You're listening to KFI A M six forty on demand. Brett, Welcome to
the Jesus Christ Show. Hello Jesus, how are you? I am well,
Brett? How are you? Oh? I'm pretty good. Okay,
good to hear. And you're very chipper for this time of day. Well,
I work nights. Oh excellent. So you're coming, you're coming down,
ending your day? Coming down? Yeah? How can I help you?
All? Right? Well, I have a would you consider the God
of the Bible good? Well, yes, well I'm kind of partial to
that. I assume you would have thought that I'd answer that it would be
weird for this shows the question is when an atheist will point to something in
the Bible and say that that is a sign of God's immorality, that is
a sign of God being evil. Yes, then they will say that you
simply cannot judge God. But by saying that God is good, you are
also making a judgment absolutely, judge absolutely, and that would be that would
be of fallacy for the Christian to put themselves in that kind of argumentation.
It's it's it's not the proper way to look at it. Then, how
then, how can you tell that God is good? Okay, Well,
there's a couple of things going on here. First, uh, when whenever
you are in a situation like this, defining your terms is important. So
defining what judgment is is important because there is a difference between judgment. You're
the same way, Brett, You're exactly the same way. If I came
up to you and I said I don't like the way you did X,
Y and Z, you'd say, oh, you know what, I don't
want you to judge me. But if I came up to you and said,
wow, that was really great that what you did, Brett, you
wouldn't go, I don't want you to judge me. So it's it's it's
important to understand what judgment means in that context. When scripture talks about uh,
well, scripture, when it talks about thou shalt not judge, lest
ye be judged, it's talking about thinking that you're better than somebody, or
being condescending in a way that you aren't looking or taking an account the things
that you do in life. You're merely looking outwardly constantly at what everyone else
does. It's not about justice. Of course, you're to judge. Christians
should judge. Everyone should judge. I'm not saying the judgment is wrong.
I'm saying if you're telling the atheist that they cannot judge judge God bad,
then you can also not call him good. Yes, which brings me to
my second point. So that was just about defining the term about judgment what
judgment is. Secondly, there's a qualifier that's missing in that statement from the
Christian which is why I have a problem with it, and that is that
there are certain things that you can't judge God above God. Going back to
my definition about being outside of the judgment, So if you're constantly judging others
and not looking at yourself, there's a problem. The problem, no,
I'm saying with let's let's take it. It's not a personal thing. That
we're looking at the greater theological or philosophical ramifications of that statement. So in
this case, somebody is saying you can't judge God is not actually actually correct.
That's that's not correct. You can't oversee judgment upon God. Man is
not high enough. You can't actually enforce that judgment exactly. So really what
you're doing is you can make observations about God and you can see those things
in God but you can't judge God's decisions. So that's what the statement needs.
It needs more qualifiers to understand what kind of judgment you're doing. You
can't sit in judgment of God. So for God to actually exist, yes,
then you could not. He would have all the powers, so you
could not actually say You could say that he was wrong all you wanted,
but it wouldn't matter exactly if it because God, God, by definition,
is a transcendent so if it trans respect well that's it's you know, a
little anthropomorphic on your part if you want to apply those human attributes and you
want to say, oh, that seems this way to you, but really
you're still have to pull it down to a human element. A mob boss
is just a human who thinks he's better than a human. God is better
than a human, so hold over you, you cannot. They are just
doing whatever they feel like. There is no choice in the matter. No,
but there's a righteousness to it. A mob boss has their own wants.
Well, because God is justice. There's a difference. Now you're trying
to parse the fact that there are human beings that abuse that God is justice.
I'm sorry, what makes you think that God is justice? Well,
the show is that Jesus Christ show would come from the generic Judeo Christian priests.
You got to give me that one a little bit. Pardon, you
got to give me that one. I mean, the show, it pretty
much lays it out in the in the name there, it's right there for
everyone to see. I'm going to come from. I'm going to tell you
that there are things not only in scripture, but outside of scripture that point
to the justice and the love of God. As a matter of fact,
Brett, you telling me that there are things that are good or bad in
this world comes from where? Why do you judge what's good or bad?
Why do you why do you say something's good or something's bad in life?
