Pastor Plek's Podcast
Pastor Plek's Podcast
Is Being Good Enough?
Have a question or comment for Pastor Plek or one of his guests. Send it here.
359: What does it truly mean to be saved? Is it through our good deeds, or is there something deeper at work? This question launches Pastors Chris and Holland into a profound theological exploration that spans from personal salvation to global politics. When listener Roman asks whether "good behavior is enough to save a man," the Chris & Holland dive into Ephesians 2:8-10, unpacking the beautiful paradox at Christianity's core: we are saved by grace through faith alone, yet faith that saves is never alone. Good works flow naturally from genuine salvation rather than creating it—a distinction that revolutionizes how we understand our relationship with God.
Ready to join the conversation? Send your questions to 737-231-0605!
Like, share, and subscribe! We love seeing and responding to your reviews and comments.
Support the show: https://wbcc.churchcenter.com/giving
and welcome back to pastor plex podcast. I'm your host, pastor plec, and joining me in studio is none other than pastor holland. How are you doing? Great thanks, chris. You know lots of things happening in the world today.
Speaker 1:I don't know if we get things I don't know if we can get to all of them, but we're gonna get to some of them. But let's just start off with, uh, an email that I have just gotten, like literally today, moments before the show. It says Pastor Chris, I am Roman, I'm 28 years old and a new follower. I'm concerned about salvation. As far as I know, a man or woman is saved by producing good behaviors toward other people and spreading love to them, stretching arms to help, and that is what I did, because I wanted to gain salvation from God. But when I explored your teaching online, I observed that it was not the same as where I stand.
Speaker 1:I'm confused about what the truth is behind these many teachings. Was good behavior enough to save a man? Thanks in advance, roman. Well, man, what a great question. What a great question. Man, what a great question. What a great question. It's so good that I almost wonder that some bot write that and just email in. I don't know, but it's just amazing. It's amazing. I very rarely do you get a question that straightforward about like I'm doing a lot of great things and great works, but I noticed on your preaching, when I listened to your teachings, that you say salvation is by grace, through faith that your works can't do it. So let's talk through that. Holland, what do you think about this question and how would you respond?
Speaker 2:Yeah, when he says, as far as I know, a man or woman is saved by producing good behaviors toward other people, I'm really curious to know, like, where'd you hear that? Where'd you learn that? Is this coming from? You know, like a Catholic upbringing? Is this coming from just a secular? I don't know, because I would say, before I became a Christian, I probably had a similar view. I think all people probably, yeah, like do good things, get rewarded with with eternal life kind of makes sense in some. You know some kind of rational way in our heads. Um, but uh, the fact that you know he somehow found church, uh, wells branch online and listening to your teaching online, and it's like man, now I want to know. I'm just like this is so cool, I just think it's so cool, it's wild.
Speaker 2:Ephesians 2 is what comes to mind for me right away. And then Romans the guy's name is Roman, and just like boom, romans Road Just did a series on that for Easter, right, yeah. And then, yeah, ephesians 2, 8 and 9, though 8, 9 and 10, honestly, for by grace, you've been saved through faith and this is not your own doing. It is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. And then verse 10, for we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them. So we're saved not by good works, but for good works. We're saved by grace, through faith, but the good works come as a result of our faith. They're how we live out our faith, how we respond to God's saving work. So that's where I would point Roman is Ephesians 2, 8 to 10. Right, yeah.
Speaker 1:So I think that's exactly—that's why I sent them. So that worked out Boom. And I think, if you kind of understand the depths of your sin, that faith has. You've been gifted faith. It's a gift of God, no one can boast. But faith that saves is never alone. It then produces because you're saved for good works that he's prepared for you beforehand. So I think that's part of it. So I don't want to. I think sometimes, as Christians, we can kind of like all you gotta do, and it is true, like there's a point of justification that happens. But the rest of your life is affirming that faith through your work. That is a result of the salvation that you've received. Yep, yeah, so you know, you, of the salvation that you've received. Yeah, yeah, so you are saved by faith alone. But faith that saves is never alone. Amen, yeah.
Speaker 1:So, all right, let's move on to another thought, because there's some big things in the news these days. All right, have you noticed that Iran and Israel have been in a little bit of a battle? I have noticed. And then the US recently bombed Iran and that caused a bit of a stir. And then Iran retaliated with some telegraphed missiles that President Trump actually thanked Iran for, and then he gave a tongue lashing to Bibi Netanyahu for firing back after Iran lobbed some more bombs and missiles over to Israel. Yeah, so where do we go with all of that? First off, like this is like this is made for TV, war, I mean. Do you know what I mean? Like it's like the weirdest. You are getting firsthand from Trump's thumbs what he's thinking, pretty much real time, and it's kind of I don't want to say war is funny, but when you don't expect this guy to say the stuff that he says, it's kind of shocking. Yeah, would you agree?
Speaker 2:I mean, yeah, it's a lot of shocking, a lot of all caps stuff being posted. A lot of you know everything's fine, the 12-day war is over, Cease fire. And then I'm declaring a peace. Yeah, I'm declaring peace.
Speaker 1:And then I'm declaring a peace yeah, I'm declaring peace and then I'm very disappointed that they did not agree with the ceasefire, and it is crazy to watch. I don't want to be in real time. I never criticize a president, even if it was Joe Biden or Barack Obama, george W Bush, I don't think he's wanting to create a war. I don't think he's wanting things to go badly for the United States. I think, in the moment where the decision turns out to be good or bad in hindsight, in the moment they're wanting to do the right thing based upon the knowledge that they have. And so, um and I and I I don't think anyone, I don't think Joe Biden was like I'm going to make Afghanistan the biggest snafu ever, like that is going to be something that mars his record. I don't think in the moment he said let's pull out of afghanistan, he thought it would turn into such a disaster, right, um, and so, in the moment, I think he thought he was doing the right thing. And, you know, based on all the information, would I have done a different thing? I don't know because I'm not there. I think that's the struggle I have in a real-time war scenario. I I'm just hesitant to criticize. The nice thing with trump is it feels like he's telegraphed everything. That's happened like he said he gave. Like you know, two months ago he warned iran I would shut down your nuclear program if I were you, and people have saber rattled in the past. But for him to be like that and then 60 days happens and then boom, israel starts bombing. He's like Matt told you and his response is like that. It's like well, should have listened. And then, in fact, like 48 hours before Israel bombed, the US got out all of their non-essential personnel from the Middle East. They got them all out of there 48 hours prior to Israel bombing them. So it's not like they didn't know. Yeah, and so then they bombed.
