WWUTT 2405 Q&A New Pope, Effectual Calling, Talking With the Dead

Proverbs on Speech, Slander, and the Mouth

What are we as Christians to think about the Pope? What is the difference between the external call and the effectual call of the Holy Spirit? And how do we speak to someone who thinks they're hearing from a dead relative?

The answer is when we understand the text.

This is When We Understand The Text, a daily Bible commentary to help encourage your time in the Word, brought to you by Providence Reformed Baptist Church in Casa Grande, Arizona. For more information about our ministry, go to www .pastorgabe .com.

Once again, it's Pastor Gabe.

Thank you, Becky.

You're welcome.

And you're welcome for joining us here today.

Yay!

Thanks!

You're always welcome. Always welcome here. Let's begin with the Word of God, Proverbs chapter 10, starting in verse 18. I've got four verses to knock out here, but they all thematically go together.

Awesome.

So verse 18 is, The one who conceals hatred has lying lips, and whoever utters slander is a fool. When words are many, transgression is not lacking, but whoever restrains his lips is prudent. The tongue of the righteous is choice silver.

The heart of the wicked is of little worth. The lips of the righteous feed many, but fools die for lack of sense. So what theme do all four of those verses appear to follow there?

The mouth.

Yeah.

Talking about our words.

The control over your mouth.

Exactly.

What kinds of things are we saying? Are they of benefit to anybody? You know, you think of the instruction in Ephesians 4, 29, that we are to build one another up with our words, giving grace to those who hear.

Whereas the heart of the wicked is of little worth, and the words that he says, what comes out of his heart comes out of his mouth, and the words that he says does not benefit anybody, doesn't build them up, but rather tears them down.

It brings ruin. Kind of going back to one of the verses that we looked at last week. The mouth of the fool brings ruin near. That was in verse 14.

Is it saying that people who lie, I'm sorry, in verse 18, is it saying people who lie, they have hatred in their heart?

The one who conceals hatred has lying lips. So, his heart is hateful toward other people. But he's acting like everything's fine and he loves everybody, but in his heart there's something scheming that's going on that is not for the betterment of people around him, but will actually be looking for his own personal advantage, tearing others down in the process for whatever will get him gain.

Whoever utters slander is a fool, so he's speaking false words about other people. And again, somehow to benefit himself, making it look like that he's in the know, or he's better than these other people, or whatever it might happen to be.

So the person who in their heart does not have a high regard for other people, then is always looking for ways that he can either take advantage of others or tear them down.

Okay.

So instead, verse 21, the lips of the righteous feed many, are of benefit to many people.

Right.

But fools die for lack of sense. And not just the fools who are senseless, but even the people who are listening to those senseless fools will also...

Following them.

Yeah, will follow them to their destruction as well.

Yeah.

It's kind of like what I shared on the broadcast on Thursday when we were in Jeremiah 14, the symbiotic relationship that the false teacher has with the person that listens to it. So as the Apostle Paul said in 2 Timothy 4, that people who wander from the truth will store up for themselves teachers to suit their own passions.

So the lying prophet lies, speaks lies so that he may take advantage of others, but those people that he's taking advantage of. We often think of them as being victims.

Right.

But again, they're going after the false teacher because the false teacher is telling them what they want to hear.

Right.

And so all the more important for us to understand the messenger and test his message according to the word that we may listen to those words that are pleasing to God and not be taken advantage of because we were listening to somebody who appealed to our flesh.

Also, like when words are many, transgression is not lacking. I think of pop music.

Oh, yeah.

Hip hop, especially because it's like that entire genre is just all about me. Singers singing about himself, all the money he's making, the women he has, the drugs he's doing.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Where words are many, transgression is not lacking.

That's true.

All right.

The Pope, the Papacy, and Christ as the Only Head of the Church

Well, this is the end of the week edition of when we understand the text. We like to take questions from the listeners. You can submit those questions to when we understand the text at gmail dot com. Babe, there's a new pope.

Rather, I should have led this by saying the Vatican has chosen a new antichrist.

Yes.

So what is this guy's name? Robert Pope Bob. He's actually taking the name Leo the 14th. But yeah, he's Pope Bob.

