So this week we're going to go through just an introduction and the first chapter of the heresies had to be dealing with are actually going to be right in front of our face in scripture between two of the apostles that we have writings from that we know a lot about. So it's going to be a good time. So as I got on your hand out there, the importance of this. Again, nothing is new. What we see today, there's already been somebody who's had this idea, whether intentionally or unintentionally, these heresies are not new. And we're going to find some terms. Like right there, I keep saying these heresies. So we're going to find some terms. And don't be daunted. Part of it is, as my wife said, part of it's for your information, and part of it's my schooling. I'm learning how to do footnotes on Microsoft. And so I know John's all like, ha, ha, ha, ha. So you'll see where I did get these definitions from. I use a lot of different resources for definitions. Some are better than others, and that's why I love that here at Trinity we're trying to get together and also compile some concise definitions to help each other as well. As you can see, like that orthodox one there, it's quite long. But anyways, we're going to look at the terms, define them. And then there are some important distinctions, which we will. That's why I have four definitions here. And then, as I said, as we go through the course, we're going to look at examples in history. This week will be the Judaizers and contemporary relevance. And I've got on their legalism and works based and we're going to expand on that quite a bit, hopefully in discussion because it's it's not as. clear in scripture. We're gonna see the Judaizers also called the Circumcision Party. We're gonna see what they wanted. And today it's not as in your face. It's a little bit more subtle and how that's creeping into the church. So that being said, we're gonna get into the importance of it, as I said, so we can learn the history and what it's done throughout the church. And that brings us to these terms of orthodox. That's a long definition, but who in their own words wants to give me an idea of what orthodox means, orthodoxy? Doctrine and sound, I guess. Doctrine and sound. I know we use new terms. I think it actually means straighten. because that's where we get orthodontists from, but right thinking or right belief. I like that doctrinally sound because we've made it more and more precise in what we mean by orthodox. Okay, so we'll just use these two right here. That'll give us a good starting point, but give me some, what you think are orthodox positions. Election, I wouldn't call that a, we'll get into some conversation on that in one of these later definitions, but. Let me, before I start throwing that out there, they were asking these questions in the church, and a lot of it, let me move this out of the way, I'm not gonna sit down. A lot of the questions, especially in the early church though, we're talking about the first century, right after the apostles. So the first, the early church fathers after the apostles, who was Jesus? Was he divine? Was he man? You know, what did that look like? Salvation? So these things. And so they came up with what they call rule of faith. Okay. And rule of faith is basically a summary of essential Christian beliefs. essential Christmas. So, yes, I agree that election as you are sanctified and learn God, you're gonna see that in his word. But that's not an essential Christian. Most people, in fact, are saved thinking that we ran to God instead of elections. So that that's not essential. But where's an example we go to of essential Christian faiths? And where is that found? Yes, it is. But rule of faith, so the early church fathers, like we want to give you a basic, essential, can't negotiate on these truths. I believe in God the Father, almighty maker of heaven and earth. Jesus Christ, his only son, our Lord, who was born of the Virgin Mary. All right, so we get these basic truths of Christianity. That's why we say for Lord's Supper, you have to at least agree with these basic, Christian beliefs. That is, and you'll see, if you get the book, you'll see they talk about that, the rule of faith. Okay, so that's what they kept pointing to, the rule of faith. So if anything goes against this, it goes into our second definition of heresy, which simply means choice, and they use that, it means to choose to go against the right thinking, the right belief. Okay, so you have Orthodox, these basic, I'm gonna use the Apostles' Creed mostly, but I think that the Nicene Creed does a better job when you get to especially Christ. The Athanasian Creed is awesome. Looking at some of the councils, these are great things, but just for simplicity, I'm gonna go to the Apostles' Creed. All right, Holy Spirit, resurrection, right, communion of saints, you know, Christ is returning, so you get these basic truths that you cannot compromise on. So what is a heresy then? Give me an example of a heresy. Work salvation? I'm going to say yes on that, but it gets a little bit difficult when you're looking at what they tried to fight early with, you know, you're not going to see works versus a faith-based salvation. Some of this is just understood, especially if you look at Paul's writing. Faith, faith, faith, faith. But we're going to get into this particularly because of the first heretical teaching that was infiltrating the church there with the Judaizers. I say first, that's the most prevalent. There may have been others, but that was one that was in your face and they became a dominant position. Yeah. That's exactly what that is right there. Yep. And they would argue, well, the creed doesn't really... Specifying, okay, yes, but scripture does. So the creed is just a summary. The creed is not the ultimate authority. That's just a summary of basic Christian beliefs. The word of God is our ultimate authority. Again, we love the creeds and confessions, but that is not our ultimate authority. And if they go against scripture, that creed is gone. All right, so rightly understood. According to scripture, these creeds are fantastic. the divinity of Christ, that they deny the divinity and say it's just a man, like the Muslims. That's adoptionism. And this was, in the early church, this was a question. As we get into later chapters, we're gonna see that. There are heretics, those who were thrown out, even that term, heretic. We call them a heretic because they went against orthodoxy. Not just a, I didn't know this. Okay, they were against the doctrine. So even today, if you disagree with me, I'm gonna call you a heretic. All right, I've been called a heretic because of my eschatological stance. That's not a heresy. I believe that Christ is returning to judge the quick and the dead. That is an orthodox position. Okay. A heresy, though, the divinity of Christ. All right. Which there are a lot to do that. A heresy. You're gonna become a god. That's a