WWUTT 400 Q&A Judge Not the Flux Capacitor Appearance?

What does it mean to judge not, lest ye be judged? What's the deal with the flux capacitor?

And did God ever appear prior to the incarnation of Jesus Christ? The answers to these questions when we understand the text.

Many of the Bible stories and verses we think we know, we don't. When we understand the text is an online ministry committed to teaching sound doctrine and exposing the faulty.

Visit our website at www .utt .com. Now here's our host, Pastor Gabe Hughes.

Thank you, Becky. And greetings, everybody. Welcome to the 400th episode of the podcast.

I don't have anything particularly special I'm doing today. I just thought I would mention that. It is

Friday and on the Friday edition of the broadcast, we take questions from the listeners. Best way to get a question to us is by email, whenweunderstandthetext at gmail .com.

I want to say thank you to those who are continuing to contribute books to the small library that we are putting together at our church.

There are some who have said, hey, we'd like to contribute to our ministry. What's a way that we can do that?

Sending books to us. That's one way that you can contribute to the church that when we understand the text was born out of.

Some especially who are in other countries and say, hey, the way that you've got your donations set up on your website, we can't give money to you that way.

But hey, you can still buy a book through Amazon or Christian book distributors or something like that. So send those books to when we know not when we understand the text.

That's not where you send them to. You send them to our church. First Southern Baptist Church, 1220

West 8th Street, Junction City, Kansas, 66441.

Now we have one shelf, not like the full shelf, not top to bottom, but one shelf that is full of John MacArthur books.

So I have put a stop on John MacArthur, but anything else is great. We just got something recently from somebody and I don't know if it was

Virginia or Maryland. I'm sorry I didn't write it down, so I can't give you a proper thank you. But it was about eight or nine books or something like that.

A couple of children's books in there, too. That was it was a title that I had never seen before. So I'm going to read those and thank you for introducing me to a new title.

And then they go on the shelf in our library. One of our high school students, this is a project for her.

She's a homeschool student, and I think that she gets credit for this somehow manning our library.

So she's cataloging everything and putting all of that together, which I think is pretty cool that that she wants to contribute to our church in that way.

And you can as well by donating books. And thank you once again for your contributions and your prayers for this ministry.

We also got an email earlier this week from somebody who said they were praying for us. That's another way that you can contribute to when we understand the text.

And I thank you for that as well. All right. Let's get to the questions here. This first one is a criticism.

I had read an email earlier this week from somebody who was upset at one of the blogs that I wrote warning people about John Pavlovitz.

I received another one. This is from Bess in Anderson, Missouri. And she said,

I think you are so wrong in all caps to tell people to stop sharing

John Pavlovitz writings. Judge not lest ye be judged. All right.

I question those like Franklin Graham who support Donald Trump. Still, I would not tell anyone not to share

Franklin Franklin's views. God works through people. See, that's a judgment.

Let me let me point out three things here. Number one, since November, I believe that nine out of 10 angry emails that I've received from the

John Pavlovitz faithful mentioned some kind of disdain for Donald Trump. I got another one just a few days ago from someone named

Lou, who said the following. So glad you have Jesus in a box and feel your knowledge of the

Bible is best. Bet you felt called to support Satan, a .k .a. Donald Trump as well.

You and your false prophets are why this article is so true in all caps and then linked to an article from John Pavlovitz.

Since the election, Pavlovitz has gone on and on about evangelicals and Donald Trump lumping the two together.

So when you write to me about how I'm judgmental against John Pavlovitz and you are linking me with Donald Trump without even doing a little bit of research to find out,

I've not been the biggest supporter of Donald Trump. And I've warned others about some of the dangerous things that he says.

You're you're being a hypocrite, saying that I'm being judgmental and yet believing, accusing me or assuming that I believe a certain way.

All right. Number two, telling me that I'm wrong and then saying, judge not lest ye be judged.

That's hypocritical. That is a judgment. You are judging me, telling me that I'm not supposed to judge others.

Furthermore, Matthew 7, from which you have taken your judge not statement, actually tells us that we are supposed to judge.

Matthew 7 1, judge not that you be not judged for with the judgment you pronounce, you will be judged.

And with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?

Or how can you say to your brother, let me take the speck out of your eye when there is the log in your own eye?

You hypocrite first take the log out of your eye and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.

This is an instruction on how we are supposed to judge. This is not Jesus saying that we are not supposed to judge at all.

Jesus said to his disciples in the book of John, do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment.

He does instruct us that we are supposed to judge. He does say, however, that we're not supposed to judge hypocritically.

And already in my first two points in response to this criticism, I have shown how you are judging hypocritically.

Point number three, I agree with you that God works through people.

He is even working through John Pavlovitz. How is he doing that? By sending Pavlovitz's readers a strong delusion so that they may believe what is false in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

They refuse to love the truth and so be saved. That's second Thessalonians two, 10 through 12.

I care about people enough to warn them about Pavlovitz, who is leading them to destruction, scratching their itching ears by telling them what they want to hear.

