture. He produces a longing and desire for personal holiness. And then he just compares what happens, by in large, in the movement of the modern Charismatic movement. And frankly, when you look at it, it's very clearly not a work of the Spirit. Okay? So, I hope that helps.

[Rod] In Genesis 13 we see the LORD speaking to Abram and He says lift up your eyes from the place where you are northward and southward and eastward and westward for all the land that you see, I will give to you and to your offspring forever. In light of what we've already discussed about the end of the world and the new heavens and the new earth, enlighten me, if you could on the word "forever" and what context is the land forever?

[Tom] Well, I think obviously, you have to relate that to what we know the Scriptures teaches about the end, that it can't be exactly the same piece of land unaffected because God's going to destroy this planet. He will, however, restore them, I believe, in the millennial period to their land. I think they are not going to be forever separate from the church. I reject that sort of kind of ultra classic dispensationalism that says there're going to be these two peoples of God. There're some who would say the Jewish people are going to, in the new heavens and the new earth, the Jewish people are going to live on the earth, and the church is going to live in the satellite city.

I utterly reject that. Ephesians 2 makes it clear that God has brought Jew and Gentile together in one new man in the church, and I think that is how it will be for all eternity. However, I think during the millennial period God, just to demonstrate the faithfulness of His character and His promises, will restore them to the land to Jerusalem. That will be the center of the planet for that time, simply to manifest His faithfulness. But I don't think you have these two separate peoples of God. I think God's just going to show that He keeps His promises. And He made promises that have yet to be kept, and I think that's one of them. But forever in the sense that it has, until their disobedience, and by the way, ultimately, He made some of that promise conditional obviously in the Mosaic Covenant. You know, this is where you'll be as long as you obey Me, but if you disobey Me, I'm going to take you away captive to all of over the planet, which He has done.

Now in God's goodness, there has been a restoration of Israel. Some people ask me, does the fact that Israel, you know, became a nation in 1948, does that mean that, you know, that that's part of prophecy? And my answer to that is that we have no idea. I mean there's no where in the Scripture that I can say to you, that means the end is here because they may get pushed off that little piece of land for a thousand years before Christ returns again. So, I can't look at that and say for sure that's what's going on. But ultimately, it is clear that they will be restored to that land during the millennial period. And so, then, of course, all bets are off for what the new heaven and the new earth will look like. I don't think there will be at that point a piece of land. I think forever means as long as this place, this planet exists, and I think, obviously, they also inherit the New Heaven and the New Earth, and so, I don't think they'll mind, if you've been to Israel, I don't think they'll mind cashing out of that for the New Heaven and the New Earth.

[Rod] Alright, thank you.

[Randy Rhodes] I, let's see. My question has to do with the acronym TULIP, and the specifically the "L" and maybe you could speak about that, and then here's a couple of questions. I find myself reasoning that it makes sense to me, but I was wondering if you could give some Scripture references, and the second question is, do you or does our church have a position on that?

[Tom] Sure, stay there just a second because I may have to ask you to help me finish up on those questions, alright. Let me take the first one. TULIP, of course for those of you who have read some about this, you understand that's an acronym for a series of five doctrines. There was a doctrinal battle in which Arminius and his followers said, we reject what the churches all around us teach, and instead we teach, and they set forth what they taught in five basic principles. In response to Arminius and his followers, the followers of God's sovereignty in salvation, those who had embraced that, and by the way that was most of Christianity, and it's called Calvinism, but it's not like Calvin came up with five points. He simple embraced the sovereignty of God in salvation, and that's what he taught, and that's what the churches taught.

But when Arminius and his followers came up with their five points, the church responded to those five points and said we utterly reject those five points you teach, and this instead is what the Scripture teaches. That's where these five points came from. They're called the five points of Calvinism. That's really a misnomer. They are in reality the church's five points in response to the false teaching of Arminius.