Speaker 1:And then, 12 days into it, trump's like I may bomb, I may not. Days into it, trump's like I may bomb, I may not. And he's like the fact that he could just walk around with that much I might bond them, I might not. It has so much swagger to it. Yeah, like say what you want about donald trump and his ego and his pride and all the things that you just sort of go along with him when you can walk around with that much swagger, that you're just like I could bomb him. You're, you're, you're, you are like setting up a fight and you're like I could punch in the face right now, but I might not. You are, it's like being at a uh, um, a bargaining table with your colt 45, just laying on the table, said I might shoot you if this goes badly, or I might not.
Speaker 2:Yeah, like and like. Who does that Like? Okay, so one is not a direct, you know kind of comparison or something, but like I think of. So you know, I've been reading through first Kings with my son.
Speaker 2:Uh, do you remember when the two women come to solomon and you know, with the, she stole her baby, died and she stole my baby, and you know whose baby is it? And he goes bring me a sword, let's chop it in half. You can each take home half the baby. And you know, you're just like that is the most insane response. And but you know, and then the, the one lady is like, yeah, that's fair, let's do it. And the other lady's like, no, give her the baby.
Speaker 2:I just, you know, and he's like, okay, that's the real mother, right. And you know, he didn't, he at no point was he ever really thinking of chopping the baby in half. But he just went this total insane route to as a psychological kind of um experiment, you know, to see how they would respond and then make a discerning judgment call after that. And um, and everyone marveled at his wisdom and knew that it was from God, right, and I was like man saying cut a baby in half with a sword led— it's pretty crazy and led people to marvel at—but you know he had something in mind. So anyway, it's not a direct comparison obviously but—.
Speaker 1:So Solomon had problems with women, donald Trump had—it's, they're the same guy, okay.
Speaker 2:I'm not saying that, but I am saying you know, like it. Sometimes it's like man, what you know, whether it's stuff with tariffs or stuff with israel or stuff you know is like is he just saying stuff, um, that he never intends to actually do, to try to get a certain you know like, absolutely I think he does that and how does it. It's very interesting to me.
Speaker 1:So when I was in, uh, in iraq. I know this is going to sound weird, but I had this mentality. I wanted my soldiers to think I was the craziest person on the battlefield right, and the reason I wanted them to think that I would do just about anything. Because if I said, hey, let's not do that, they'd be like oh, let's not. Like, oh, the commander doesn't want to do that and he'll go. He's aggressive and crazy and he'll do whatever. Um, so let's not do that.
Speaker 1:So I I think there's a part of that where you want everyone to sort of be on edge a little bit when it comes to you know, because to try to control people, control people that sounds like a weird way to put it, but to like control outcomes is like near impossible. Yeah, uh, you've got different countries with their different sets of advisors, but when, when donald trump is on the world stage, he is an absolute wild card. You don't know which way he's gonna go. And when he sends bombs over to iran, they're everyone's. Everybody was thinking he wants world war three, he won, and like they believe that because he's led them to believe that. And then all of a sudden he's yelling at BB Netanyahu like I ordered a ceasefire, what's?
Speaker 2:wrong with you. He's a child. I just heard a tease in the.
Speaker 1:Wild East, wild East In the Middle East. So I think it's sort of like that. He wants no one to be able to predict him, although you look at him and it's pretty predictable. I remember when he announced the tariffs, I remember saying to my wife there's no way these are going to last, because this is how he gets people to the table. And sure enough, he shut the tariffs down and then everybody's lined up at the table and he's working deals, and I think we have a deal with China now. We have a deal with Great Britain up at the table and he's working deals, and I think we have a deal with China now. We have a deal with Great Britain. We have a deal with all these different countries that is way more in our favor than it was before, and so that's why you know, when he talks about America first, that's what he's really doing. I think Tucker Carlson just went off on Donald Trump and his proxy, ted Cruz. I don't know. Did you see that?
Speaker 2:Yes, oh, yeah, so yeah we should get to that?
Speaker 1:Yeah, we should, because Ted Cruz God bless him did not do dispensationalists any favors. I well. It was a hard to watch interview. I was dying a thousand deaths as he just said what dispensationalists believe, not exactly Okay.
Speaker 2:So you and I don't agree on this point At some point. There's things we do agree on, yeah, and you're allowed to be wrong. It's cool, yeah.
Speaker 2:And so are you, and that's great, I think. You know, when we think about this situation spiritually like two things come to mind are theologically number one first, timothy pray for those in high positions. That includes Trump, that includes other US leaders, that includes Israel and Iran's leaders. Pray for those who are in high positions. 1 Timothy 2 says that we might live peaceful, quiet lives. We don't want war. Pray, honor those who are in authority over you, be subject to governing authorities and honor them. Romans 13, 1 Peter, 3 or 4?, 3., 3?, yeah, 2, 3, and 4. It's all about suffering, so, yeah, so honor, be subject to them, pray for them. And then also, you know, assessing these things from a theological standpoint, there's one aspect with the Ted Cruz thing, you know that you brought up where he said okay, if you have the exact quote.