heresy. That's heretical. Yes. Christ. Humanity. Some people said that. Which, well, it was great. I was talking to my son, actually it was during the sermon this last week, and talking about Christ dying on the cross. And my son looks over to me and said, God can't die. I said, you're right, son. But Jesus was God. You're right, son. And Jesus died. You're right, son. But God can't die. Again, you're right, son. So I'm going to say you're going in a circle. And this, you know, of course, he's trying to question it. And I, I can't put into words, I've tried that they asked some other question, like, I'm going to go to the children's, you know, catechism here. And it's in the book. Yes. hopefully help to answer some of these because absolutely how do I explain this to a six-year-old so he's gonna understand it you know but that's you're asking the right questions and you see something here so yes and then he moved on okay now we're having food right so As far as her virginity? I was going to say, because if you're saying she's just a good young woman, then she wasn't necessarily a virgin. A lot of people always thought that immaculate conception was referring to Christ. It's like, no, it's referring to Mary is what that term was. And that's even worse than what you thought it meant. You thought it was bad enough, and it's even worse than what you thought it meant. Well, and that's why I like Apostle Creed, you know, virgin birth, but again, we get into that. Did it mean young woman? Did it mean virgin? And of course, as you study systematic theology and get into that, well, we're looking at this curse sin. So I love the way the two gospels have different lineages, even in fact, so you can study that. The Mormons, when they add on to the Bible, or they say these other texts in the Bible, I mean, it's not with the Apostles' Creed, it's obviously, right? Yeah, I think that with them, their whole basis is heretical from the start. That was unintentional. If you look back at the history, and again, I'm not going to sidetrack too much, but Joseph Smith, if you look back at his history, he was a conman and a fraud long before he became the founder of the Mormon Church. So all he did was he finally found something that worked for him. So, and then yes, so he was a heretic for a lot more reasons than that. But there are some, like my mom out in Arizona loved them. All these elders keep coming over and helping me with everything I need. Well, of course, they're very family focused. They have great works, good works like we talked about. They have great good works, but they're not of God. And maybe some of it is misled and they will be called out of that cult, but that whole religion is heretical. But also, like, there are some even, I would say, more liberal churches that believe, okay, you got the Bible, but then you need this. You need something extra. Yeah, you need something extra. You know, something with the inerrancy or the sufficiency of Scripture. I'm gonna put infallibility too. Also clarity, because some people say, well, you can't interpret the Bible, only I can. Well, I can interpret the Bible, and you just, you're not spiritual enough to see it. That's why I like the way that the confession handled that, with the things that are needed to be known are clear to everybody. We don't know what that looks like for everybody, like my son asking that question, all right? He's not gonna go into it and find some of the stuff that, like, when John and I are having a discussion, like, yes, what does that mean? Well, let's go into this, you know, craziness, but he's asking the right things, and the things that God wants to reveal in his word are gonna be clear. All right. Some things like me, I read the scripture 100 times. How have I not seen that before? It's God's timing. All right. But the things that I needed to know were clear. But yes, clarity of scripture, sufficiency of scripture. No, we need more than that. Or yes, you need somebody to interpret it for you. I caveat that with some things. I'm like, I don't understand what this means. I'm going to go to somebody who knows languages, for example, or somebody who's done a more thorough study on this. Well, if you compare it to this and you look at the languages, ah, that makes sense. But I'm still prayerfully considering it as a spirit illuminates that to me. So the sufficiency of scripture, the inerrancy, yeah, the Bible's a good, you know. And there will never be anything that is against what scripture has already made clear. I think when we look at heretics historically, they really thought they were contending for the Christian faith. So it wasn't like they were out to destroy Christianity. They really thought that they were honestly contending for the faith, and they tried to explain mysteries when they should have just left the mysteries. So I said, we're going to see it became heritage. Yes, that's a heresy. And I'm going to word it a different way to fix that. Like, oh, well, you just now you put into modalism there, you know, like that video. That's Patrick, you know, explain the Trinity to me. It's like a clover. It's like water. So So just some examples there. And even today, though, people like that label heretics because it means they're a rebel. They're going against the patriarchal system or some other system. So they like getting that branding. No, no. If these are the essential Christian beliefs and you're going against them, and it's not because you know, Scripture has been clearly defined there, you're getting into the heretical realms. On that note, let me look at these last two definitions before we move on, because they're not in the book, but I think they're important as well. It's on the second page there. That's the rest of your heresy definition as well. And that's confusing with heresy because it means other opinion. So a lot of times what we have is not a heretical view, which again just means choosing to go against the Orthodox, but we see these ideas here. You would say, yes, that's heretical, but a heterodox position. And I'm going to use one of the easiest ones to see is who is the proper recipient of baptism? I'm hoping that everybody in here has the correct answer, which is believers. All right, we are Credo Baptist. So to us, that's the right belief, that's doctrinally sound, but our Presbyterian brothers, would you say that they're heretics? I would say that they are brothers in Christ still. So this is a different opinion. This is a heterodox issue. All right. Heterodoxy is just a differing opinion and a lot of eschatology is another big one. All right. How you look at that? Yes. Well, I'm going to close with a terrible example. Even Baptists, we can look at that because it goes, yes, Believers, Baptists, that means anybody who comes through here that we can throw in a tank to get our $10,000 for the year. Alright, so, but that doesn't fall in, you know, which is category. We would say that that's