Alright, so now "TULIP". "T" is total depravity. All of these could be improved upon, the label, because the label could be a little misleading. By total depravity we don't mean every sinner is as bad as he could be, is what it seems to imply. Instead, what we mean is sin has permeated every single part of every sinner, every one of us, every part of our being, our wills, our minds. I mean, read Romans 3, and Paul quotes a series of passages from the Old Testament in which he says there is no one who seeks for God, there's our will. He talks about our minds being corrupted. He talks about our entire person having been affected by sin. That's total depravity. It's total in the sense that it effects every single part of who we are.

It means that we have inherited Adam's guilt. And in addition to inheriting Adam's guilt, we have also inherited his corruption through natural generation through our parents. And so, that's how we are born, totally depraved. What that means practically, and this what they were responding to is, there is nothing in me that left to myself, will respond positively to the gospel, has the capacity to respond positively to the gospel. I mean, Jesus said didn't He that no one is able to come to me unless the Father draws him. Paul in Romans 8 says it is not possible for you to obey the law of God. And so, there are these statements that are very clear in Scripture. If you want to learn more about the total depravity, again I did a series back in the Systematic Series a sermon called "Bad to the Bone", about three or four messages in which I worked through the issue of total depravity. But that's the "T".

"U" has to do with unconditional election. That is God's choice of us in eternity past was not conditioned on anything in us. Clearly Ephesians 1 makes that very clear. He chose us in Him from before the foundation of the world. Romans makes that very clear. You read chapter 9, and what you discover is that God chose, based on nothing in them. And I don't have time to go there, but read Romans 9, and that's reinforced, unconditional election.

Also, we took six messages in the early verses of Ephesians 1 to work through the issue of election. If you are struggling with election, and some people do. I know folks come to our church from a lot of different backgrounds. If you have never really studied that biblically, go listen to that series. Work through it biblically, and let the Scriptures themselves speak, and you'll see that you can't get your way around it.

But the followers of Arminius said that our election is conditional. It is conditioned on, (and it varies depending on who you read). It is conditioned on our response. In other words God looked down through the corridors of time. He saw that we were going to believe, and He said, he's going to believe so I am going to choose him.

The problem with that is that's not what the Scriptures teach. In fact, they teach exactly the opposite. One of the most powerful demonstrations of that is when Jesus says to those cities that He's judging, He says, you know "woe to you Capernaum" and so forth, and He says, if the works that had been done in you, had been done in Sodom, "they would have repented … in sackcloth and ashes." Think about that, God knew Sodom would repent, having given them the right opportunity, and He didn't. So clearly, election is not conditioned on man's potential response. It is unconditional. I'll come back to "L" okay.

"I" is irresistible grace, and again there is a better way to describe it. Irresistible has this kind of picture of God dragging the sinner kicking and screaming against his will to salvation. That's not what the Scriptures teach nor is that what those who believe in the sovereignty of God teach. Irresistible in the sense that when God chooses you in eternity past, and when He begins through the gospel, drawing you, calling you to Himself, you won't resist. You won't want to resist because at that moment you will see your sin, you'll see the beauty of Christ, and you will want to run to Christ, irresistible in that sense. The picture, again, that Christ gives is, no man can come to Me unless the Father draws him. And that's the picture through the gospel message as it's preached and taught.

You know, people might have heard, you've experienced this, right? You've heard, if you are like me, you heard the gospel many times, and you didn't respond. And then there was a time when you heard that message, and the Spirit of was working in and through that to bring conviction, and God was, through that message drawing you, compelling you irresistibly to Christ. That's irresistible grace. It is an expression of God's, once He's made the decision to draw the sinner to Himself, in that moment He opens up their hearts to see Christ, and to see their sin, they run to Him. And that's what it means by irresistible.

Now, the "P", the perseverance of the saints. That is if you have been saved, then you can't lose that. And again, this is contrary to what Arminius taught, and they were answering that charge. They were saying once you were truly in Christ, you will persevere. It's not once saved, always saved. That sounds like, you know, you can just do whatever you want.

That's not what perseverance of the saints teaches, instead, it says if you've really come to faith, if you've really repented, then your entire life will be a life of repentance and faith. Oh sure, you'll sin, and you'll struggle, and you'll have major issues in your life, but there will be a pattern of faith and repentance throughout your life. You will persevere in your faith.

