Finishing Up Sheikh Awal's Opening Statement from 2009

Webcasting around the world from the desert metropolis of Phoenix, Arizona. This is the dividing line. The Apostle Peter commanded Christians to be ready to give a defense for the hope that is within us.

Yet to give that answer with gentleness and reverence. Our host is dr. James white director of Alpha Omega ministries and an elder at the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church. This is a live program and we invite your participation.

If you'd like to talk with dr. White call now. It's 602 973 460 to or toll-free across the United States. It's 1 877 7 5 3 3 3 4 1. And now with today's topic here is James white. And good afternoon.

Opening Banter and Call-In Setup

Welcome to the dividing line on a Thursday afternoon. 8 7 7 7 5 3 3 3 4 1. 8 7 7 7 5 3 3 3 4 1 is the phone number. Dividing dot line is. The Skype address if you want to be able to be heard turning the pages of your Bible scratching your nose.

Yes, you do when you're. When you're on Skype, we will hear it all unlike. People got along fine for a good hundred years on just plain old, you know phone lines, but everything keeps changing. No, I'm definitely a geek and I love geeky things but.

Sometimes it just it's just going too fast, you know, there's just there. You know, I've got a new phone coming, you know. My old phone has decided to air once in a while and I sort of wonder if they're it's planned obsolescence.

I think it is. But you know, in fact, wasn't I talking to you? I think I was on the phone with you yeah, and all of a sudden it just went blue and. That's almost exactly the name. It sounded made. And just decide to completely reset and that's generally not a good thing.

That that's generally not what you want that have happened during your phone calls. Anyways got another one coming and you know, there's the learning curve and you know. The setup time and and it's like, you know every couple years.

I don't know. Maybe I'm just getting old and I I like Sameness, you know, I know some people who are really into sameness. I know I know one person doesn't even have a cell phone. Yeah, my fellow elder at church Does not even have a cell phone.

That means when he leaves the house, you can't call him. Nope doesn't have a pager either. Nope. We we did drag him kicking and screaming into the computer age. But yeah, he doesn't do it but you can still get all of them it's it's his wife that's you know.

Responding to everything and pretending to be him and typing Stuff but but yeah, I remember we gave him some of those PDFs of like Spurgeon and stuff like that it was he's a look at. I like. Wow, What a great gift for me, you know.

Yeah, oh well. That's interesting. All right, let's let's go ahead and before we dive back into the shake a wall material. And We're going to talk with Kyle in Illinois. Hi Kyle. How are you?

The Sin Leading to Death in 1 John and Hebrews

Doing good. Good. I was just recently talking with a couple and I think theology about the the concept of cinema and Essentially the concept was is that he basically died to sin nature I guess they would say and and then post conversion you you're gone to the sin nature.

But then if you sin a sin of the death, you know, you're out the door and you're gone Reality, there's something you know wrong with that. But in terms of how you would walk through the sin of the death and how you describe a large distinction sin of the death You know, then that's a problem.

Oh Wow, it's just a very interesting. You said this is something you said this was somebody at church. Yeah. Yeah. Oh, wow.

Alrighty then First things first first John chapter 5 If Anyone sees his brother committing a sin not leading to death He shall ask and God will for him give life to those who commit sin not leading to death.

There is a sin leading to death. I do not say that he should make request for this all unrighteousness is sin and there is a sin not leading to death. We know that no one who was born of God sins. But he was was born of God keeps him and the evil one does not touch him.

I agree with I think a large portion of Interpreters in regards to this text that John is referring to a specific sin the very same sin that the writer of Hebrews would be referring to in the sense of the ultimate act of Apostasy the writer of Hebrews would be referring to going back and offering sacrifice for first John.

It would likewise be something that involves the denial of who Jesus is after confession of the truth of who he is for John it probably had something to do with Those false teachers had gone out and and then began to deny that Jesus had come in the flesh so it would seem to be a fundamental denial of a positive affirmation you've met you've made concerning the faith specifically concerning who Jesus is and then the the public denial of that and Certainly, that's that's John's concern is in identifying these false teachers who have gone out and in essence of set up alternative churches based upon this denial of the actual incarnation and things like that, so there is a I Think a pretty good consensus there and a good basis in first John for seeing that kind of sin not as some kind of Moral issue in the sense of You know getting drunk and running somebody over in a car or something like that.