not correct doctrine, but it's not. heresy. So you have to understand that there is room for grace in some of those. King James only. That can kind of get idolatrous, which I will say is very, some of those are very cultic. But just saying I believe in the King James, okay, I believe when Christ returns he's going to speak in Elizabethan English. Okay, I believe that the original language was King James. Don't try to correct the King James with Greek, is what some pastors in King James only say. Like, you know what? I have to stop you right there. You're now going against how God preserved His Word. So, and in fact, your translation is based off of Latin Vulgate as well, so we can get into that whole thing. But, King James only? It depends. That's a heterodox, but some of them can get very idolatrous in the book. And then the last word I have there is orthopraxy. I know these are crazy words. This one, though, is actually good. If you have orthodox in your life, if you have doctrinal sound, right thinking, what's going to naturally flow from that is going to be what orthopraxy is, or praxis. It's the right actions, the right practice. However, just because you observe somebody doing the right things, the right practice, does not mean that they have doctrinally sound. It could be just rote, like, you know, you're raised this way, this is what you do, it's a habit, or you are trying to work for a salvation because you don't understand that it's faith alone, grace alone, Christ alone. So just because your practice is right does not mean that you're orthodox. But that is a good fruit of somebody who has an orthodox understanding. You're going to see the right practices. So it's just a word that, like I said, I wanted to put on there as well because I think it pertains to this idea we're looking at here. And most of the time we're gonna be focusing on orthodox versus heretical. But there are gonna be some conversations that come up where that's not necessarily heretical. All right, and we have to be graceful in that. Again, I believe saying that you are the reason you got saved. Yes, I'm gonna be like, that's very wrong thinking. I'm not gonna call you a heretic because I thought I ran to Christ too. But as you are growing in the Lord, I'm praying that the spirit reveals to you, God is sovereign. All right, that's where it's yes. We can get into some arguments on that tension, but if you're gonna remove any of that sovereignty from God, that's where I start having a problem. Unless, like I say, you have to be graceful. A young believer is not gonna know these things. All right, I didn't know a lot of stuff, especially coming from a Catholic background. I didn't realize that I was actually, and I forget his name here now, the heresy that I believed in, was that Mariconianism? Marcion. Yes, that's so me Old Testament creator of the universe vengeful God you will do what I say or I will destroy you This is a God that I feared now you have as I saw it peace love harmony, you know hippie God in the New Testament and I didn't know that there was actually, that's not a new heresy. That's going back to the first century. It's still going on today, so. Andy Stanley. You don't need the Old Testament, only worry about, that's why, I liked what you said, but at the same time, the red letter of Christian life, I hope that doesn't mean that you're only going to the New Testament, because the whole book is the word of Christ, but I understand the intention behind that one. So it's possible to be a heretic and still practice orthopraxy. You have the wrong belief, but the right practice. Yep. You see, believers' baptism, okay, but... And we do have that, I'm gonna, what, you have to be baptized in Jesus' name, because that's the model now, not in the name of the triune God. Tell your friend that we're in class right now. But I know it's you now. Music team. What are those people that believe in, like, first, they put a lot of emphasis in the first three or four chapters. Did that say it? I mean, I don't know if that said it, but... In the Old Testament or just in the Gospels? In the Old Testament. In the Old Testament? Have you ever heard of that? Yeah, we had, when I was in Texas, one lady, actually, I think two ladies left our church to go to something like that. I don't know whether you understood. They put a lot of emphasis in the first three or four chapters. The only thing I'm thinking on that is I met some guys that believed in the pre-Adamite race So where they were looking at God's creation that there was a race before what we read recorded in chapter 2 So I don't know if that's kind of what you're talking about Which again that you know, you get gap there and all that so that's why I have no problem with the six-day creation I know some brothers and that's a good example here. I know some godly men who believe in you know a old earth creation but I disagree with them, and that leads to heresies like this. God got it wrong the first time, so he had to start over with Adam and Eve. Garbage. Evolutionary creation. Sorry, that's garbage. There are some men who are very theologically sound in other areas, but that one, I'm like, I gotta say that you're embracing a heresy. I'm not gonna call you a heretic, but you're embracing a heresy. So, I don't know if that's what you were talking about, but some do put some… Well then that's where you get, what is it, that Lillian, that's where the, I think that's what it is, Lillian, Lilith, Lilith. So you start getting these other, yes, the Kabbalah, they go into that as well, Kabbalah. And yes, just starting to get into some crazy stuff. And my understanding is that's where the lore of vampires comes from, too. I'm like, OK, we just. So you went into the left field there just because you didn't embrace the scripture is inerrant, infallible, insufficient. You had to go to extra writing. Which one? Oh yeah, the extra spirit from the saints that are dead, yes. Yeah, that's not how that works. That's not how any of this works. Okay, that being said, I like the book does talk about those three zones. You have orthodoxy, you have heresy, and you have this in between which can lead to heretical teaching. The Protestant church has the same thing, but it was easier to, they use different words. Actually, they both use Latin, so it was crazy, but the definition for the Catholic church was a little bit easier there. I do like this question though is, what are two major reasons we should pay attention to and learn from history about orthodoxy and heresy? I think that's being relevant what we're hearing here that there are modern day heretics and they present themselves though as brothers. And it's hard to detect some of these heresies. And the quote from C.S. Lewis talking about chronological snobbery. All right, basically, that we're so arrogant, we think that the knowledge and understanding we have here in 2022 is better than the 300 ADs. We're more knowledgeable