We have an institution here in Dallas that has had professors and still has professors who teach that, if you ever once in your life make a sort of affirmation of the gospel. If you say I think that's true, then you're saved. And you can then live like a pagan for fifty years. You can even curse and reject Jesus Christ, and you're still a Christian.

That's not what perseverance of the saints teaches. Perseverance of the saints says, if you're truly saved, then you will continue to follow Jesus Christ. Imperfectly, you'll stray from the path, you'll sin, and you'll have to ask for forgiveness and come back to Christ, but you will live a life of faith and repentance. That's the perseverance of the saints.

Now, let me come back to the heart of your question, the "L". The "L" stands for "limited atonement". Now, let me say that our elders are absolutely united on the other four points of "TULIP", absolutely. On this point there are some of us who are convinced of one side of this and some of us who are convinced on the other side. But we have agreed that this is not going to be an issue of division and divisiveness in this church. However, what we have agreed is that each of us will teach our own conscience when we have to deal with this.

So, let me tell you what I believe. I believe that the Scriptures, when you put the package together, God in eternity past chose the sinners that He would redeem. So, the issue of the limited atonement really answers this question. For whom did Christ die? Now, there are two parts of that question and two answers. In one sense the death of Christ was unlimited, it was universal in this one sense. And that is there were benefits from His death that were for all people.

Read Romans 3, and there you have, in Romans 3, Paul talks about the fact that God vindicated His justice at the cross, and he uses two different expressions. One of them he says is by passing over sins that had been previously committed. What is that about? He's saying that God's justice is so demanding that every sin be punished that at the cross Jesus' death allowed God, because Jesus died, God could be merciful to sinners before that. In other words, if God were just, the moment you sinned He would kill you. If His justice was exacted as you deserve it, as I deserve it the first moment we sinned … we're gone. God doesn't do that. He lets sinners live. He's good to them and shows them mercy and common grace.

The only reason God can do that was purchased at the cross. His justice in doing that was vindicated at the cross. Also, there is a universal offer of the gospel that comes out of the death of Christ. I can tell every person I meet, listen, God so loved the world that He sent His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life. There is the universal, genuine universal offer of the gospel to all men. So, there are aspects of the death of Christ and specifically in purchasing common grace that are universal.

But the key issue and the key cornerstone of the atonement was substitution, right? Jesus substituting, enduring the wrath of God for sin. So, the question is at the core of the atonement is substitution. So, the question could be reframed this way. For whom did Jesus substitute? For whom did He fully and completely, that's the word "propitiation", satisfy the wrath of God? The answer to that hast to be for His own. Otherwise, Jesus completely satisfied God's wrath.

If He satisfied it for every man on the planet, then you have double jeopardy. You have people then paying and then enduring God's wrath a second time when Jesus endured it for them. And so, at the core of the atonement is substitution. And for whom did Jesus actually substitute? My answer to that is for the elect, for those whom God chose. God knew who they were, right? He chose them in eternity past. So, in the mind of God, that's really the question, in the mind of God for whom was Jesus Christ substituting? The answer to that is for His own. And there are so many passages that talk about His dying for that group. He gave Himself for His church Ephesians 5 says, and in Mark 10:45, He gave His life a ransom for many, not for all.

There are a handful of passages that raise a question because they seem to imply that He gave Himself as a propitiation for the world. All of those can be answered. I don't have time to go through each of them here. But I did a message, Randy, just to sort of wrap this up. At the end of the soteriology section the salvation section in Systematic Theology on Sunday night called "The Great Debate, Calvinism Versus Arminiusism". Go back and listen to that. I'll unfold that a little more, okay?

[I'm Anna Stover, Steve and Anna Stover's daughter] And I've been thinking a lot about heaven and things this past year, obviously. But a couple of months ago, our neighbor's son in LA died who at the age of 22 unless something happened right before he died, was definitely not a believer. And my husband and I have been discussing and struggling with, you know, my husband said how could I share with them, it's almost like, if I tell them about Christ and about heaven, and I'm saying there, rather than hell, and then we were just talking about hell. And is hell being, you know, and I guess we talked a little bit about it, annihilation and at some point is it just these people if you are in heaven or in hell, you know, you cease to exist completely, and it's just a separation from God, and then He just cuts you off, or there is this eternal [Tom eternal punishment] eternal punishment, [Tom, sure] eternal torment, you know, the Lazarus I'm in eternal pain, their 22 year old son, you know.