Speaker 2:It was something along the lines of when I was growing up in Sunday school, they taught me that whoever blesses Israel will be blessed and whoever curses Israel will be cursed. And I want to be on the blessing side. It was something like that. If not, you know verbatim.
Speaker 1:Let me see if I can find it. I mean, it was with Tucker Carlson and I thought with Tucker Carlson it would be a little bit more of a layup. He goes. This is what he said. As a Christian growing up in Sunday school, I was taught from the Bible those who bless Israel will be blessed and those who curse Israel will be cursed. And from my perspective I'd rather be on the blessing side of things.
Speaker 2:You pretty much nailed it.
Speaker 1:Way to go. And then that's when Carlson asked him. So you should support the government, and he goes no, I should support Israel and I, honestly, I'm in the same spot with him. I would use a different verse, okay, I would point to Revelation and say is there an Israel in the end times? Yes, there is. What verse? Revelation 7, there's 144,000 Israelites.
Speaker 2:That's not very many. What's the population of Israel? That's not very many.
Speaker 1:What's the population of Israel?
Speaker 2:You know that's a good question. Now I feel like Tucker asking Ted Cruz the population of Iran.
Speaker 1:The population of Israel is probably like 10 million, right, but only 144,000 in Revelation. What say you? Well, they're the real Israel, clearly so, the real Israel.
Speaker 2:I nailed it.
Speaker 1:There's 7 million, 7.7 million, oh no, it's 10 million. It's 10 million, all right, so there's 10 million people there. 144,000 will be the genuine, true Israel.
Speaker 2:So you think that's a literal number and not a symbolic number? Very literal.
Speaker 1:Okay. Do you think there's 12 gates or is that symbolic of heaven? Are there 12 cornerstones or is that just symbolic?
Speaker 2:Sure 12 cornerstones, symbolic or literal either way, in that how you interpret those verses right there is going to be different than what it says about the salvation of a whole nation of people. So you're saying, though, though that it's literal um 144 000, and does that include um? So are there not already 144 000 jews? Absolutely?
Speaker 1:but I think you know the tribulation. It's not going to go well in old Israel.
Speaker 2:So what happens to the other 9.9 million? Listen?
Speaker 1:they're not all Jews. Okay, that might be the Christian ones, okay.
Speaker 2:So, but they are Jews, Okay Now. So, even when, so okay, this whole conversation, I feel like when the Bible refers to Israel, so like when the Bible refers to Israel, Israel can mean an ethnicity, you know it can mean a nation, which there's overlap there in the Bible, but not necessarily today in the way that we define nations and stuff today.
Speaker 2:And then there's a religion, jewish religion. So when you, when what's his name? Ted Cruz says that you know, whoever blesses Israel will be blessed, what is he talking about there that you agree with? Are you saying the religion, no, or the nation, or the ethnic Like? What do you mean?
Speaker 1:So this is the part where I think you and I do agree. Okay, Like that. The blessing of God will bless those who bless Israel and curse those who curse. That promise specifically isn't referencing for modern day Israel. That's referencing.
Speaker 2:Modern day. When you say Israel, you mean the nation, state of Israel, the nation state of Israel that's actually for Christians.
Speaker 1:I will go there with you, 100% Okay, because Because we are the children of Abraham by faith. Okay right, Galatians, Romans say that Pretty much the whole Bible says that, or at least the New Testament says that, so I am 1000% with you on that, however. So Ted Cruz is wrong, completely wrong.
Speaker 1:That's why it was painful to watch that, because it's like I know what he's trying to say, but it's clear he hasn't actually been to sunday school in a while or he hasn't studied up on it. Okay, I'm not gonna say he's been to school, but he definitely hasn't studied up on any of that, because that, clearly, that would not be the verse that you would go to. However, how about? So? This is the part where let's walk through Romans 11. Can we do that? Yeah, I asked then?
Speaker 1:has God rejected his people? By no means, by no means, for I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not rejected the people for whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the scripture says to Elijah, how he appeals to God against Israel? Now, here's what I want us to see. Israel was, back then, the chosen people of God that were inheriting the blessings, but they had forsaken God. And so, therefore, the people, the prophet, called out against the king of Israel, king Ahab, elijah, king Ahab, the big battle with Jezebel, right. So this is where I think. Sometimes we think now I'm about to mix metaphors a little bit, but to call out Israel for doing something wrong is okay to do. I still think we should bless Israel. Well, why? Why should we pray for? Bless, Israel.
Speaker 2:Which Israel are we talking about now?
Speaker 1:Okay, good call. So the nation state of Israel. I still think we should, because I still think there is an inheritance of some sort that God's going to restore to the nation of Israel in some way, and those 144,000 of each of those tribes. The reason why I think it's like an ancestral heritage, blood thing is because it gives each tribe that they're from.
Speaker 2:Is it all the tribes, though? No, okay.
Speaker 1:It's not Joseph and Ephraim get, it's like a three-parter in there, whereas I think Dan is left out. And that's where. Guess what was in Dan, the golden calf, guess what was in Dan.
Speaker 2:The golden calf, so it sounds a little symbolic to me. If you ask me so to answer your question from earlier, I do land on the symbolic side of it, no, no no, no, no, but it's not symbolic, it's actual descendants of Israel. I think there's Okay.
Speaker 1:You don't think there could be actual descendants of Israel? Yes, I do, and there's 144,000 of Israel. Yes, I do, and there's 144,000 of them that then fulfill what God calls, because all the rest of the country gets wiped out, because it's the tribulation.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I think it's a symbolic number. You know the 12 times 12, and it represents believing it just essentially represents believing Jews, those who are ethnically Jewish, who have put their faith in Christ and have been saved.
Speaker 1:Hold on, hold on.
Speaker 2:Which has nothing to do with a modern nation of Israel.
Speaker 1:But it could. But you're saying that for 2000,. You know, year 70,. Jerusalem gets eradicated by the Romans.