For you, things that are harmful and things that are beneficial. No,
no, no, no, no, no no no. That's that's hedonism.
You don't believe that because they're who no, no, no, not
hethism, not hedonism. If I slam my hand, this idea that we
can only judge things wrong because there's some kind of ultimate standard we're judging against
is silly. Okay, you tell me my hand in a car door that
hurts, Okay, But I'm not seeing some kind of ultimate standard of non
hurt. Okay, So everything that hurts is bad depending on how depending on
how it goes is everything is everything that causes pain bad? Is everything that
causes pleasure good? Okay? So that's a that's a lousy standard. Wouldn't
you say? I did not say that, sir? Okay? So is
pleasure good? Pleasure can be good, It can be good. So when
does pleasure become So when does pleasure become bad? When it becomes harmful to
you? And what is harm if you just sit there having pleasure all day
long? And what is harm if you just sit there with just pleasure all
day long and start to ignore things that you need, start to ignore things
that are more beneficial towards you? Says who says who? Well says reality
says reality? And what context says who? What do you? You're you're
using circular reasoning as you go back and say, well, if it's pleasure
but only pleasure sometimes, sir, if you sit there shooting up on drugs
all day long, you will feel pleasure, but at the same time you're
doing pyisical damage to your body. What if you what if you shoot up?
What if you shoot up only partial during the day, so maybe six
hours and you're still doing damage to your body. That's sort of your decision.
What kind of damage. Now, if you cut open a person,
does that cause damage to them? Technically yes, it depends on what your
what your point is. That's that's when I'm saying, is that you keep
adding a qualifier to it. So there is no standard for what is good
or bad. You have to keep judging whether it's good or bad based on
what you think is good or bad, or pleasurable or harmful. There is
no universal what is pleasurable or harmful unless you're the one that's You kind of
keep saying, well, I deem this pleasurable, I deem this harmful.
But who does that society? We get together in gotcha. It's so it's
the society that decides what's good and bad. Societies generally do yes, okay.
Are there societies that do things that are bad? Yes? Okay,
Then who judges that society the people in that society. No, because they're
the ones doing it bad. They didn't, you know, not see Germany
didn't self regulate, okay, and that so that society, that society did
not self regulate who regulated them, the greater society of the world. I
see. So as long as the world sees it as okay, then it's
okay. I cannot give you an ultimate standard. No you can't. That's
the point, Brett. That's what I want you to say. You're obviously
not stupid, so I want you to see that all you do is push
it upon another chain link, another chain link, because this infinite regression of
maybe this, maybe that, and maybe this, and that's not how it
works. Eventually, you have to get to a place outside of that society
to make that judgment. A can in a standard measuring rod, because you
can't just say an inch is an inch as an inch. Somebody has to
agree on that, and it has to be outside of the inch. The
measurement tool can't be the ultimate measuring tool because it's temporal. It's not it's
not infinite, and that's what you're looking for, what you need. That
is what defines it. And we could have been here all day, Brett,
and you would have had to come up with one more reason. Whereas
the theist doesn't. It stops at God, God alone, the transcendent lawgiver,
who is always in the law Wannie, Welcome to the Jesus Christ Show.
Good morning, Jesus. I have a question for you. Okay.
I read a book called The Appointment with You Always, and it was talking
about the established and it's meant that the established established originally was established on the
moon cycles, and that the reason that it was changing was because of commercially
applies, because of because of what commercial it applies, that the merchant wanted
to establish a certain day like this say oh God, okay, well,
no, that's false. Now your phone's a little muddy there, so I'm
going to put you on hold because it's kind of hard to understand, and
I'm guessing that the listeners having a hard time understanding. So essentially, you're
asking about the Sabbath and that the Sabbath was changed. No, the Sabbath
was established in Genesis, chapter two, verse two, and it says by
the seventh day God completed his work which his hands had done, and he
rested on the seventh day from all of his work which he had done.
There's the first sign of the Sabbath. Sabbath is the Hebrew word shabbat by
the word for sabbath and the Greek word Sabatan. They both mean to rest
from labor. That's what it means. So that's where it comes from.