I really, I don't know. I think I would have more respect for them if they went with their original given name. They go and adopt a name that's been used, like, what, 15, 14 times.

Well, 14 times. Yeah, especially.

And then it's like, why? Anyway.

I don't remember why.

Are you following their shoes? Are you like, what? What's the deal? Now, I know whenever there was First Communion and then there was what's next.

So your Catholic upbringing, you're talking, right?

My Catholic upbringing. So there is First Communion. And then there's you go through confirmation.

Yes.

Confirmation process.

And then you get you pick a saint. And then all of a sudden, that saint's name is part of your name. OK, like, not legally, but just that's what you call yourself then.

Sure.

And so I'm wondering if, like, the Pope does the same thing. Like, do they legally change their name to that? Or do they, like, just adopt that? And then that's what they're called? Or how?

Yeah, it's not a legal name change.

It's not?

It's just he's known by that name as the Pope. That was his Pope name. And Leo's appropriate because Leo means lion.

OK.

And First Peter 5, 8 says, be sober minded, be watchful. Your adversary, the devil prowls around like a roaring lion. Seeking for someone to devour.

Well, there you go.

So I'm all right with the Pope calling himself Leo.

Yeah.

I'm still going to call him Pope Bob, though. So this question.

I mean, is that his, like, astrology sign?

Yeah, not a Leo. Because remember, we just had Pope Francis. There was Pope Benedict. Pope John Paul. Yeah, it's all just.

They just recycle them.

Yeah, they just it's kind of like hurricane names.

Oh, what's the next one? Oh, yeah, this one's coming up.

Yeah.

Hurricane names.

So this question comes from Ryan. He says, as a Christian, should I care about who the Pope is? Obviously, he doesn't answer to me or, frankly, for God. But I know that he is a cultural figure. How should I respond?

I really like Virgil Walker's response, he says, and then posted it here. A new pope has been crowned, but the old lie remains. No priest, no pontiff, no pope can save you. Salvation is by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, according to Scripture alone, for the glory of God alone.

Flee false shepherds, run to Christ.

Amen.

So, yeah, it's true that we as Protestants, as evangelicals, or dare I say, we as Christians don't have any sort of reverence for the Pope. He claims to be the vicar of Christ. He's the representation, the head of the church, Christ on the earth.

That's the position of the Pope. Now, the Roman Catholics will ground this in Matthew 16, 18, where Jesus said to Peter, you are Peter, and on this rock, I will build my church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it.

So the Roman Catholics use that verse to say that's the papacy right there. Jesus appointed Peter to be the first Pope.

Okay.

And so the Pope today...

Jesus.

Yeah, that's what they're saying.

And Jesus is not appointing Popes. They're appointing them themselves.

But they will say that this is like an unbroken line of succession. So Pope Leo XIV is the 267th Pope, or something like that, if you count from Peter all the way to today.

Oh.

But going all the way back to Peter, even, there's no evidence that he was ever a bishop.

Of Rome.

There's no historical evidence that he had ever been...

Or Catholic, for that matter.

Well, yeah, but Roman Catholic doesn't come along for hundreds of years later. So there's no evidence that Peter was ever there, let alone that he was the bishop of Rome and therefore could have been named the first Pope.

But even going by what we have in Scripture, Peter is not the rock. Christ is.

Right.

When Jesus says, on this rock, I will build my church, there is nothing in Scripture anywhere after that verse before that verse that is indicating there is any other rock but Christ. 1 Corinthians 10 .4 says, the rock is Christ.

Ephesians 2 .20 says that the church is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone. And if you go to 1 Peter 2, you have the guy that the Roman Catholic Church claims is the first Pope saying even there that Jesus Christ is the cornerstone and the rest of the church is built upon him.

For he says that you are chosen in precious stones. You are like living stones being built up as a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.

And then goes on from there to say, for it stands in Scripture, behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a cornerstone chosen and precious, and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame. That's Christ.

Christ is the rock on which the church is built.

Yes.

Now, Peter is certainly a stone.

Right.

And he is definitely a foundation stone because of what's said there in Ephesians 2 .20.

Yes.

But he's not the rock.

Right.

And the church is not built on him.

Right.

The church is built on Christ.

Or should be, to be sound.

Well, yeah.