Speaker 2:And at that point there's no longer a nation of Israel.
Speaker 1:Absolutely, absolutely. But in 1948, somehow, israel comes out of nowhere, out of the Holocaust, where. Why are all these Jews getting personally attacked and destroyed? And they still hang around. Do you not think there's?
Speaker 2:God's favor. A little bit on that. I think it has nothing to do with—I think all of us exist by God's favor. Fair enough, every nation. But there's not. You can't just say it's a coincidence, but to take up the name Israel, which, as you said, 70 AD, yeah, there's the nation, the temple, the walls everything destroyed?
Speaker 2:There's no more king on the throne. This is now the old covenant, fulfilled and made obsolete by Christ. Agreed, 100% Okay. Now you know, with his death and resurrection, the new covenant is the covenant of grace right. The new covenant is God's covenant people. Now that includes all those who you know came, who lived before Christ but put their faith in the coming Messiah. Right. That includes all those you know even to this day who put their faith in Jesus. God's covenant people is the new covenant. Right day. Who put their faith in Jesus, god's covenant people is the new covenant. So what that means is that God has no other covenant with another nation, another people. All of his promises that he made to Israel are received by those who have faith in the chosen one of Israel, jesus Christ.
Speaker 1:But this is where I go, to Romans 11. So too, at the present time, there is a remnant chosen by grace. Yes, and he's referring back—.
Speaker 2:The covenant of grace believing Jews who are ethnically Jewish but believe in Jesus.
Speaker 1:So that's why, I think, eventually, you're going to have believing Jews of the nation of Israel, and so that's why they're inextricably linked is because they're going to be in Israel, because they are Jews. That's where they've been called back to, because the diaspora has returned to Israel, and so therefore, I think there is favor upon Israel as they are in Revelation, whereas the United States is not Just throwing that out there.
Speaker 2:Well, I would say United States is in Revelation in that it refers to all the nations of the world.
Speaker 1:Fair enough, okay, fair enough and God can come back. As one who believes in imminency, I believe God can come back, or Jesus can come back at any time, any place, any moment. So yes, the doctrine of imminency would say the US could be in there as all nations.
Speaker 2:Yeah, but does God? Would you say that God has a special purpose for modern Israel? Yes, based on what?
Speaker 1:Based upon. There's still a remnant based upon Revelation 7, that God is going to.
Speaker 2:I mean it's going to be, but that remnant there. But do you?
Speaker 1:think it's going to be in Jerusalem when he talks about, in Jerusalem, the two witnesses on the street. Is it going to be in Jerusalem when the temple is rebuilt? Do you think it's going to be built where the temple should be, at the Dome of the Rock? Oh man, come on. What do you think? I just want to know, all symbolic, yes, oh Listen, ladies and gentlemen, do not let Holland lead you astray. Okay, yeah, so you think, okay, okay. So who is from daniel, who is in, uh, the abomination of desecration, declaring himself to be god, in the middle of the temple?
Speaker 2:this is going to be a long conversation of. We are in very different places here where I believe some of these things have already happened and taken place, so you would go with. That was Titus, yes.
Speaker 1:It's an unfortunate name for my son, but it's not that's the bad one. The good one is in the book of Titus.
Speaker 2:Yes.
Speaker 1:That's the one he's named after, Right? Yeah, yeah, so Titus is Titus Vespian, I think, or something like that. Anyway, he's the one that destroyed Jerusalem, sacked it, poured pig's blood all over the place, and Rome is rule here.
Speaker 2:Yes, and then the destruction that was prophesied 70 AD fulfillment of that was prophesied, you know, 70 AD fulfillment of that, just massive Roman. You know, the Roman attack and siege of Jerusalem destroying everything. You know, josephus I think it was is the one who said you know, millions of Jewish people died during that, except for those who fleed, who were dispersed, you know. And so a lot of the things Jesus prophesied about coming destruction in Jerusalem were fulfilled.
Speaker 1:I'm okay with it being a double fulfillment.
Speaker 2:Yeah, the final fulfillment. You know, we're obviously continuing in the end times or the last days now, where there's persecution from the world, and we're awaiting the return of Jesus. So not saying that everything has been fulfilled. Obviously we're still awaiting the return of Jesus and the resurrection of the dead. But this is where you and I kind of diverge. And you believe in the rapture and the literal seven years of tribulation. Jesus comes back, raptures, the church, leaves again, and then seven years of tribulation, right.
Speaker 1:No, no, three and a half years of the start of the tribulation. I think it's great. Then he stands in the middle of the declared self-begotten and then you have the next persecution of the last three and a half years. Jesus finally comes at the end of that, yeah.
Speaker 2:So to me it's not a big deal to really go at it on end times, eschatology, stuff, but the relevant piece was like who is Israel? And is Ted Cruz right that we have a biblical obligation to support the modern nation of Israel based on the Bible? And that's where I would go. I say no, we have no obligation to support the modern state of Israel. We do have an obligation to support the Israel of God, the true Israel, the house of Israel, the sons of Abraham, which is those who believe in Jesus, and that's not a replacement. Some people will call it like replacement. It's. That has always been true Israel. True Israel has always been those who have faith in the Messiah.
Speaker 1:And salvation is always by grace, through faith, exactly From Genesis 15, where he looked at the stars and he believed, and God credited to him his righteousness.
Speaker 2:So God has always been faithful to his promise to save true Israel, those who believe in the Messiah Jesus.
Speaker 1:Christ. I don't think you and I disagree. I just think the weird part—and maybe this is my nuance—I think God brought back Israel for the purpose of the tribulation period and so you know, whoever brings peace to the world probably be centered himself in Jerusalem, declare himself to be God. All that sort of insanity, what do you? So you're thinking that are we in the the tribulation already happened or we're in it? Are we in the tribulation already happened or we're in it? Are we in it, yeah, or is it just going to get worse and worse, or is it going to get better and better? So they've already been through the tribulation and now we're in the millennial kingdom and things are getting better and better until Jesus one day steps off the cloud onto the throne.