False teachers are a judgment on those who hate God. So yes,

God is using John Pavlovitz. That doesn't mean you should follow him or share his articles.

I pray that the Lord would grant him repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth and he come to his senses and escape from the snare of the devil after being captured by him to do his will.

That's second Timothy two, 25 through 26. But until that happens, until he repents, do not share his blogs.

And in doing so, you lead others astray. Next comment comes from Jeff in California.

He says, Hey, good job on fitting the flux capacitor into your latest video about Lent.

I believe a lot of people miss that one. And also got a comment on Twitter from Rachel in Indiana. She said that I think you should totally work a flux capacitor into every video like an

Easter egg. Hey, you got a video on that? No, I haven't done a video on Easter eggs yet. I suppose I should as we get closer to Easter, maybe that's an easy video to do.

Easter eggs are not in the Bible. There we go. Got that one taken care of. You know, there was a point when

I started doing videos and I was getting a lot of pointers from other people. And I was showing the video saying, how can we do this?

How can we change these things and throwing scripts around and saying, is this script accurate and all that kind of stuff? There was a point when

I wanted to fit Batman into every what video never happened, though.

Actually, I gave up the idea after the first 90 second video that I did. But the first 90 second video was if memory serves, it was on the subject of God helps those who help themselves.

And there is a blink in that video. It goes by real fast, but it's Batman with his thumb up.

Specifically, it's the Michael Keaton Batman doing a thumbs up. And I like that so much.

And I thought it was funny that I thought, hey, what if I what if I sneak that into every video? There's some sort of superhero reference.

If it's not Batman, it's another kind of superhero. But the next video we did, I think, was a more serious topic.

And it was just kind of distracting to throw in a culture reference like that. Pop culture references are a funny kind of animal.

They can be a little bit entertaining and kind of fun for people to find every once in a while.

But they also have that potential of causing people to stumble. And I just don't want to do that. You know,

Back to the Future is not really a movie that you would recommend. You don't tell people to go watch

Back to the Future. A lot of people have seen it because it's a very popular movie. But I don't want throwing in references like that to come across as this is something entertaining that you can see so that you can get the joke and laugh along with us.

So for that reason, I don't really throw in a lot of pop references. My wife and I, we've got shows and movies that we like to watch, but we really watch those things very privately.

I don't really talk about them. You might notice if you've listened to this program for any length of time or if you've read my blog,

I criticize a lot more movies and TV shows than I actually recommend. And it's because I don't want to cause anybody to stumble.

For the most part, those shows and those movies are made by very liberal people. And they will throw stuff in there that I don't want to have the potential of leading somebody astray.

Now, there's stuff that for my wife and I is completely off limits. It's not like we're going, hey, we're going to watch this bad stuff.

As long as nobody else knows about it, then we're safe and we're OK. It's nothing like that. We have certain convictions and certain way of screening the things that we watch.

But I don't want to tell you, hey, we watch this particular detective show. And then you go, oh, well, if Gabe is watching it, it must be

OK. And then you bring it up. And in the content of that particular episode that you watch is something that causes you to stumble.

I just don't want somebody that would cause you to stumble in that way. So for that reason,

I tend to stay away from pop culture references or even recommendations. But for whatever reason, in the

Lent video, it felt kind of funny to throw in a flux capacitor because I said the word flux.

So the flux capacitor just kind of fit anyway. But thank you.

Thank you for the suggestion. Maybe a few more Easter eggs will pop up here and there. It's just not something that I'm going to make a regular habit out of.

All right. Last question here. This comes from Sam in Lindale, Texas. He says, well, this is about the video that I did on the shack versus the

Bible. He says Exodus 3, 13 through 15. When Moses asked God, who should

I say who sent me? God in the burning bush said, I am who I am. God has never revealed himself without a physical appearance ever.

If he ever had, folks would draw conclusions about God according to his appearance rather than who

God truly is. Hollywood has enough trouble with the appearance of Christ, often depicted with blue eyes and blonde hair.

In fact, the Bible also never made a reference to Christ's appearance. God is consistent.

Yes. Doesn't giving God two physical appearances in the shack mean that the book is scriptural apostasy?

Not that you don't make good points, but you left out this most obvious fact. Well, first of all, you mentioned that God has never revealed himself with a physical appearance ever.

Well, the fact of the matter, he has now, if you're talking about God, the father, right? God, the father has never shown himself because as it says in John 1, 18, no one has ever seen

God referencing the father. The only God referencing the son who is at the father's side, he has made him known.

So no one has ever seen God, the father. One of the reasons why you can know, by the way, that Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism, was a complete liar because he claimed that God, the father, and God, the son, both appeared to him at the same time.

That's not even a claim that anyone in the Bible, Old Testament or New, makes. Any appearance that we have of God is a

Christophany. It's an appearance of Christ prior to the incarnation of Christ.