There is a there is a theological element to it that involves purposefulness in in the action of the individual in the same way that going back to the to Judaism and offering sacrifice and thereby Trampling underfoot the blood of the Son of God the book of Hebrews Is is the same type of thing now as to the the rest of the assertions?

I I'm somewhat hesitant. You know when you just get a summary of sort of what somebody's saying you make a comment about it. And and then they say oh, no, I don't you didn't do your homework, and you didn't look at this.

Yeah, I'm a little bit concerned there, but it sounds like if anyone if anyone is saying that in essence, it's the thing caught me in all you were describing there was this idea of being covered by the Advocacy rather than the blood I think is what you said.

I'm not sure yeah.

You know they would categorize been very differently than at that point than that you would. You'd call it mistakes or. Sure, and it would not. They wouldn't call it sin. And I recognized obviously just read in first John there that you know sin is a transgression of the law.

And so I don't. Well not only that but the very issue of advocacy that is introduced in first John 2 1 if any man sins We have an advocate with the Father Jesus Christ the righteous so it's it's sin, and it is.

The idea that that once you are in Christ sin is no longer sin Just doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever in in the sense that my sins Have been nailed to the cross of Calvary the the writings that were against me which brought condemnation.

He's born in himself there is there is a different way in which sin is treated because Because it's already been imputed to my sin-bearer, and I have experienced regeneration and so in that sense There's a difference.

Which pre conversion? Discussion, but they said well, you know how is it possible for the sin of the death but would you say it's consistent on stuff? They were never of us of course. Yeah, you've got the same line of thought.

Oh, yeah.

Yeah, there's I don't think there's any question first John that you're you're you're in any Hebrews. That the person that does this is is demonstrating by their so doing that. As as the writer says in Hebrews chapter 6 we're convinced of better things you things which accompany salvation and so a person who would do these things would be demonstrating that they don't possess that kind of Perseverance that hope that has an a safe and secure anchor within the veil because of the very fact that they have been taken back and To the old ways and offered sacrifice.

So yeah, both would both would be saying the very same thing. So it sounds like this person's wherever these people are saying that a true Christian can send the sin unto death.

Is that the idea? Absolutely. Yeah, they would they would make that affirmation. You know, yeah, that would be very core to it. Yeah.

Well, I think again the best way to handle any kind of odd theology Encounter is is what I would call holistically that is the best it. You don't accomplish much going at every single little point. It's it's the broad categories of Biblical teaching that are going to be violated at some point by an off-the-wall perspective.

And so once we really establish Fundamental issues regarding the nature of justification the nature of righteousness the nature of the atonement imputed righteousness, etc, etc The intercessory work of Christ, that's really where you start detecting Imbalances in someone's perspective and that's it sounds like what you've got going on there.

But yeah, as far as as that sin unto death, yeah that I think that's definitely the direction to go with it. Okay, okay. All right. That's helpful. Thanks so much. All right. Thanks for your phone call.

Appreciate it. All right, bye-bye all right. Dividing that line on Skype and eight seven seven seven five three three three four one. We have been providing a response to shake a wall. I am thankful I did get an email and to whoever sent it, thank you, I haven't responded to you yet, but Recently trying to just trying to keep the email box from exploding is is the fun part I did get an email and I want to thank whoever sent it in Thanking me for doing this series because this particular individual is is talking with a Muslim who reasons very very much like Shake a wall does and so they this individual had found this discussion to be extremely helpful in.

Not not necessarily in the sense that every arguments identical, but the mindset Is the same and hopefully that is helpful to you so We are getting right toward the end of the opening statement. I will try to find the rebuttal period as quickly as I can.

I'm dealing with videos here. I didn't actually extract the audios and do stuff like that. I should have a little bit faster and then I'd also have as most of you know, I Try as best I can to study the writings and presentations of future opponents.

I Wrote an email to the only email address I could find On the web asking how I get hold of the gentleman's books I couldn't find them on online in any in any way never got a response to that. So But I did track down some DVDs and it was a DVD of a radio program.