Speaker 2:Yes, so post-mill, meaning the tribulation that the 70 AD—.
Speaker 2:Was already fulfilled and at the same time, there is now the living out of the last days, which is essentially the spread of the church throughout the world. As the gospel is proclaimed to all nations, we make disciples of all nations. This is, you know all of that is the kingdom of God expanding throughout the earth, right, and therefore the kingdom of Jesus, you know, jesus reigning that, expanding throughout the earth as we make disciples, disciple the nations. And so, as we do that, there is persecution and tribulation and trials that you face from the world and at the same time, you can say that it is getting worse and worse in some ways, and that as the church spreads, the church is persecuted more because the church is bigger and reaching more places, but also it's getting better and better. In the fact that the church is reaching more places, there's more Christians now than there ever has been. So in some sense of it, things are better and better. The more disciples are made, the more churches are planted, the more the world is reached for Christ. Things are getting better.
Speaker 2:Obviously, the church has a positive influence on the culture around it as it spreads, and the church will always be, since not every single person is going to be a believer, there's always going to be those who reject the church and persecute the church. So persecutions will continue until Jesus comes back. Fair enough, okay, does that make sense? Yeah, it does. I know we're different on that.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I think the hard part for me is just like looking at the world. Like I'm saying, in 10 years people are going to be walking around with their robot friends and like it's going to be a weird world. You heard it here first. Folks Like Mark Zuckerberg's stated goal is that you would have more AI friends than real friends.
Speaker 2:Right, have more ai friends than real friends, right, and to me, like we're now, do you think there's going to be more christians on planet earth 10 years from now than today? Yes, okay, is that better or worse for planet earth?
Speaker 1:better, all right, so we're on the same page, but I think the persecution will get. At some point it'll get worse. As someone, the church triumphs, no matter what right it does. The church triumphs.
Speaker 2:I will build my church. The gates of hell will not stand against it.
Speaker 1:Amen, but there might be a part where, when the restrainer, holy Spirit, is sucked out of the world because all of his saints are taken out, because it's not like the Holy Spirit is just like an energy force roaming around, it's in people, he's in people and so, therefore, when he raptures his spirit out and the restrainer is removed, then you're going to have unfettered evil during that seven-year tribulation period.
Speaker 2:Yeah, that's where we. I just I don't think that that's going to happen.
Speaker 1:The rapture you know we're going to be preaching through 2 Thessalonians very soon. Love that, and we will, maybe not this next year, because it doesn't really fit with the direction I'm going with. Worship, personal worship, but maybe it does, Maybe it's missional worship. There you go. So therefore you need to pray for everyone to get raptured. Okay.
Speaker 2:So it's clear. If anyone's like, what do you mean? It says in Thessalonians that it says that Jesus will return and meet everybody in the air and we will meet him in the air. And so dispensationalists take that to mean that we will get raptured, raptured, zapped up into heaven Out of the earth, uh-huh, to avoid the suffering of the tribulation. Right, because double jeopardy Jesus already paid for my sin. Boom.
Speaker 1:That doesn't mean that you never experienced suffering though, but it does mean you don't experience God's wrath, and God's wrath was coming on the earth right through all the different tribulations that God unleashed from hell. So therefore, you don't get double jeopardy. Jesus already paid it.
Speaker 2:Paid it all. God's wrath can come and bring suffering to those who are under his judgment and collaterally suffering to those who are under his grace, and yet experience that suffering in a way that refines their faith. But it's not Judgment can have a dual purpose in unbelievers and believers' lives.
Speaker 1:Right, but with it would be God's wrath direct, like if they were experiencing on the receiving end of God's wrath. Then what did Jesus die on the cross for? He took on the wrath of God. That's why I think those believers are still. They won't experience God's wrath in that way.
Speaker 2:It's kind of two different senses of God's wrath, though Temporally in the physical world, versus eternally His condemnation in hell. Sure, I'm not—, Jesus saves us from God's condemnation in hell and eternal torment, and yet we still experience temporal physical suffering in this world.
Speaker 1:But that's our own fault. This is where.
Speaker 2:Not necessarily. Job experienced it when it wasn't of any fault of his. He wasn't.
Speaker 1:Okay, God did say he was innocent. However, he didn't have Jesus die on the cross for him yet. And in Job he does point to someone dying in our place as a substitute. Okay, well, I didn't even get to get—. Hold on, real quick, real quick, All right, all right, Whoa whoa, whoa, Real quick.
Speaker 2:The non-dispensational view of meeting Jesus in the air is that we just like when you know someone comes in the door and you go, oh, and you go and meet them at the door and you welcome them into your house. Yeah, the same idea Jesus used in the parable. When the groom arrives, you know, and they go and meet him there and escort him in for the wedding ceremony. Yeah, that's what we think is happening we meet Jesus in the air and welcome him down for the final judgment. Okay.
Speaker 1:So I like that, but what do you think?
Speaker 2:it means, that's the other view.
Speaker 1:The for the mystery of lawlessness is already at work. Only he who now restrains it will do so until he is out of the way. That's why I'm like that is the part of the Holy Spirit has to be out of the way for unrestrained evil to take over the earth and there will be a day when there aren't any Christians on the planet and then they will come to faith through, probably, the Listen to Pastor Plex podcast with Alan Gregg. Let's be sitting there going.
Speaker 2:What do we do?
Speaker 1:Whoa, what must I do to be saved? And then bam hey, maybe, maybe. Hey, can I say this one thing? I'm going to go off the dispensational rails for a second, but Trump said something that I thought was interesting. Did you hear him at the press conference? I love you God, we love you God. It was very personal.
Speaker 2:And God bless Israel, god bless Iran, god bless America. We love you, god. That was interesting.