than them. So we don't need to look at their writings and see what they battled there. All right? Well, that goes a long way. That's going a long way. It's like if they become Christians, they'll bend the wheel all over again. They don't want to believe that. I love history anyways, but yes, and even where they're in error. I'm not going to throw out the theology of Martin Luther because of his very wrong teaching in some areas. Was he a heretic? He had some practices that I would disagree with vehemently. We can look at the early church here in the States. Started out getting away from the religious persecution. But then we get into even the Southern Baptists, which we'll get into in a little bit here. I don't want to jump ahead. But some of their practices, I love. John Dagg was a Southern preacher. And his two theological books on biblical theology are outstanding. But he had the wrong idea of race. And being in the South, All right, he embraced some of those ideas. That does not mean that what he believed about scripture teaching on God should be ignored. What should be ignored and he should have rebuked, and he's dead now. We can't make him repent and rebuke of these erroneous ideas he had. But you have to be careful with embracing an entirety of a person. I said, when we quote somebody or use their writings, we're not endorsing everything about them. We are trying to show, look, he had this right about God, and here's the scripture to back it up. Because there are some areas like, you know what, I don't want to have my name associated with this guy. But he was right in this area here. So for research resources, it's not bad. And even that, like I said, don't throw out the heretic label all the time. You disagree with me, you're a heretic. I got blasted because I was calling William Lane Craig a heretic. And he had two very big followers in my church that were, I would almost call them disciples of his. They loved everything about him and wanted to bring me up for rebuke and discipline because I was calling a brother a heretic. All right. Well, as he is constantly coming out and proving that I was correct, I have no problem with my original statement. You know, more and more proof is coming out like, yes, your doctrine is wrong. And now you're going into all these heretical leanings. Is he a believer? That's between him and God. The fruits that I see, his teachings are heretical. All right. So calling out a brother should be done cautiously. But everybody's afraid of calling out a brother. And we're gonna go to scripture here now. Because the first chapter deals with the Judaizers, and like I said, I've called it the Circumcision Party. And we're going to look at some scripture here and see some relevance, what was going on there, and who that pertained to. We're going to be in Acts, and then Galatians. I think I put the scriptures on there for you. And I'm going to bring over Timothy and Titus. Because we're seeing the early church form. In the Book of Acts, we're seeing the Acts of the Apostles. We're seeing the early church. And of course, I love that if you're going to go in chronological order with the letters and stuff, it's great to look at the Book of Acts. And you can see, well, here's where Paul was at this time. That's when he wrote this. And we do have some good datings. Some are guesses. Some disagree. Some scholars disagree with some of the writings on some of them. But it's great to pair up. what you see in scripture in the book of Acts with the other letters. What we're looking at here is chapter 11 of Acts. Somebody want to read verses 1 through 3? I don't want to bogart everything here. The apostles and the brothers who were throughout the day had heard that the Gentiles also had received the word of God. So when Peter went up to Jerusalem, the circumcision party criticized him, saying, you went to uncircumcised men and ate with them. So if you go back before, if you read the rest of it, he'll go into his vision that he had and what God has made clean, you can't make unclean, basically showing that the Gentiles are also going to be inheriting this gospel. But here's the circumcision party, the Judaizers, and so they're Jews who have come to believe in the Messiah, in Christ. But they're still, and it's understandable, this is their whole tradition, their whole life, their whole culture evolved around the law of God and these ceremonies. So now we have this further truth of God. They have to be like us. This isn't for everybody. This is for the Jew. So okay, this Gentile is gonna be pulled into this Christian faith now, but he has to embrace all this other history we have. He has to be circumcised. He has to obey these laws, okay? Adding to the gospel here. Yeah, so the circumcision party comes up to Peter like, what are you doing eating with these unclean, with the uncircumcised? So that's what it is, is Peter with the Gentiles. I'm putting this up there because it's awesome, it's gonna happen in a little bit. Okay? And then go to chapter 15 in Acts. And this goes into the Jerusalem Council. This is my My defense on circumcision was not replaced by baptism. If anywhere in scripture was going to show us that, no guys, you don't have to be circumcised anymore. That's the old covenant. The new covenant sign is circumcision. But that's not what comes out of this. What comes out of this is tell the Gentiles to avoid idols, to avoid food that was sacrificed as idols, to avoid sexual fornication, to avoid eating from strangled and blood. So it was a very limited thing. It wasn't, no, baptism replaced circumcision. But that's also not a full proof for, I say I bring that up for Presbyterian versus Baptist debates. But we do see that this was, the council gets together and if you read that whole chapter there, they get together, the elders, the church in Jerusalem, like we need to decide what's going on with this. The word of God has come to us, this new revelation, this covenant that we've been waiting for is here in Christ. Okay, the Messiah has come. What do we do with non-Jews? Okay. And again, that's why I say anybody who is antisemitic and is a Christian, I'm like, you don't understand the history of this. Your savior was Jewish. The early church was prominently Jewish. All right. So you're having a whole lot of self hate as it were. But this is the council at Jerusalem, so now Paul and Barnabas come here too, and then they go out, and this is what's expected now of the Gentiles. You don't have to be circumcised. I put over here Timothy and Titus just because I found this fascinating today as I was going over this, and again, one of those things that you kind of realize but don't really see at the front. Timothy was circumcised, okay? Probably right around the time of Acts 15 here, what we're seeing. Okay. And this way he's not a stumbling block to the weaker brother, the circumcision party. All right. They say they have a lot of baggage. They're carrying