I mean, if you got a church that's not built on Christ, then you don't really have a church.

Right.

Or you have a church, but it would be a false church, not the true church. But furthermore, there's other things in Scripture that indicate to us that Peter did not have some kind of primacy over the rest of the apostles.

Peter was rebuked by Jesus just a few verses after that one.

Yeah, that's true.

After he said, you are Peter, and on this rock, I will build my church, saying to him, blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for man did not reveal this to you, the claim that Peter made, you are the Christ, the son of the living God, man has not revealed this to you, but my father who is in heaven, it was not revealed to him by flesh and blood.

Right.

But then a few verses later, when Peter tries to oppose Jesus going to the cross, Jesus says to him, get behind me, Satan. So, and Peter had a real knack for sticking his foot in his mouth.

Yes.

For somebody who's supposed to hold a position that is infallible.

Yeah.

And then you also had the apostle Paul rebuking Peter in Galatians chapter two, because Peter was choosing to eat with the Jews and shunning the Gentiles. And so, Paul opposed Peter to his face.

Right.

Paul had this authority as an apostle in which he could rebuke another apostle if that apostle was in the wrong. So, Peter had no primacy there that Paul had to be in subjection to. Whatever Peter says goes, I guess, I have to be in subjection to him because he's the.

One.

He's the one Jesus appointed to be the rock on which the church is built. Nothing in scripture reflects that in any way. There's not even another verse after Matthew 16, 18. Even if you're looking at that one with some level of confusion.

Okay.

When Jesus says, you are Peter and on this rock, I will build my church. Peter means rock. So, is Jesus talking about Peter? You have no other passage after that to confirm that theory. You would just be reading that into Matthew 16, 18, but can't cross-reference it with any other passage.

So, there's nothing else in scripture that indicates that about Peter. Now, going back to Ryan's question, though, how is it should we think about the Pope? Because he's obviously a cultural figure. Well, I think it is important that we know who this is.

Because the number of world leaders out there who claim to be Roman Catholic.

That's what I was going to say.

And they're going to follow, especially in Europe.

Yeah.

They're going to follow whatever the Pope says.

Right.

And it's connections. So, it's like all of the Catholic churches are the autonomous or whatever. They're the same. It's going to be the same no matter where you go.

Well, yeah, the Catholic churches are not autonomous. It's a hierarchy.

Well, yeah, I used the wrong word. I meant like they're all connected. They're all the same. If you go to one in a different language, it's still going to be the same. The message will be a little bit different.

But the structure of the mass is all the same.

Right.

And so, it's going to and the Pope can change that. Because there was one Pope who very much upset my grandpa. Because he changed too much.

Wasn't it Francis? I thought he didn't like Francis.

I think it was.

Yeah.

And so, but my grandpa, he stood up and he left. And we're in the middle. Because he's like, nope, this is not right. But it was just funny how it was like, yeah, the Popes can make such a crazy decision to change all the churches.

That affects all of Roman Catholicism.

All the churches have to do it because he's the Pope. I mean, there was a lot of people who went along with it too.

Right.

They weren't as

Oh, of course.

Bold as my grandpa.

Well, it looks like this Pope is very much a, you know, Francian or whatever. Whatever you would say about Francis, whatever his teaching was, this guy's following along the lines with it.

Oh.

Really hard to think that this was not something very political. Because he's made all kinds of statements about open borders and immigration.

Already?

And what's like the most

For there?

No, going back. Like all of his teaching going back as a cardinal.

Oh, okay.

I'm talking Pope Leo XIV.

Yes.

Pope Bob.

Okay.

Pope Bob.

Pope Bob from Chicago, incidentally. Pope Bob from Chicago. Yeah, he's from Chicago. This is the first American Pope.

Oh, I missed that.

Yes.

Okay. Well, that's interesting.

In the history of Roman Catholicism, he's the first Pope from the United States.

That's interesting. Okay, that explains why he's talking about borders and stuff.

Okay.

Exactly.

Exactly.

I'm caught up now.

Well, I mean, Francis did too. Francis said things.

Oh, yeah, yeah.

Francis said stuff that appeared to be directly going after.

I just ignored Francis. I was like, you're crazy.