So say so I set up a it's not like when we set up the video camera in the unbelievable studios in London when I did the programs there and So I Have that queued up in an audio format as well to get to because there were some very interesting statements That were made at that time, but let's uh, let's continue on with Sheikha Wall's opening statement and remember, he's Just starting to wrap up here But he was just in the section talking about the the total corruption of the Bible and and things like that.

The Quranic Claim That Jesus Did Not Die on the Cross

Why do you talk a lot in your mind and heart. It is I myself. Handle me and see for a spirit have no flesh and bones as you see me. Because they thought he's dead. He said it is I myself. Touch me and see look you think I'm a spirit.

Handle me and see for a spirit meaning any spirit have no flesh and bones as you see me. How can they touch him. And why they were not happy for joy. And he wants to convince them further that it is him flesh and bones.

He said have you here any meat to eat. And they gave him broiled fish and honeycomb and he took it and he ate it In their very sight. And they were overjoyed. And they went and told the other disciple and they told they told Thomas the doubting Thomas.

And so they said Thomas watch what they say. This is Thomas. We have seen the master and that he was alive. They didn't say Thomas. We have seen the master and that he was resurrected. If the hood now, of course.

Anyone reading John and Allowing John to be John knows exactly what they mean. They say we have seen him and he's alive the whole reason for that. They're not going. Oh, we've been deceived. We were we were wrong or or John you were at the foot of the cross and you misled us and I don't know how anyone can read the text just so completely out of its own context.

But the argument honestly here is we'll see They said he was alive not that he had been raised from the dead and so they didn't believe Jesus died on a cross now. No one just reading John would come up with that.

But the mindset here and I realize a lot of people go This kind of argumentation is just so poor. But the point is That you're probably gonna be talking to a person who's never read the text of John for themselves you have to know where to go to demonstrate that they're misreading this text and The the reaction of utter amazement of how can you miss that so badly is not an argument to them.

You you have to be able to with some level of patience. Say well, you know that that's that's very interesting, but that doesn't seem to be even slightly possible if you just allowed John to be John and and point out that John was at the cross and You know, were you aware of that?

In this in this instance of people listening to shake a wall. They don't know that he's given them no indication of that and so You have to be able to respond to those those particular things and to understand the mindset that.

That many of them have such a radical radical idea of the corruption in the New Testament that they feel warranted in isolating Entire portions of the text that completely changed the meaning such as well.

John was actually there they can they can get rid of that and ignore that by just simply saying if it doesn't agree with Islam, therefore, it must not be true and Some people would say well, you know this gentleman's arguments really aren't up to the level of a Shabir Ali but remember remember and I present this and every time I talk about Islam, I present this section, but Even in that context.

Remember the question I asked should be or during cross-examination the very first debate we did I said as a Muslim Can you tell us how we can recognize what is and what is not inspired in The text of the Bible what was his response?

That which agrees with the Quran would be and that which disagrees wouldn't be and So you really do have this it you know, it's it's the old illustration, but it's a good illustration. They they have these the lens through which they're looking at the New Testament is the Quran.

And the Quran comes long after The New Testament and so you would think it would be the other way around but It becomes the lens and so when the Quran in interacting with the Injil Contradicts that and the whole question is why does it contradict that wide was the author of the Quran unaware of these things?

But when it comes those areas, then they'll just go well, you know, I Don't have to worry about that portion because I can take this portion read it in a way that fits with Islam and say your book is supporting me of Course, they would never allow you to read the Quran that way and is that consistent inconsistency?

That is that is the problem because inspired in the you would have said Thomas We have seen the master and that he was disrupted. But they say Thomas we have seen the master and that he was alive meaning we expect him to die.

But he didn't die. He was alive. Suppose you have an accident and that accident looks like you're going to die. But later, you know, the first time is brought the jaw of life. They bring you out. So oh my god, they are alive meaning they did not die.

So Jesus Christ did not die on the cross. He did not die on the cross. But it was made to appear to them. So.

Because they don't have the exact knowledge of what and that's where that one cut off. So I'm gonna continue on with the next one. Which was because that was right at the end of his presentation as I recall.

So I'm gonna continue on with the next one, which is the rebuttal period. Unfortunately The the Christian debater really did not respond to almost any of that he he just went back to Saying well the Bible says this and the Bible says not that not so much.