with them. We have been God's people. This is the law that he's given to us. This is the customs given to us. So Paul's like, okay, Timothy, for the sake of the weaker brother, so that you're not a stumbling block, you're circumcised because his mom's Jewish. And so that's, that's, that's the key. So he was considered a Jew. And to prevent an uprising, because we see the weaker brother, as you'll notice, the weaker brother became a very strong voice in the early church. That's why when I was talking about liberty of conscience and not binding somebody's conscience there, is because the weaker brother can oftentimes become the dominant voice and that does not make them right. So like what was happening here, and Paul tells Timothy to get circumcised, but you'll see later, if you go to Galatians chapter two, we're gonna see that Titus was not. So let's see what changed there in Galatians chapter two. Then after 14 years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. I went up because of a revelation and sat before them, though privately before those who seemed influential, the gospel that I proclaimed among the Gentiles, in order to make sure I was not running or had not run in vain. But even Titus, who was with me, was not forced to be circumcised, to spy out our freedoms that we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might bring us into slavery. To them we did not yield in submission, even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you. And from those who seemed to be influential, what they were makes no difference to me. God shows no impartiality. Those, I say, who seemed influential added nothing to me. On the contrary, when I saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted to the gospel to the circumcised, for he who works through Peter for his apostolic ministry to the circumcised, works also through me for mine to the Gentiles. And when James and Cephas and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given to me, they gave the right hand of fellowship to Barnabas and me, that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the circumcised. Only they asked us to remember the poor, the very thing that I was eager to do. But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. For before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles. But when they came, he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party. And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy. But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas, before them all, if you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews? There you go. Thank you. So we see this, and that's a big text, but I wanted to show you there. Paul is showing us, you know, I have the same gospel. He shows the the unity with James and with John and with Peter. He was entrusted the gospel through Christ, and they gave him the right hand of fellowship and to Barnabas. But they agreed, you're going to go to the Jews, we're going to go to the Gentiles. You notice though, Peter was rebuked by the circumcision party for eating with the Gentiles. Not eating the Gentiles, eating with the Gentiles. So he's like, no, here's the vision God gave me though. Well, the brother started doing some improper practices. Paul busts him out right here. So that's why I said earlier, if there's a brother who is doing wrong, I know we have the Matthew 18 example, but he still calls him out here. He said, I called him out publicly because he went from eating with the Gentiles and being called out to not eating with the Gentiles. It says, after certain men came from the circumcision party, He started forsaking his other brothers, you know, because he was afraid of them. So the circumcision party, the weaker brother became a very dominant voice here. All right, I just love seeing that with Peter, because I love Peter. He was, no, they're not going to take me. I'll defend you. Let me chop off an ear. All right, I'll never defend you. Hi-ho, Peter. And then he comes back with this vision. No, you guys don't understand. I'm meeting with them because the gospel has come to them. Let's figure this out. OK, oh, here they come again. So here's an example. I'm over here. And you saw he said that though, Titus, he did not make him get circumcised, but in that caveat, whereas Timothy was Jewish lineage, Titus was a Greek, but Paul's also looking at like, no, look, we, we discussed this after that council, after the Acts 15 Jerusalem council, here's all that's required of a, a Greek convert, right? These things, not the circumcision. And they were still holding onto it. If you go on, I love, I disagree with those who say that's not what Paul meant, but Paul is saying if you're going to force people to get circumcised, I say... You. Done. You're going that extreme, just, no, cut it off. Because you're taking what was supposed to represent the circumcision pointing to Christ being cut off from His people, now you're making it in addition to the law, which we talked about adding to the Word of God, they're adding to the Gospel. So I like Paul. Yes, he had his problems. But I love, especially in this one, Galatians is probably my favorite letter of Paul's, just because we get a lot of the Abrahamic covenant. We get to see what it means, the law versus the gospel. And this is where he says, no, I had a problem with Peter, and I called him out in front of people. So we see an example, though, of two brothers, ministers of the gospel. There was a disagreement that was gospel issued, and here's how it's solved. Then we go and look at the books of Peter, and he's going to say, no, Paul is awesome. His writings are hard sometimes, but you need to read what Paul is saying. So there was not animosity. He calls them out, lets Peter know that your actions are wrong, but they are still brothers. So it wasn't heretical, but the Judaizers were trying to add to the gospel. So in the rest of our time here, I want to look at the contemporary relevance that we have here. So looking at this, it's works. Yes, it's Jesus plus. Okay, that's what they were saying. It's not Christ alone. It's Christ plus. In their case, it was the circumcision. And with that, there was, I'm sure that a lot of them were still looking at the ceremonies and the feasts and stuff, which I like how some of that, you know, observing the feast for understanding what it meant is not bad, but that's not required for your salvation. So in today, what do we see that reflects this mindset of the circumcision party? Okay, so baptism. So if you're not baptized, are you truly saved? No, I hear you. But there are some that say that, right? Well, you weren't baptized, so you're not saved. Yep, the mode of the baptism. I brought up last week that Catholic priest in Arizona that they said, you know, thousands of his baptisms are null and void. So what I was just thinking today, and there's some very hot topics. I hate this right here because to me, this