And you find it also in the Ten Commandments. You see it in Exodus
twenty eight through eleven. But a lot of people get the too confused between
the Sabbath, which is Saturday, and they get that confused with the Christian
day of rest after the Resurrection, which is Sunday. Okay, it's referred
to as the Lord's Day, So the Sabbath is still on Saturday. The
Lord's Day is on Sunday. The majority of Christians practice their faith and rest
and go to church and all that on Sunday, the Lord's Day, not
Sabbath. Now we're there there changes in calendars and things like that throughout the
years. Yes, but the Sabbath is still considered the last day of the
week. It's not a particular it's not a particular day per se. It's
the last day of the week. And that's you know, that's important because
people get caught up in in the Sabbath and start almost worshiping it, Like
is this if the Sabbath is the thing to worship And if you remember when
I was asked about the Sabbath. In scripture, I said that Sabbath was
made for man, not man for the Sabbath, and also look up Colossians
chapter two, verse sixteen. Therefore, let no one act as your judge
in regard to the food or drink, or in respect to a festival or
a new moon or a Sabbath day. Meaning don't be judged by those that
say that you have to worship this way, or you have to worship on
that day, or any of those things. The important part of the Sabbath
is that you stop that there's one day that you stop, you rest,
you communion with God. You should be doing that throughout the week as well,
but have that specific time to set that apart, to do that and
make it important in your life, Lonnie, that's the key. That is
what's most important. Don't get lost in just the strict tradition of things,
because sometimes traditions start coming idols, people start worshiping those traditions rather than the
word of God. And really it's about you taking that time. You having
the time of rest, you having time with God, and stopping from working.
That's the most important thing. To have that time away from work,
that downtime Vincent, Welcome to the Jesus Christ Show. Oh Jesus Hi Hi.
My question is in regard to the whole concept of God. Okay,
my banks are Christian pastors, and so I've been raised with the Christian religion
my whole life. I don't necessarily agree with most applications to it. I
think a lot of the teaching that you brought I agree with, but when
it comes to the institution of the church itself, I have a lot of
disagreements with their approach. Okay. The question that I have regarding God is
if God is of love and forgiveness and understanding and compassion, a, why
is that not reflected in the Christian religion? And by why would there be
such things as how or even sins for that matter? If God was you
know, of forgiveness and understanding. Okay, well you asked kind of four
questions in there. So let's get to as many of the us as we
can, and keep in mind that it's very difficult. As you're a PK
and PK's pastors. Kids often have a difficult time because reconciling between seeing their
parents as humans and then the words that I have to be taught as well,
if you imagine, Vincent, the it's been said by a chief of
police that the judicial system of the United States is perfect save for one problem,
and that is that it has to be run by human beings. That
is exactly the same problem with the church. You're dealing with perfection, but
yet those that are preaching or teaching it are imperfect. However, your concept
or your definition is what's at the root of your concern. It's how you
define these things is what you have a problem with. You have you love,
forgiveness, Hell, it's the way you define them that causes the problem,
not having them in themselves, because forgiveness is different than reconciliation, and
love isn't just ignoring the stupid things people do and giving them a hug,
which is what most people think when they think of love. They go,
oh, love is just kind of ignoring all the bad stuff and just being
nice to them. That's that's not love at all. And so really your
understanding of those things plays a big part. Hell, for instance, Vincent,
what kind of music do you hate that you just can't stand? I'll
the country Western? Okay. You know what the funny thing is is that
I asked this question on occasion, and that's one of the top two.
So let's say country Western. You don't like country western, so you don't
want to listen to it for a half hour, do you You don't want
to listen to it for a full day? Do you right? You wouldn't
want to be forced to listen to it for a year, would you right?