[Tom] Yea, that's hard when it comes down to a person, to an individual. So, let me answer in two different ways. First of all, let me say that I never remove hope from someone who has heard the gospel unless they died cursing Christ. You know, God is gracious. He is, by nature, He delights in doing good to those who are His enemies. And so, if someone understands the gospel, I wouldn't preach them into heaven and say they are in heaven. I don't know that. But I wouldn't rob all hope that God, through His Spirit, brought conviction, maybe at the very end of life when they have realized in that moment they're passing out of this life into the next that they responded to the truth.

And I encourage people not to assume that person is in heaven because we don't know that but to hold out hope and not to lose all hope. If the person knew the gospel, and didn't die cursing Christ, then hope that God was gracious and that maybe in the very end as He did with the thief, He brought this person to Himself. So, that would be on the practical level of ministering to that family. And sort of juxtaposing the gospel against that and the reality of heaven and hell. I would never say a person's in heaven, nor would I say a person's in hell. I don't know that.

Now, if a person dies contradicting the gospel, then obviously, we don't have much hope at that point, and we have no hope. You understand what I'm saying is we just don't know. So on a practical and on a pastoral level, I wouldn't say your son is in hell because I don't know that. I would tell them to hold out some hope that he came to understand the truth and by God's grace came to embrace it even in the last breath of life.

Now back to the other question in terms of the end of the unregenerate. This is a very hard truth, and it's not one that is comfortable or that I like, but it's a reality biblically. The Bible does not allow for soul sleep, or purgatory or annihilationism. It simple doesn't. And here's one way we know this for sure. When Jesus talked about heaven and hell (and by the way, Jesus had more to say about hell that anybody else in Scripture.) When He talked about heaven and hell, He used the exact same terms in parallel to one another to describe the reality of heaven and hell. He speaks of those who (I'm, looking here for the text, yea) in Matthew 25:46 at the judgment there, the judgment of the sheep and the goats it's called. Basically, it's called the end of the tribulation period. He sorts out individuals not nations.

And He says at the end of that verse 46, "These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." Now here in one verse you have Jesus contrasting the eternal state of the righteous and the wicked. And He uses exactly the same word. You cannot believe what Jesus teaches and end up anywhere else than eternal punishment. However long eternal life is, that's how long eternal punishment is. There is no relenting. There is no change in that. You have Him talking about that the smoke of their torment, Revelation 20, will ascend day and night forever. I mean, you just can't get away from that reality. That seems, on the surface, harsh to us doesn't it because, after all, you live seventy years, and you've only sinned for seventy years, how can God punish sin for longer than that? We understand parody, but what we don't understand is the magnitude of sinning against God.

The magnitude of the sin ultimately is measured in the magnitude of the person you committed it against. Just like crime. If a child disobeys his parent, that's an indiscretion of one level, but if that same child acts in utter rebellion against the president of the United States, and tries to take his life, that's a crime of a totally different magnitude. And now we are talking about our lives of rebellion against the Creator of the universe. And so, it's a hard truth. Again, if you are interested in sorting through this a little more, I did a full message on the issue of hell in that Systematic Theology series. You can go back and work through it. The evidence though is overwhelming. This is just one passage of many, many passages that drive home that hell is as long as heaven is.

[Suku] Was Jesus impeccable in His humanity? And the answer is yes. Will all the saved inherit the character of impossibility to sin for all eternity and glory?

[Tom] Yes, Suku, I think Jesus, the question is regarding Jesus' impeccability. Was He able to sin as a man or was He not able to sin? The answer is He was not able to sin. You say then, well how could His temptation be real temptation? Well, let me ask you this, what's the greater temptation, a person who gives in to that temptation, or a person who never does? When is the level of the temptation greater? It's to the person who never gives in. That's when the pressure mounts, and the temptation is greater. So. the fact that He couldn't sin doesn't make the temptation any less. His temptations were real. The Scripture tells us that.