is the biggest, you must be circumcised to prove that you're really Christ. Tolerance. You talked about what do we mean by Presbyterian? Well, the article I was reading today was on the lesbian couple of pastors of the Baptist church. There's the one in Raleigh too. Well, this was a couple of their co-pastors, this wife and wife. And yes, their garments with the rainbow on and stuff like that. No, Jesus loved everybody. So if you're not embracing and following what Jesus said, you're not truly a Christian. They call them Christian in name only is what they're calling those who disagree with that tolerant policy. Yeah, that's a big one right now too. That's the critical race theory. And again, I'm going to look at, like I said with John Dagg, he was wrong. But the theology he had, if I'm recommending the John Dagg book, the one I'm recommending is his biblical theology, which talks about the characteristics of God, what scripture says about God. I'm not going to recommend the writing he had on why certain men are higher class than other men. No, that guy was wrong and should have been rebuked by more people than he was. But now we're swinging the other way here. All right. And if you don't embrace this, like I love, Thabiti Anyabole has done a lot for me in my early development of seeing truth and doctrine. Fantastic. He's the one that told me about music and the message having to mirror up. And instead of this performance, he went more and more as things started happening towards the progressive and CRT. And if you don't embrace CRT, it's because either you haven't been truly saved by God yet, or... And it's hard because, like I say, I would still recommend a lot of his early sermons, his messages, his books. But they're trying to get this new circumcision there. Well, if you're not circumcised, you're not really part of Christianity. I hear a lot of the tolerance part, especially in the LGBT community when they talk about how you're going to be against love. I'm going to go up against, let me go to a couple of sources here. I think that there's such a subtle compromise between the people that identify themselves as the leaders of the evangelical movement, that it's happened to So you end up with the SBC embracing critical race theory as an evaluation tool and saying that they can divorce it from its atheistic origins, which is called Marx. It's happening a lot. It's happening a lot. And the problem is that we have trusted these guys like Albert Moller. I think Albert Moller is a phenomenal genius. But I also think Albert Moller is compromised at this point. He's compromised on a lot of things. And so he sits in New York. Where do we go? We go where we should have gone. And that's the word of God. Rightly divided. So people like Dagg, their big issue was the Canaanites and how they equated the Canaanites with black folks. And they had this idea of a benign kind of supervision. And so in their mind, the way they were thinking it, they were thinking of a benign supervision because these were lesser. And that was all wrong, but that was because of false interpretation. I think the person you may be thinking about are the Andrew Murray, who was at Shepherd's Chapel. Oh, Shepherd's Chapel. And the Murrayites, you know, they believe in an eight-day creation. They believe the Canaanites got into the ark. And we had a couple that were here, and it's, if you're not careful, they do take root in the church. And that's, you know, these classes are really important. They're so important. Well, and all it takes is one generation to completely flip a proper understanding of orthodox sound doctrine. You're talking about the compromising Albert Muller. That's exactly what Paul was rebuking Peter for. Sorry, Paul wasn't the one eating, it was Peter. Yeah, don't just take it as a part of embracing all these other things. It's because we don't want to be labeled, we need to follow. Yes. Because now your Christianity is in doubt. I remember I read a book, I don't know if it was a, it was a C.S. Lewis book, and maybe it was a formal thing, but he was talking about he was on a bus, and you know, he went to all these different places, you know, these different adventures. Well, he went to this one place, right, and he was talking to this angel, and the angel showed him this, It was a mother, and she was in hell. She was burning in hell, right? And the only thing she could do, she was asking for her son. And the angel was explaining to her, well, your son's in heaven. He's not going to come down here. And she was like, well, he's my son. You know, he's my son. I love him. He needs to be down here with me. We need to be together. And the angel was explaining to him. how the mother thinks that's love. The mother thinks that's true love. That's really hate. And then you think about it, why would the mother in hell be so selfish and so want her son to come from heaven to be with her in hell? But that's how some people are. That was a good book. So even, like I say, C.S. Lewis, I will quote a lot of his things, but you know what? He had some doctrine that I would not So, like I said, these are the big ones that are slipping into the church stain. Everybody is, you know, watch and know, you know, you need to go and apologize for how God made you. I remember one of your first sermons here. In fact, it was a honor your mother and father. It's like you're saying that you would have picked different parents if you had the choice. So you're saying, you know, better than God. So even those with terrible parents, no, do you know better than God? So each of us was made in the image of God. We all look different. All right, I'd love, I was busting him out for the fellowship, but John's sitting over there, got his pizza, his leg crossed. He's just sitting there smiling, looking at everybody. He's like, look at him over there. He's like the disciple, John, look at my beloved children over here. But it was awesome, the diversity and everything that was taking place. That's the fellowship of God. And we're seeing that unity in Christ and not in these differences. All right. And that's the problem that a lot of people had. But then, like I said, the minority voice gets louder. The Circumcision Party was weaker, brother. They had an influential voice. And it's like, no, we're going to add to this. I'll tell you, that example that you gave is really powerful because Because we hear Jesus say, well, if you have something against a brother, take him privately. But that's not what Paul did. Paul called him out in front of all the brothers because what he was doing was a threat to the gospel. And he just called them out. Yeah. Like he was doing it in a very public way so that he could get everybody to see when you're corrected. And it was another gospel. And so, you know, it's kind of interesting because if Paul had let it slide and talked to them privately, then those guys would have walked away thinking it's OK. And he