Answering all the misrepresentations has just been given and so he then gets up for his rebuttal period.

Rebuttal to the Claim That Jesus Did Not Die

Mr. Lazaro just brought the charges that I Was not I was out of context I was not talking look because I've given you the quotation to Prove that Jesus Christ did not die on the cross. Now if he died on the cross then we will talk about salvation.

But the question what I did was I've given you over 20 verses or so From your scripture that Christ did not die on the cross and I gave you reasons upon reasons in the I was on top of the topic Salvation through Jesus Christ through the Quran or through the Bible.

Now if Christ did not die then that means there's no salvation. So what I did was I dismantled the concept of salvation. Uproot it completely from your books. That's what I did.

And I'm sure that's exactly what he feels that he's doing. He clearly does not see that. You can deal with any Ancient text or modern text in an irrational fashion. You can you can take anything apart.

You can ignore anything. You can you can ignore context. You can you know, that's that's not difficult to do even if you do memorize the text and things like that and make it much more impressive that way, but.

But to say that I've uprooted it from your own Text would mean that you are actually treating them In their original context and what and in the way that their original authors intended them to be understood.

That's the only way you could do it truthfully anyways. And he's not done that as I've begun to do that his his opponent had pointed out well, you're you're ignoring this issue and that that issue and and You know, which is the only thing you can say but then you have to be able to go in and demonstrate those things contextually but I'm sure he actually does believe that and It requires a Christian who knows their their scriptures to be able to.

Provide that kind of response to them. You're talking about in Islam. There's no salvation. Really? There's no salvation as Jesus didn't. Jesus said if you want to go to heaven keep the law of Moses. This man came to ask him.

I've given you already Matthew 29 16. This man wants to go to heaven. He's a good master. What good must I do to enter life eternally. To enter heaven eternally. And Jesus Christ said if you want to enter heaven Keep the commandment of Moses and that is the law.

And we already pointed out that that's not what Jesus said. When you actually look at the text and read all of it He mentions some of the commandments and the man's response is I've kept these from my youth and Jesus response is if you would be perfect then do what go and sell all that you have and come follow me.

Now even even if we didn't go any deeper than that. The fact that this demonstrates that Jesus knows the heart of this man. He knows that at the very root of his problem is idolatry he loves his stuff more than he loves God and He is putting his finger upon that.

And so there's there's something supernatural going on here. I mean this man just comes up to Jesus and Jesus knows exactly what his problem is. I Listening to the youth that Sheikha wall is using the text right here isn't it sufficient to note that Jesus says sell you possess and Come follow me he adds following Jesus.

So is Sheikha wall really going to suggest to us that Jesus's own teaching? Was the Islamic way and that is follow The law of God perfectly and follow Christ. The whole point of the Christian message is no one ever did the first no one could ever do both.

That would be a complete mission impossible plan of salvation but but the point is again to even present the idea that Jesus is presenting the Islamic viewpoint here Requires that he never actually quote the whole text to the people in the audience and if there was a meaningful response being offered the Christian would have pointed that out and gone directly to text and Said this is what he's not telling you in this text.

And this is what he's not telling you in that text. But unfortunately that that didn't happen. If if Lord blesses and and everything stays on track for next month. That will happen if that kind of argument is is presented when I have the opportunity of responding.

Islam is simple rational straightforward on a bigger statement. I shot a lot in the law.

Now at least not did y 'all catch that. Yeah, that's something that that believe it or not I think I'll over over time you you might start even recognizing that that's called the Shahada and. The only reason I stop it right there is that there are certain people.

I mean that that flows off. The tongue of any Muslim was such ease. Because they say it over and over and over in all the prayers and. So anybody who was actually ever a practicing devout Muslim? Would never confuse that with the beginning of Surah Tafatiha.

No, I don't think they would. Period. You believe in Allah and his messengers and the books and then you do good. And that is exactly what the Bible said where in the book of Ecclesiastes chapter 12 verse 18 it says Listen to the end of the matter This is the whole matter follow God do good and act upon the laws and commandments because upon that God will judge you in the day of judgment.

Simple clicker statement as.