Speaker 1:Yeah, did you think that that was? What was that? I don't know, I don't know.
Speaker 1:He wants God to bless everybody, I agree, but like we love you God, that is a very. That was an unscripted that came from the heart, so I don't know if I'm saying he's a Christian or not, but man, that was like that's what that's the way, like you know, know, your kid talks when in you know, like in their prayers, yeah, and I felt like that was very childlike faith, which I thought was really good of him to kind of go in that direction so I don't know if that's the say that says anything about salvation, but I did appreciate the we love you, god.
Speaker 1:I think he was talking to god in that moment, man, I hope so.
Speaker 2:I mean, yeah, I think only God knows his heart, yeah, for sure. But yeah, I would—so my view, you know, as a post-millennial I expect the Great Commission to be fulfilled, yeah, and that we make disciples of all nations. And that part of that is we see many national leaders come to faith in Christ and see many, many Christian nations throughout the world giving favor to the church.
Speaker 1:I also believe that all nations will receive Christ. Okay, yeah, I think we're on the same page, like that's Bible. You can't deny that All right.
Speaker 2:I mean, is that the classic dispensational view?
Speaker 1:Yeah, because at any moment all nations could believe Okay, through one, like you know, he can make anyone's heart change in any given moment. Boom, boom, boom boom.
Speaker 2:So this is a for the listeners who are like oh no, chris and Holland don't agree. We would categorize this as a tertiary.
Speaker 1:Tertiary. This is what you're supposed to debate about. This is what, if you were in England, you'd be at the pub, and this is the stuff you debate no-transcript. Like sometimes you know I'll be honest. Like do I always agree with my own view? Probably not Just because I'm like Holland has some good arguments and sometimes where I'm just like I haven't thought about it that way.
Speaker 2:I feel like there's a hole in every eschatology, or else there would just be one eschatology. Anyway, that's good. I bring that up to say. You know, when it comes to the tertiary things that are not essential for salvation or even essential for church unity, like, debate them and challenge each other and grow and don't feel like you have to lock into something and never change. So like, my view on eschatology is different now than it was 10 years ago and I'm always trying to learn and study. 10 years ago, whatever you told me to be then I started, you know, like, discerning for yourself, yeah, reading the bible and stuff like that. All right, how about?
Speaker 1:this. How about this? Let's go to an issue that we have. Holland has been, uh. Let's go to an issue that we have. Holland has been, uh, I say quiet, because usually Holland is a social media gangster, um, but recently I've been engaging in some conversations with some people online.
Speaker 1:Okay and uh, there, this is where I'm now we're taking away left turn, but I do think it's important to talk about, like this is where, on some issues that we do agree on is like the sanctity of marriage, traditional roles for men and women. That is not just a you're trying to keep the man or the woman in this case down. This is actually God's design, god's order and for our good, and that doesn't save you living traditional man woman roles, but it is something we should conform to after we have been saved. Would that be a good way to put that? Amen, yeah.
Speaker 1:And so I think one of the things that I've noticed is, I think, conservative Christians who, in the past, I would be one of these who would say I'm not going to be a keyboard warrior, I'm not going to engage when people say stuff that I completely disagree with, but now I feel like if I don't say something and I think you would agree with this. If I don't say something, then who is? If all you hear is your echo chamber, and especially as people deconstruct their faith and sort of walk away and then we just sit there and go all right, see ya, I think to me there's a part of us that's required to kind of lean into that stuff, especially if they're making a case for why homosexuality or why nontraditional marriage is okay. I think that's for me something very important for us to sort of lean into as something we do agree on as a primary doctrine and a secondary doctrine. Wouldn't you agree?
Speaker 2:Yeah, what's the question? Should we engage online about that stuff?
Speaker 1:And how much should we? Because we're arguing for fun here. But what about issues that matter, like, how much should we engage that, especially with the, the divisiveness, polarization of things? What matters?
Speaker 2:so I think number one, most of your engagement and you know the way that you live your life and conduct your ministry and study theology should be in person, in real life, in a real community, where you actually have legitimate community with people. But online is an area where exchange of ideas and it's kind of like a public, a public square in a sense, where, um, people make truth claims, right, and what's interesting about it is like a place, like you know, if you look at, like Facebook or X, right, facebook was really came around, you know, to help college students meet and share pictures and, um, you know, get to know people on your campus, eventually involved, if evolved into, you know, a place to share photos and connect socially, social media connection, um, and so it's a place where, um, you know, you, I want to see my cousin's baby and how are they doing? You know, see pictures of my friend's trip to, whatever, right, egypt, and you know, like, cool stuff like that. But then you have, you know, x, which was, you know, formerly Twitter, that used to just kind of posting short things, news ideas. It was punchy short, you know, not long posts, not, uh, not as visual like Instagram, just more about like uh, words, and so X tends to be a much more kind of like volatile place.
Speaker 2:I think it is.
Speaker 2:It is more less about like hey, look at these cute pictures of me and my family and more about the um, uh, debating ideas and stuff like that. But it very much happens on Facebook and I think on Facebook it tends to be taken way more personally because it's supposed to be this more kind of personal social place, and so even just thinking about that going where do you engage, stuff I post on X is not necessarily the same stuff that I'll post on Facebook, where you know I'll post. If I'm going to post pictures about, you know, my kids drawing that they drew me for father's day, you know I maybe I'll post that on X, but more that's more of a Facebook thing. Um, if I'm going to, you know like, have a six part article on this very you know um controversial theological thing where I want to debate with people, I'm probably not going to do that on Facebook with my you know the people who just want to see pictures that my kids drew me, um, but from time to time someone else will post something on Facebook and I think it's a.
Speaker 2:As a pastor, you're a, you're a guardian of, of doctrine Um, and you, you're responsible for your flock, and so you can't be responsible for everyone, but when you know that people in your church are seeing certain things online.