was saying, I think he was saying in the passage in Galatians that he felt led by the Spirit to do that too. I believe, like I say, Paul was sarcastic and he said some, like I say, pretty harsh things, but obviously it was, whether it was right at the time or not, it was of God. And we have these writings, like I say, to the point where that rebuke was enough to correct Peter. Yes. And even, I'm going to read this last one, but I want to get to a couple more though, because illegalism is another one. There are different denominations like that. Yes, you got saved, but you're not truly saved because you haven't given up all these sins that you have. I read an article yesterday, in fact, and it was talking about a lack of courage in the church today. The fact that people are afraid to stand up for what they believe because they will be called, they will be attacked, they may have to pay a price. and friends or public opinion or whatever. But they were saying, that's what we have to be. We have to be courageous and stand for what the Bible says and what is true. And when this stuff starts to creep into, like what we're talking about here, we have to stand up and say, no, this is not right. It's not going to be popular because the wave is going in the other direction, but the courage. And the article actually talked about a soldier in the Israeli army, how they went into battle, small in number, knowing that they might not make it out of that battle, but they had to trust God. So we had to do the exact same thing. It equated to, I thought to myself, that was a really good way of explaining Well, and looking at Peter and this. being influenced by the circumcision party. That was the premonition of that in his denial of Christ. All right, so we kind of see that. Yes, I'm bold. I'm gonna stand up, but this isn't the first time that he's caved to, you know, the crowd around him. All right, but that gives me hope. That's sanctification. Look at what God did to Peter through his life. I'm not saying that I'm ever gonna be on par with, you know, an apostle, but seeing that sanctification, that's for all of us. I'm sure some of the people from the circumcision party, they didn't really embrace it at first. They probably left the meeting like, can you believe that guy? Who does he think he is? I'm sure he got that, but in the end, the truth comes out. Yeah, I can do no other. What I love is that Paul, being the Pharisee of Pharisees, so it's not like he's an outsider who's rebuking this practice. Alright, and that's why I brought up the Timothy and the Titus, because, like I said, I didn't even pay attention to that. I read over the Titus thing there, but, you know, you go back to Timothy, no Timothy. You know, for the sake of the younger, or the weaker brother, we're going to make sure that this is right. So yeah, look at the tolerance and the intolerance. We are tolerant, and we're going to get to the scripture here in a second from Ephesians, but just some other works based though, the legalism. Alright, like I said, I brought up that there are some denominations, yes, you got saved, and we won't get into the second and third baptisms and stuff, but you are not truly saved until you get rid of all these sins in your life. Scripture says that's not how it is. Yes, we are trying to. live our lives with good works, but that's because of our salvation, not in order to earn the favor. And then legalism is this other thing. So yes, and again, this term I brought up before, we say legalism, but it has two different meanings. When I'm saying legalism here, I'm talking about with the gospel, Jesus plus. There are some practices that women can't wear pants. That's a legalistic approach in some churches, but that's not a salvation issue. They're not making that a salvation issue. But there are legalists that make things a salvation issue. Yes, that you are not saved unless these things. So that's what, when you hear legalism, like heretic, we throw that word out there, but legalism gets thrown out there too. And that's a legalistic idea. Okay, let me get you to explain a little bit more. Do you mean that salvation plus, are you just saying that this is how you think it should be preferred? Okay, and there are some legalistic approach that people are very adamant about, but are not a salvation issue. And going to the tolerant, that's not tolerant, all right? Letting somebody live this lifestyle that is clearly spitting in the face of God is not true tolerance and love. What tolerance is, and I love that it ends in the Ephesians scripture here, my last scripture, but in Ephesians chapter 2, And 8 to 10, again it's another Paul letter, but in Ephesians chapter 2, 8 to 10, For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is now your own doing. It is a gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are His worksmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in Him. walking them and elsewhere Paul talks about we read in that Galatians there's there's no difference now we don't God does not differentiate the Jew and the Gentile all this is ridiculous because in Christ we are all brethren all right that tolerance is in Christ you are my brother that's tolerant All right. Again, looking at the early cultures and different people, you know, not wanting to extend it. And again, even looking at Martin Luther, he had some very incorrect thinking on people. But in Christ, we are all one. We are the body of Christ. That's what it's going to be like in heaven. It's going to be awesome. A beautiful picture. That's the gospel truth. This is not what I would call a rule of faith, but since I do believe in the five solas, and faith alone, grace alone, Christ alone, according to scripture alone, glory to God alone, I would consider that which is early creedal in my understanding. It's not in the early creeds, but if you look back at their writings, I think that it was evident in a lot of their writings. Where it gets lost is when people try to define other things or allow these little things to sneak into it. All right, so even some godly men that I thought were standing strong, it just takes one little chip in the armor. And then, like I said, within a generation, though, we can have a completely different understanding in certain churches. They're adding more and more. Yes. I think they got a number in there now, too, or something. But you do, and that's why I love some men who are standing up, like, well, Jesus never said anything that, you know, went against homosexuality. Well, first of all, Jesus is the Son of God. He is in the Godhead who was there at Sodom and Gomorrah, who was there at the giving of the law, who was there at all these other events. So yes, Christ is called the Logos, the Word. He says a lot about what's right and wrong. That's not saying the hatred where people, and I hate that phrase, anything phobic. It's not a fear and it's not a hatred, but to be truly compassionate is