But because he said some things about immigration, this kind of has that appearance of, oh, that's why they chose that guy. Because it sounds like something that could oppose the president of the United States or some of those political issues that are kind of dominating this current administration.

And so that would be the reason why he was chosen and appointed. I mean, you got to consider too, J .D. Vance is a practicing Roman Catholic. So it's important for us to know who is the Pope in Rome, because how much is the vice president of the United States going to be following his lead?

Right.

Will there be any opposition there? You know, things of that nature. I mean, he's a hugely influential religious and world figure. And whoever is going to be in that position of the Pope is going to affect some of the moral issues that are going on in our culture.

So what kind of direction are those moral issues going to take? He's going to have an influence on them. So that's why there is some importance to us paying attention to whoever is in that spot and whatever his ethics or his politics might happen to be, because it's going to have a global impact.

Right.

So it'd be kind of like paying attention to who the president is.

Yeah, of course.

Right.

Yeah.

Just like we were world leaders.

Yeah.

Just like we're interested in who the president is and what his politics are.

Right.

So you're going to be interested in the Pope in that sense as well.

Because it indirectly does affect you.

But it's the very fact that he claims to be the vicar of Christ. You know, for us as Reformed Baptists, our confession of faith says he's an antichrist.

Right.

So that's true. Yeah, there is kind of a direct impact there.

That's true.

There's the Pope. And OK, like I started by saying, they've chosen another antichrist. This is a man who doesn't actually stand in the position of Christ. He stands opposed to Christ.

What is the vicar of Christ mean? Can you explain that a little bit better?

The term vicar, the word vicar itself means it's from the same word that we get vicarious. So if you live vicariously through someone else.

Oh, OK.

So vicarious is a substitute or a representative. So he's meant to be the representative of Christ on the earth. He's the visible head.

OK.

So as Christ is the invisible head of the church, this is according to Roman Catholic.

Right.

Theology.

Right.

Christ is the invisible head. The Pope is the visible head.

OK, so he's supposed to be sinless?

Well, the apologists will admit that he's not. And the catechism doesn't say so. But most Roman Catholics think that he is. Remember, they call him the Holy Father.

No, that's true. That's true. I had forgotten that. It's been too long. I'm grateful.

And they really do see him as sinless. Even if you have, even if, you know, you're going to come up with a Roman Catholic apologist like the Catholic Answers guys or something like that are going to say, no, no, no, no, he's not sinless.

You know, whatever a Catholic apologist says is really irrelevant because whatever the Pope says goes.

Right.

And those Catholic apologists have no authority over the Pope. So they'll try to like walk back his statements or clarify his statement. And Francis said all kinds of things.

Oh, man.

That were not only unbiblical. Of course, he did because he's the Pope. He's the Roman Catholic Pope. But it was even contrary to Roman Catholic doctrine.

Yes.

So some of the things he said, like, you know, when he talked about how that atheist father went to heaven or when he said that mankind is basically good. Things of that nature. He's speaking contrary to even what Roman Catholic doctrine was saying.

Yeah.

And you'll have the Catholic apologists that will come out and try to explain. No, what he really meant was this or whatever is this or or they can even just straight up say he was wrong. He had a moment of weakness there when he said that doesn't matter.

He's the Pope and you're not.

Yep.

So based on the very reasoning for his position, his words have all the authority and whatever a Catholic apologist says doesn't matter. And the apologists have hated it when I've said that.

Yeah.

But they know I'm right in their heart of hearts. They know I can't. I cannot really oppose the Pope.

Yeah.

Matt Walsh is a very outspoken Roman Catholic. He's one of the I want to say pundits. Would he be a pundit? One of the talking heads of the Daily Wire.

Anyway, I have no idea what that's called.

I've been anchor opinion columnists.

Oh, yeah, that'd be good.

Opinionist.

We're all opinionists, babe.

Yeah.

And he's an outspoken Roman Catholic, and he very much opposed Francis. But it's like it doesn't matter, man.

You can't do anything.

There's nothing you knew about it.

Yeah.

According to your church's doctrine, you have to do it. You have to do. You have to submit to whoever he is on the top of this thing. So so anyway, it's all of that's just wildly amusing. And at the same time, sad and heartbreaking.

Yeah.