Okay, So if I forced you to listen to country music for an
eternity, that would be hell because you don't want to. You don't want
it, you want no part of it, and therefore why would you want
to experience it forever? Heaven? All heaven is and I say all because
some people like to whittle it down as if this is a negative. All
heaven is his communion and worship eternally with the Father. If you don't want
to love Him and serve him for seventy eighty ninety measly years on earth,
God will not force you to do that for eternity. So he allows you
and send you to allows you to make a choice here on earth to not
be with Him for eternity. And it's called hell to not be with but
eternity from God. And the thing that people don't get wrap their heads around,
Vincent, is that you think you don't want God, and this isn't
you, particularly the Greater You think they don't want God, Yet they don't
know that God even works in their life even if they reject him. On
Earth, God is still sustaining this planet. So they are getting all the
benefits of God even if they don't know it, or at least part of
those benefits, and in Hell they won't have any of them. It's like
the petulant child going, you know what, I hate my parents. I
just want to move, and then realizing now they're on the streets, there's
no roof over their head, there's no one guiding them, there's no one
giving them love, and now they understand the power of it, but can't
go back because the decision is so respected by God that humans have the ability
to make that decision, that it is a final and eternal decision at the
point of death. So that's what hell is is somebody truly experiencing for eternity
the eternal decision they made. That's it. It's a respect factor. It's
not an unloving or an unjust God. It's a very loving and very just
God who says, I respect you, I love you. Love can only
exist by mutual respect. Love can only exist if I give you a choice
not to love, because forced love is rape. Forcing somebody to to give
themselves to you, to physically give themselves to you, to be a part
of your life, to give what you want of a situation is wrong and
it's evil, and God can't and won't do it. He allows humans to
make the conscious, educated choice to reject him for all of eternity. But
it's like rejecting water. When you're in a desert, you're going to know
how much you need water. And all these people that you come across in
life that go, oh, I don't drink water because I hate the taste,
Well, your body needs it. And it's not till you really understand
that you're getting water in Jews, or you're getting water even in SODA's,
you're getting water little bits here and there, that your body stays hydrated,
that you're still getting that water, just like you're still being sustained even if
you're an atheist on Earth. But when you're in Hell, it's like being
in the desert without water. There you you realize the necessity of it.
In the consequence of that decision in a more real way, and that's not
lacking love in any way, shape or form. Well, Jesus, I
don't disagree with you on any point, especially in terms of understanding that there's
no way around God's involvement on this earth and with every sentient being that inhabits
this earth. But with God's design, like you said, also comes choice.
And what I what I have a hard time understanding is that choice.
You know, it's very cut and dry when it comes to biblical principles.
You know, if you don't follow this, if you don't follow that,
you're going to go to hell. And I don't necessarily agree with that.
I think there are a lot of really really good people on this earth.
Who wha wha wha wha whoa whoa whoa good? What does that mean?
Hy? By what standard? Is somebody good? By your standard? How
could you even say that somebody is good vincent? By who? Is that
a cultural statement that the culture says that they're good or the populace says they're
good. This isn't a sociological viewpoint. I think that intentions inherently can be
good. But by what standard? Biblical standard? Thou shalt not murder,
thou shalt not lie, that shall not commit adultery. By what standard do
you say someone's good? Hmmm, Well, it couldn't be only biblical,
although a lot of those biblical principles are very sound. You know, of
course, you shouldn't kill people, and you shouldn't do you think society should
decide what good, what's good and what's bad? Not necessarily, because society
is soluble. Yeah, So where do you get the standard of good?
Is that just the things that you like? No, not necessarily, because
it's not even taste. I think that humans inherently know what and where does
that inherent knowledge come from? It's okay, so why is it? This
is what gets me vincent. You will sit there reasonably, and I love
that you're even bringing these things up and that you're questioning it. That's a
good thing. Some churches may not think that, but I think that's a
good thing. The problem lies in that you're picking and choosing that. The
question is not how come this is the only way to be saved? The
question is why is there any way to be saved? Because it's undeserving.
Your standard of good comes from God, period. There is not one society
on the planet, not even a cannibalistic society. There is not one society
that believes it's okay to murder one. There's not one society on this planet
that believes it's okay to steal. Do you know that even a thief doesn't
believe it it's okay to steal. If you try and steal from them,
they'll tell you that they they supersede that in their own mind, that it's
that it's okay for them for whatever reason. I'm poor, or the world
has handed me a bad you know, go of it, or whatever it
is. They rationalize it, but no one believes it's okay. It is
inherent. It's inherent in human beings. They know that these things are wrong
because God placed that in their heart, that knowledge of good and evil and
understanding the two, so that they could make a choice. They choose to
do evil. They choose to do things that are wrong, like they choose
to go to hell. If if if you're in a burning building, vincent
and the fire department comes in and they cut a hole that is in the
shape of a square, are you gonna argue with them that you'd rather go
out a circle, that you don't think it's fair that they make you go
out of a square, and that you don't want that kind of salvation.