Speaker 2:You want to protect them from something that might harm their soul, and so I think there is a wise and good way to engage online, not even necessarily if the person that you're debating is going to listen, but for the people who are watching to hear. Are they right? You know, how do you respond to that? What's a Christian, biblical response to this thing? That seems wrong in one way but, you know, is very popular, or maybe kind of seems right or compassionate in another way. How do I respond to this?
Speaker 2:I think a pastor, you know, can weigh in on those things wisely with you know, patience. Second, Timothy, you know, speaks to this, as you know, to be respectful with your opponents, to be gentle, saying perhaps God may grant them repentance, right, and at the same time, if it's someone who's claiming to be a teacher, though now there's Jesus and John the Baptist, Paul when it came to addressing teachers, they were very sharp. They were not gentle with wolves, they were not gentle with people who were in a position of teaching. So I think, depending on who you're talking to and what the subject matter is, it takes a lot of wisdom to know. Is this a time to be gentle and softly redirect. Is this a time to draw a hard line and say, hey, no, if you're leading people astray, you cannot, you know, go that direction?
Speaker 1:So I think it takes a lot of wisdom, right, I just think look back to is there a history for this public debates? Clearly there is. Yeah, you know Agrippa and Paul whenever he was in prison and he said will you persuade me? In this short a time Did I too become a Christian? That was a public debate. I don't know if Paul thought he was going to convert him, but there's a lot of people watching.
Speaker 1:He wanted to yeah sure, and I mean I don't think you engage it without that. But I think the greater scope of that is he is presenting the idea so that the public square were here or in, um, uh, act 17, with uh in athens or uh, I just think, even beyond, uh, well, even even jude, of like, hey, there's false teachers out there and you've got to stop. Contend for the faith, yeah, and for the faith there's. There's got to be a can, a contending for the faith, not so that, um, it's so that people don't get led astray. I think, as I was thinking about you know, you talked this morning in our men's group about Proverbs 7, about how men are led astray by a woman. But men can be led astray by an idea that sounds really good, sounds like there's going to be life, but it actually leads to death.
Speaker 1:I just also think about, like you know, in the early days of the Christian church. I think of Justin Martyr. Just one guy pops up the public debates. You know he would write against heresies, against Crescens. Is that Martyr or Irenaeus?
Speaker 1:Yeah, but I think he wrote yeah, maybe one of the guys, but I know that Martyr did a bunch of debates with Crescens the cynic philosopher, and and that ended up getting him killed because Crescens got jealous of Justin Martyr's debate skills and then had him killed.
Speaker 2:Yeah, against heresies was Irenaeus, but yes, both of those examples are saying they didn't have social media back then.
Speaker 1:What was the public?
Speaker 2:swear. That was their social media was writing these letters, writing these books. You think of Martin Luther and the 95 theses. You know the reformation of that was going public, right? So that was the social media of the day. Before you doom scrolled, you went to the public square and just listened, yeah and uh. You know these were guys. You know writing things against her.
Speaker 2:They had councils that convened where they would say, hey, this teacher is a false teacher, he's a heretic. If he doesn't repent, you know, we're putting him out of the church and doctrine and theology Paul told Timothy you know, guard your teaching and guard your life. Watch your life, your soul, you know the way that you live and watch your teaching, and those things go hand in hand. Your teaching will influence your life and lead your life, whether for better or for worse. So it's an important thing and I think sometimes people think, oh, to be a Christian or to be a pastor.
Speaker 2:You just, you know there's no room for confronting people about things when in reality, I'm just like what Bible are you reading, right? What Jesus are you following, if not a Jesus who confronted the Pharisees left and right and, you know, left them confounded at his with his rebukes, and some repented and some repented. Nicodemus was a Pharisee. You have the apostle Paul, you Paul. You have Jewish leaders who did turn. You have and in the future, there'll be 144,000 of them there you go If there's not already.
Speaker 2:You have not only them turning, though, but you have Jesus rebuking the Pharisees for their false doctrine or their hypocrisy. But then you have the onlookers who see it and go. Man, he teaches with authority, and they could see there was something different about Jesus. So, even if he didn't convert the people he confronted, people who were witnessing it got to see I'm going to follow Jesus instead of the Pharisees. So that's were witnessing it got to see I'm going to follow Jesus instead of the Pharisees. So that's part of it on social media, too, is you might be debating with someone about something and you don't want to do it all the time. You got to choose your battles, but when it's wise, when it's prudential, you might not convert the person that you are debating, but you might help the other people who are watching know how to biblically handle this.
Speaker 1:And that's why you want to be gentle, yes, respectful, because if you're not, you come off with the anti God like you'd be, like okay, that's exactly what I knew you would do you. You fall right into the trap of um someone that's that they're hoping you would kind of go that way, and then they don't say anything. They've won the argument.
Speaker 2:Avoid ad hominem things just attacking the person, attacking them, trying to mock them with petty insults, stuff that's just like teenage boy petty stuff, obviously. Don't do that. But that doesn't mean that there's no room for being firm and direct and saying, hey, this is not. You've stepped outside of the bounds of the faith If you go this direction. What you've said is you know, it's heretical, it's a false teaching, you need to repent, um, and you can say that with, with, uh, firmness and with love and compassion.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I almost feel like in my head I need to have four layers of doctrine. I know this, I've been thinking a lot about this lately, so this might come out weird because I've been thinking about it and haven't actually processed it. So hang with me. Primary doctrine, which would be like salvation by grace, through faith Jesus is the only way Bible is infallible. That kind of stuff. Secondary doctrines the only way Bible is infallible, that kind of stuff. Secondary doctrines, distinctives for our church, Like we believe in male elders, male pastors, male leadership, headship in the home, headship in the home, okay. Then tertiary issues, like eschatology, homeschool or public school, like what are the things that we can debate about it? Those are, and it's okay to debate and it's okay to question it. And then quaternary issues, which I feel like would be like uh, of of, like changing the definition of sin, so say, like homosexuality is um affirmed by god, like I think that's something, that that's something to be actively against, because getting at the very core of of the image of God. Did you say quadrenary?