So in other words, we have to buckle up and go for another ride on that crazy train.

Well, every time there's a Pope and there's always going to be a Pope until Christ comes back.

Fair enough.

All right.

I do think that's one of those positions, one of those authorities. It's always going to be there until Christ returns. So and again, it's why we have in our statement of faith and why a lot of reform denominations, including Presbyterians, have in their statements of faith that the Pope is an antichrist.

Yeah.

So claiming to be the vicar of Christ or standing as the visible head of Christ on the earth is an opposition to Christ, not a representative of Christ.

Right.

The head of the church is Jesus, and it will always and only be Jesus.

Amen.

And he is the rock upon which the church is built, and there will not be another one.

And I'm so grateful.

Oh, yeah.

Amen to that. He is the same yesterday, today and forever, whereas Popes are always going to be changing. I'll get this pushback from Roman Catholics as well. Anytime they start bringing up the fact that Protestant denomination, there's always these thousands of Protestant denominations.

So which one is the correct one? And I'll fire back, which one of your Popes was the correct one?

Right.

Because they've all taught something different.

They have.

And there have never been two Popes that were in agreement with one another.

Yep.

For like nine years, there were two Popes at the same time. Francis and Benedict.

Yes.

And they were as night and day from one another as two Popes could have been.

Yes.

So who was the correct one?

Yeah.

Which one was right? And they try to...

That's the second one they brought in.

Yeah.

Yeah, right. They try to make fun of Protestantism and say that we have so many divided issues and all this kind of stuff. It exists within your conclave. So don't even give me that. This question comes from John.

He says, greetings, Pastor Gabe. On your Wednesday podcast, you were talking about the people who took the blasphemy challenge and you were explaining how the only way someone could blaspheme the Holy Spirit is to resist the gospel, all of one's life and die in their sins.

So we were talking about where Jesus was responding to the crowds who were saying of him that he's of Beelzebul and that's how he's able to cast out demons. And so Jesus said that all kinds of blasphemies that people utter will be forgiven them, but not the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.

Right.

That's what we refer to as the unforgivable sin.

Right.

So we kind of looked at the different possibilities of what that could potentially mean. And there are some that just simply means, well, Jesus was only talking about the Pharisees, only they could have committed the unforgivable sin because of what they know and what they saw with their very eyes.

And we're not there at the time of Jesus' earthly ministry to see what he was doing. So we can't commit the unpardonable sin. But I don't think that that's the context either, especially with the way that it's worded in Luke.

Yeah.

Matthew and Mark, I get why you might come to that conclusion. But the way that it's given to us in Luke sounds a lot more like it's the witness of the Holy Spirit that a person would continue to resist and having never submitted to the call of the gospel.

Then on the day of judgment, that's ultimately the thing they're getting judged for is that they did not believe in Jesus Christ and did not listen to the witness of the Holy Spirit that showed us that Jesus is the Christ.

Yeah.

And so John goes on to say, you already know that I'm reformed. Therefore, I understand what you were saying. But for the rest of your audience, would you elaborate on that understanding comparing it to the general gospel call with irresistible grace?

So the general gospel call is the call that everybody hears whenever you hear a presentation of the gospel.

Okay.

Jesus Christ died on the cross for your sins. He rose again from the dead. Whoever believes in him will not perish but have everlasting life. You've heard the gospel call.

Amen.

You've heard what we call the external call, not the effectual call. So the effectual call being that work of the Holy Spirit that happens on the inside of a person to believe the message that you just heard.

Now, the Holy Spirit does not do such a work in every single person.

Correct.

But only those who believe, you know, the Spirit has done that work in them. But the Spirit is still behind the external call. Even if a person didn't listen to that call and didn't believe that call, the Spirit was still in the delivery of that gospel message.

Sure.

And so the person that does not believe in the gospel has still resisted the Spirit, even though the effectual call has not been worked out in their hearts. John 6, 37, all that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me, I will never cast out.

And verse 44, no one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up on the last day. And it's the Father who sends the Spirit that has worked in that message of the gospel to regenerate our hearts, that we may go from the stone-cold sinner that was in resistance to God and opposed him and was in rebellion, and now having heard about our sin and need for a Savior, we're broken and convicted and desire to know Jesus Christ.