It's ridiculous. It's not a matter of people. People get bent out of
shape, Vincent because they don't want to give up what they don't want to
give up. They don't want to be accountable, they don't want to be
held accountable, and they don't want anything in their life that is at have
to, so they continue to reject God. And there are other religions out
there, and there are counterfeits, and there are all these things. But
this is the Jesus Christ Show, so you kind of knew what you were
getting into as far as far as what side I'm going to land on.
But scripture says these things not to paint you into a corner, Vincent,
not to make you feel boxed in, but it gives you an out,
and people don't do that. Wow, I'd really like to go out my
window instead of a door. And how come houses and structural engineering and architects
design things with doors. I want a port hole in the top of the
house because it's not efficient. And there's a point where you have to trust
that God created things because it is the best way to the best possible world,
which is heaven. But earth is not the best possible world. And
that the fact that there's any way to salvation is the miracle, not that
it just happens to be via my death. And now you get sides and
teams going, oh, well, I don't that's not what I believe,
that's not what I was raised with. It doesn't matter. It's about truth.
That's what should be at the center of it. Not a particular team,
not Christians versus this group. Not what is the truth? And when
you're led to that truth, then accept it or reject it and receive the
blessings or the consequences. Sal Welcome to the Jesus Christ Show. Oh I'm
curious as to how you can impute divinity or or even reliability to a set
of documents that were cobbled together centuries after they were written. Never mind the
fact that they were written in some cases, in many cases, decades after
the events that they described. But I'm really troubled by the fact that they
were put together. Talking about the apocrypal full books of the Bible that aren't
accepted into the cannon. It seems to me that it's a hit in this
kind of thing. You know, you pick one, you don't pick another,
and then you and in the end say well, this is what the
word of God is. I don't buy it. No, I don't suppose
you do. And it's a noble question. Indeed, what I will say,
sal is that you've asked more than one question. So I'll address as
much of it as I can, because they're all they're all important in their
own right, but they've kind of all deal with different answers. So I
will say this for the sake of time. If you look at any of
history, you've any work of antiquity, you've articulated the same thing. So
that would you'd have to discount any work of history, because you know,
even Homer's Iliad, I think there's four hundred copies, Caesar's Gaelic Wars,
you've got ten copies, all written after the fact. That's the way history
happens. So it's written after the fact. So in the case, so
scripture is not the anomaly, it's not the standout. As a matter of
fact, scripture, if you're dealing with just the New Testament alone, you
have over twenty five thousand, not ten, not four hundred twenty five thousand
whole, and parts of manuscripts in there, even building into their entirety,
you could actually reconstruct the New Testament save for about a handful of John,
the Book of John by the early church father's teachings. So it doesn't stand
up the same way as other works of antiquity. It stands out and compared
to other works of antiquity. To compare the two is silly. When you
look at history, All of History South is written after the fact. You
could write something about JFK. You could write something about Martin Luther King Junior,
and it still holds water. There might even be more insights that could
be added to it. So I don't know that that appeal to antiquity is
the proper way to look at it. I think it actually ends up being
fallacious. Having said that, I think authorship can be seen in many different
ways, and for the sake of time all answer one that I'm hoping that
sticks with you, That is that you listen to the voice of something.
Bibliographical tests are often used to decide what scripture or what book is written by
whom, and that's not just in scripture. That's with any work of antiquity.
So in the case of scripture, you want to hear a voice.
And if you listen to scripture of things, it says, it's not a
book man would write. If he could. Man wouldn't write a book of
rules that he doesn't want to live by at all. He would take out
all the things dealing with premarital sex. He would take out all the things
dealing with the things that he doesn't want to do. Why would he write
the very book that he rebels against. It's not in the voice of man,
it's in the voice of God. KFI AM six forty on demand