you need Jesus. Homosexuality is right there in the realm of sexual immorality. I think it's easy for Christians to demonize, this is where we have to guard ourselves, to demonize people. So we've been saved, have been saved, are being saved, will be saved by the grace of God. And the grace of God was extended to us when we were just as lost as they were. And so, it's not about demonizing people. It's about glorifying God. And I think that that's the shift that we have to make. We have to make that shift. Look, what you do does not glorify God. Now, I'm going to tell you about God. What you do with that information, that's between God and you. Unless God changes you, you're not going to respond to that information. Just like unless God changed me, I wasn't going to respond to that information. And it's a sad thing to watch when you start reading the statistics on that lifestyle. It's a very sad lifestyle. It's not loving people when you don't tell them the truth. It's like if you come to me, and your glands are swollen, and you're losing weight, and you got night sweats, and you got, you know, you're just being consumed, and I look at you as a physician, and I go, you just gotta cope. But the reality is you got a cancer that's ravaging your body. And I don't want to send them to you because I don't want to hurt your feelings or scare you. That's not loving, man. And that's the problem. And we all have relatives probably that are into that lifestyle. Some of us may have kids that are into that lifestyle. But it's not loving them, not telling them the truth. But in the same breath, God didn't call us out of the world either. So you've got to find that balance. I don't know if you've heard this term before or not. It's no more, yes, practicing sexual immorality is wrong, but I'm still a gay Christian. I just don't practice it. This is what is attacking our reform brethren in the PCA, which I would have said was a orthodox. There are a lot of churches. I know that one up the road there just recently left the PCA over this. There are gay pastors. They're claiming, yes, I'm gay and I'm a Christian, but I'm not engaging in this fornication, so I'm just a side B Christian. You can't exclude me. I still have a place at the table. So now you're mixing up this tolerance. Yes, we love you. Yes, if you have been redeemed by God, you are a brother, but your identity is not in your sexual preference. Your identity is in Christ. So this is the side be Christians are called now. So what's in the universities now to as far as, um, uh, I'm saying you could be a minor attracted person and not be a pedophile. So sit in a restaurant at the time and worry about it so it doesn't sound as bad. I'm listening to a book now by Carl Truman called The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self. And what he does is he does a really good job on tracing how we got to this disconnect between mind and physicality. And it goes all the way back to the Romantic era, those poets, and how they started sewing these ideas. And Rousseau about this idea about the true man, the happy man, is the natural man, the man that is unencumbered by the rules of law and society. And then it just plays out all the way through Freud, and you get to a place from where you are today. where you can make a statement like, I'm a man trapped in a woman's body. I'm a woman trapped in a man's body. And if he made a point that I thought was really great, he goes, my grandfather would not have understood that statement. My grandfather would not have understood that statement. It makes no sense. It's a nonsensical statement. It is. And it's that subtle intrusion that's now going to be the circumcision party has a major voice now. It's like, wait a minute, you can't be mad at me because I'm gay. because yeah, that's not it. I'm gonna refer you to the word of God again. Yes, but now it's accepted. Now it's the voice that we have now. It's not that it's mad, but it's it's it's a hostility towards God that we need to, you know, we need to stand firm. And like we said, that is a game, but they're still embraced. That's the identity. That's my identity is in this lifestyle. Not in Christ was the problem. That's what it goes back to. You know, my identity is in my race and not in Christ. My identity is in my status and not in Christ. That's the problem. That's we see that in Scripture. And even my status is that I am a Jew. This is a Gentile. So I'm the preferred of God. What would your answer be to that? A good answer to that is someone who says, well, I'm gay, but I'm not practicing it, but I should still, you know, have my position again in the church or as a pastor. I would take you to 2 Corinthians 5.17. That's where I would take you. With him, man being Christ, he creates all the things that come and the things that don't come. So either you're recreated in the image of the Son, or you're not. And so, for me, that's where I go with those, because what's happening is, in no other era in history, of human history, have we identified ourselves by sexual practices. This is the only era where we're doing that. And it's a total shift from the transcendent God to the flesh. I am what I do. It's crazy. It's only in one particular area. Can I say, well, I'm a plumber, I'm a Christian? Yeah, that makes sense. You're a plumber and you are a Christian, right? But when you say, I'm gay and I'm a Christian, you're identifying yourself by a sexual predilection, not by an employment. This is something I I'm an adultery Christian, but how is this different? I know I bring that up in a lot of the context, but look at Paul. They bring up the two things over and over again. Adultery and murder. Adultery and murder. Adultery and murder. Well, I have a wandering eye, but I'm not acting on it. Christ addressed that. It's the same thing. Yeah, so what you're doing is really you have put yourself as the creator. So you're no longer the creature, you are the creator. I have ascended. That's a scary question. Anybody have any questions on some of this stuff? Like I said, if you don't mind going longer, I don't mind either. I know that some of these conversations, we're going to really get into some discussion. I love classes like this. But like I said, that circumcision party, the Judaizers, we have our examples today. So that's what I'm hoping to show, is as we're learning the history, why it's important is because they battled it then, we're battling it now. And they went to the Word of God to defend the Orthodox Christian views. Alright, with these creeds, confession, we'll see that again. Maybe that'll be a class later on. And if you are interested in some of those things, I say hit us up because we do have how we got the creeds and confessions and the councils and if you're a history nerd, fantastic stuff. If you're not a history nerd, I still say it's fantastic, but I'm biased because I'm a history nerd, so. Any other questions or statements on this?