Any appearance of God in the Old Testament, that is the appearance of God, the son. And so for Joseph Smith to claim that God, the father, appeared to him,

Smith is claiming something that never even happened to any of the prophets or the apostles. So that's one of the ways that you know he's a liar and anybody else who claims to see

God, the father, Kim Walker Smith from Jesus culture, same thing. She claimed to have this vision where she's sitting in this room praying and Jesus comes and taps her on the shoulder and when she turns and looks behind her, there's

Jesus and she also sees a vision of God, the father. Liar as well. Nobody has ever seen

God, the father. So if that's what you mean when you say that no one has ever seen

God ever, that's correct. But God has shown himself in a physical appearance even prior to the incarnation of Christ.

Genesis chapter 18 is an example of this. Genesis 18, verse one, So God in a physical form comes and sits down with Abraham and eats with him.

So God did show himself in a physical way. Now this was a form that Abraham could receive.

It wasn't God appearing in all of his glory because Abraham wouldn't have been able to stand that. But he makes an appearance as a man before Abraham.

Now, of course, his appearance is not described, but we do have descriptions of Jesus' appearance in the

Bible. Isaiah 53, Who has believed what he has heard from us and to whom has the arm of the

Lord been revealed? For he grew up before him like a young plant and like a root out of dry ground.

He had no form or majesty that we should look at him and no beauty that we should desire him.

He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief and is one from whom men hide their faces.

He was despised and we esteemed him not. Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows.

Yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions.

He was crushed for our iniquities. Upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his wounds we are healed.

So there are mentions there of Jesus' appearance in Isaiah 53, that he was not a good -looking man, that he had no appearance that drew people to him, but rather that would make them hide their faces.

Now, we can also know that Jesus was a Galilean. He was born in Galilee, so he had olive skin.

That is not inappropriate for us to draw that deduction. But he looked like every other

Galilean in the area. There was nothing about him that stood out from anyone else. Because when

Judas was telling the Pharisees who Jesus was, or the soldiers that were going with him, he said, the one

I kiss is the man. So Jesus did not even stand out from his own disciples, and Judas had to have this signal, this indicator, as to which one of them was

Jesus, because there was that possibility that the disciples were going to jump up and go, oh, I'm Jesus, to try to fool them, protecting their

Lord in the process. So yes, we can know what

Jesus looked like, and it's not inappropriate for us to discern that. What is inappropriate is when we take liberties with that interpretation and we make

God into what we want. And not only did William Paul Young do that in appearance, making

God the Father a woman, and making God the Holy Spirit also into a woman, in that personification, but he took liberties with God into making

God into something that Scripture does not describe in his character and in the execution of his judgments.

God is a universalist in the shack, claiming that he is going to save everybody.

Jesus says that he is the best way to have a relationship with God, not the only way to have a relationship with God.

And I think one of the most offensive statements that's made in the shack is when Jesus says to Mac that he never presents himself as a king, which is horribly blasphemous, because that is exactly the way that Christ is shown to us, particularly in the book of Revelation, that he is king of kings and Lord of lords, and he is coming back as a conquering king to destroy his enemies and all those who were in league with the beast.

The end times are full of blood and war, and this is not the kind of God that William Paul Young wants to believe in.

He refuses to believe in that God. The kind of God that he created is not the

God of the Bible. And in his most recent book, Lies We Believe About God, he concludes his chapters by presenting a quote from the

God in the shack and saying that that's the God he believes in. So William Paul Young very literally saying that the

God that he follows is the God he invented. It is a false

God and he is a heretic, have nothing to do with the shack or his book.

And that's enough for us to know. We don't have to, you know, try to try to get into the logistics of, well, he gave

God an appearance and God never appeared. Well, he did appear. He made physical appearances in the

Old Testament even prior to the incarnation of Jesus Christ. What makes the incarnation specific and unique is that God came into human flesh.

He simply had the appearance of a man like with Abraham in Genesis chapter 18.

But with Jesus Christ, God became the God man, fully

God, fully man, put on flesh and dwelt among us. We now have a high priest who is able to sympathize with us in our weaknesses, for he himself was tempted, yet was without sin, as it says in the book of Hebrews.

And as we just read this week in 1 John chapter 2, he is our advocate before the father,

Jesus Christ, the righteous, did everything perfectly when we could not be perfect.

He was perfect. That perfect, spotless sacrifice on the cross for our sins so that all who believe in Christ are forgiven their sins and have received eternal life.

That is the Jesus of the Bible. That is the God that we are supposed to believe in and follow.

Not the made up God of the shack, but the true God of the scriptures. So thank you for your question,

Sam, and thank you all for your questions. Once again, if you would like to submit a question to the ministry, the best way to do it is sending us an email, whenweunderstandthetext at gmail .com.

God bless. We'll continue our study of 1 John chapter 2 on Monday. This is

When We Understand the Text with Pastor Gabe Hughes. There are lots of great Bible teaching programs on the web, and we thank you for selecting ours.

But this is no replacement for regular fellowship with a church family. Find a good, gospel -teaching,

Christ -centered church to worship with this weekend, and join us again Monday for more Bible study, When We Understand the