Speaker 2:Quadrenary, the fourth, that's the word for that.
Speaker 1:I don't know.
Speaker 2:I'm going to take your word for it. I don't know, but it's so. Okay, my question, though, is like primary, secondary, tertiary, each one is going down in priority, right, but then when you get to this quadrenary, it sounds like Quadrenary, right, but then when you get to this quad quadrenary, it sounds like you're quadrenary Nice. All right, you got it. Uh, it might be quaternary, quaternary, quaternary, quaternary but it sounds like I mean, when you're saying changing the definition of sin, I go. Well, that's a pretty big deal.
Speaker 1:It goes right back up to the first one, right? Is that what?
Speaker 2:you're saying yeah, like to me, I would go if you're changing, if it's, if it's something that is definitionally sin, that's kind of like primary, that's not even. That's not even what.
Speaker 1:I guess, what am I against? I don't. I think a lot.
Speaker 2:So another category for like things that should be actively opposed. There you go.
Speaker 1:Okay, that might be like actively oppose quaternary, actively opposed. There you go, okay, thank you. That might be like actively oppose um quaternary issues which are the things that affect the primary issues. Probably a bit and that might be, you know, over the top, but I think the the homosexuality stuff is something I want to be. I can't like I'm not in fellowship with churches that are gay affirming.
Speaker 2:Yeah, yeah, saying. I see what you mean.
Speaker 1:Um, is that? That might be something I've just been processing and I need to kind of really process it more, but I think that's where I go to. There's a concern I have that we're we can be so nice that we're like no, that is actively, you are harming people. Yeah, um, actively, you are harming people.
Speaker 2:Yeah, it's interesting because typically, like the primary category, the primary bucket was like Apostles' Creed type stuff.
Speaker 1:But quaternary people affirm the Apostles' Creed, but then still do that.
Speaker 2:Yeah, because in the early days of Christianity the theological crises were doctrine of God, doctrine of Christ, very spiritual things of the two natures of Christ, and does he have one will or two wills? And does God you know that kind of stuff of really sorting out Christology and Trinitarian theology. That kind of stuff of really sorting out Christology and Trinitarian theology, the theological crises of today, a lot of people one don't know or care about some of those types of things.
Speaker 2:I think they're anthropological as opposed to— Very much Anthropological more about who we are, what it means to be male and female. What marriage is what? Um, uh, uh, yeah, what, what it looks like to lead your home, to lead a church, to lead a nation very like earthy um things as opposed to heavenly, spiritual things, pneumatological or Christological, yeah, um, and so that's uh, that's really interesting because you don't have councils and creeds that really address a lot of those things. There were early councils that addressed things like women preaching and pastoring, but they didn't receive nearly as much attention. It was kind of like that wasn't really a cultural battle back then, whereas today it's like it is the battlefield. A cultural battle back then, whereas today it's like it is the battlefield.
Speaker 2:What does it mean to be male and female? Who you know? Um, yeah, marriage, sex, um, leadership of home, church and nation all of that stuff Um, things that people used to know intuitively, things that essentially basically, um, go with the grain of nature, more natural things, um, uh. We live in a world today that essentially rejects nature and nature's God, um, and wants to go in the other direction. All the Genesis one and two, stuff of like be fruitful and multiply, um, you know. Uh, god created us male and female. Um, we're like questioning and rejecting all that stuff today as opposed to like. Um, does God have you know? As opposed to like. Does God have you know questions about like the persons or essence of God, so that it's like we kind of need a new creed, a new yeah, you know you have like the Nicene Creed, the Apostles Creed.
Speaker 1:It's kind of like you need a new creed for today that affirms God's teaching about gender and sexuality and marriage and headship, and I think there's been several attempts at that right.
Speaker 2:Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. You know they created the Danvers statement back in 87, 88 that essentially attempted to do that. It's not necessarily like. It was rejected by a lot of people who were egalitarians and feminists and disagreed with it. You know, and they also came out with one I think it's the Nashville Statement that has to do more with homosexuality, transgenderism. So you have, that's like, you know, an organization that's trying to do that, but it's not necessarily like widely adopted Right and I think that's what's hard, because this is what stinks about not being part of the Catholic Church anymore.
Speaker 1:It's like you couldn't have a doctrine that hit all across the globe, but that was for the right reasons, yeah.
Speaker 2:It's unfortunate.
Speaker 1:Church is hard. Yeah, church is hard. It's wild how difficult church has been for thousands and thousands of years, yet it keeps growing. It keeps growing and it keeps moving, that even when there's sharp disagreements between Barnabas and Saul, the church still expands and that's unfortunate, but I think it's part of God's plan to reach the world. Although I don't think he's I don't know if the right word is, I don't think he's honored by those breakups, but I do think he allows them for his glory, yeah he works them for good.
Speaker 2:Yeah, aiming for unity, which is why what's tough? People say, like man, doctrine divides, and so let's just kind of relax the doctrine a little bit so that we can all be together. But it doesn't work. Um, doctrine does divide, and it's meant to divide truth from error. Um, for the good of the church, um, but what happens is, you know, um, you do get some of these splits and factions and schisms and things that are like man it's not what you want.
Speaker 2:You want everyone to be one, but at the same time, you can't compromise on truth, and so yeah it's worth fighting for and worth praying for, though it is definitely worth it.
Speaker 1:Hey, if you've got any questions, you can text us in at 737-231-0605. We would love to hear from you. We do faith, culture and everything in between. Pastor Hall and I love to talk about this stuff and we'd love to talk about your stuff, so send in those questions from our house to yours. Have an awesome week of worship.