The question though is, could He sin? And the answer is in His humanity, if you could somehow separate His humanity, then perhaps you could say yes, but you can't. He was the Godman. By the way, I think it was W.G.T. Shedd, the great American theologian, who illustrated the union of the natures in this way. He said if you take a tiny thin steel wire, can you break that wire? Yes, you can. That's Jesus' humanity. What if you take that tiny steel wire and you weld it into the midst a gigantic iron bar, can it be broken then, the answer is, no. Theoretically that steel cable can be broken, but practically it's impossible. And that was true with our Lord because He was the Godman and therefore unable to sin because God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempts He any man, James 1.

So then, your second question was about us. The answer to that is yes, we will have His character. We will be unable to sin. Once, either we die, and we're the spirits of just men made perfect, or Christ comes, and we're glorified we'll be like Him, body and soul. We will be perfect and unable to sin. Isn't that a wonderful reality? You know, the older I get, the more I long for that day when I will be like Him in that way. One more, and then we have got to close it out.

[My name is Katelyn Fessenden] I was wondering, some of my Christian friends have told me that Jesus didn't really turn in John 2 the water into wine, like He didn't turn the water into actual wine but just grape juice. And then other people have told me that Jesus never drank actual wine, it was just grape juice. So that's what I was wondering.

[Tom] I grew up in places where that argument was made. They can't be justified biblically. There is no question but what the wine in Scripture was wine. And it was possible, the word was used for example in Ephesians 5. Do not get drunk with wine. You know, you can't get drunk with grape juice. You can drink a lot of grape juice, but it's not going to get you drunk. And so, the wine of the New Testament times was wine. It was fermented grape juice. Now, it was naturally fermented, it wasn't like a lot of our alcoholic beverages today that have some hyped up distillation process that makes the alcohol content a lot greater.

In addition to that, the reason they drank wine was not only for enjoyment but also because the water was often such that it would make you sick. And so, they didn't always do this, but often they would mix wine and water together so that the alcohol content would destroy anything that was dangerous in there. But there is no question that in the first century they drank wine, Jesus drank wine.

The issue is not, whether or not you drank wine. The issue is very clearly, we're not to get drunk. It's an issue of Christian liberty. If you are interested, in fact, I think it would be helpful, some of you who have grown up in settings and been involved or heard in church settings certain things about those kinds of issues, I would encourage you to listen to the series on Romans 14, where we walk through issues of conscience. In the end, all the moral decisions that we are faced with come into three categories, only three. Either God commands it chapter and verse, or God forbids it chapter and verse, and everything else falls into an issue of conscience. Where what we are to do with that is dictated by Romans 14 and 1 Corinthians 8-10. The principles are laid out there, so I think through four messages, I sort of walk-through Romans 14 and lay out how to make those decisions.

Wine, for a believer, drinking alcoholic beverages for a believer falls into that category of issues of conscience. It's not forbidden, what is forbidden is getting drunk. And, by the way, let me just say that if you're drunk by the state of Texas standards, you're drunk. And you are violating the Scripture, alright? I just want to make that clear. I'm not opposed at all to Christians using their Christian liberty, and you know, having a glass of wine with their meal or whatever, but if you consume alcohol so that you are consistently drunk by the standards of the state of Texas, you are drunk by God's standards as well, and you are sinning against Him. Alright? So, you can use your Christian liberty and enjoy it, but don't run it out until you fall over the cliff into sin. Alright?

Alright, well it's been a good time. Thank you for your questions. I hope something I said was coherent after my night last night, but I the Lord will use those answers for good in all our lives.

Let's pray together.

Father, thank you for the opportunity to gather together this evening. Thank you for using Your Word in our lives. Thank you for how practical Your Word is; how it addresses these issues for us. Father, I pray that You would ignite in us, in each of us a greater desire to really understand Your Word, to be men and women of the Word. Father, I pray that you would use this evening and what we've discussed for the benefit of all of us. And bless out fellowship together.

We pray in Jesus' name, Amen.