If Ecclesiastes is even meant to start being a full Explication of the entirety of the biblical doctrine of salvation. I mean Ecclesiastes. What what's the whole book about? The futility of life outside of having a divine view.

Over and over again. It's utility. It's utility. It's utility. I saw this. I saw injustice where I saw that and it is. It is a poetic discussion of what life would be like if you did not recognize the purpose of God.

But that comes long after the giving of the law the sacrifices the prophecies of the coming Messiah and his work and all these other things to isolate that one text and say well, this is it. And to say see it's from your own books.

Well, if you won't treat my own books fairly Why do you expect me to treat yours fairly just just looking for consistency here? Because as I've said for a number of years now In consistency is the sign of a failed argument.

I'm not quoting from any book but from your books yet. You are accusing me that I'm out of context. I'm not out of context I'm on target and the concept now is just quoted a verse that Jesus Christ did so many miracle.

Which miracle Jesus Christ do.

Jesus and Lazarus in John 11

Now this is interesting. This goes on for a while. And I guess I understand the argumentation here. I'm gonna give you again. This is I think this is important to to understand. It is hard for us Westerners to enter into the mindset of many of These folks that that are not coming from how we've been trained.

It's one of the difficulties for example that I've mentioned many times one of the reasons I don't get into dealing with the Eastern Orthodoxy is because Just the foundational discussions of just how different the mindset is normally takes up the entire time you've got and You have trouble going from there but we need to try at least understand where they're coming from and the argumentation being presented here in essence is Quranic in That it is Jesus never did any miracle by himself.

He always did it at the permission of Allah and that's one of the arguments of the Quran. Now here folks is where you have to be very careful. This is where theology matters. This is where if you're gonna be a sound apologist You need to be involved in the church and this is where listen to me now.

You have to resist the temptation to be drawn into the defense of things. You don't actually believe one of the most common things I have seen as I have walked the streets of Mesa or wherever it might be.

I walk up and I hear Christians talking with somebody else is That so very often. We will get we will become so Embroiled in the give-and-take. That the other side will say something and we automatically think we have to contradict that.

Because they said it and I know they're wrong. So if they said it they must be wrong about everything. That's what I've appreciated and I hope that I have shown the same thing that's what I've appreciated in the examination of the Ergon Cantor stuff is that Turretin fan has been very very careful you know, we've disagreed with Muhammad Khan and Saying you know, we've said from the beginning Yes, he's Ergon and Emir are ex-muslims.

The question is does that make them experts in Islam? Why why does Ergon make up all this stuff about his history, etc, etc. It's not a question as to whether their father was a Muslim or that they were raised with Muslims.

That's not even an issue. That's all that's only made issue by the other side right now is as a smokescreen. So we have been careful and there are arguments out there that you know one that I'll just mention in passing Muhammad Khan has and maybe he just did this initially to Provide evidence in regards to Ergon Cantor's name Ergon Michael Cantor not Mehmet, but He's dragged up the fact that Ergon Cantor has a massive lead foot he has got a bazillion speeding tickets.

You can see him all along. Just got one. I think with the 20th of May if I recall correctly was 72 and 55 if not, it was an 80 and 55 and he's got lots of them. He's got lots of them now on Just a Christian leader level that bugs me.

You know, there's this thing called Romans 13 the Bible and you know, I think I think Becoming infamous amongst every road cop in the entire Lynchburg area by name. Hey, Bob. Hey, Joe. Hey, how you doing again?

Hey, I always saw you last week. Yeah, boy, you had on two wheels going around the corner there, you know I don't know that's really the way you want to witness to people. Okay. But I haven't mentioned it.

Because it's not directly relevant to the question of the integrity of Ergon Cantor in the pulpit. I Think it's relevant. I think it should be very relevant to the people of Liberty. I think I Don't know.

Do you have a not have a problem with someone who just you know. Every couple months about you know, maybe six a year or so. Collecting those Bothers me but there have been people who have raised issues and we've said, you know.

Okay, fine, but I don't think that's relevant. You have to be careful about the argumentation that you're that you're using and and being fair I don't think it's relevant to whether he was a Muslim or not or whether he's lied about his background that he can't seem to Keep his car in under, you know anywhere near the speed limit and so what I mean here is what you're gonna hear is an example of this the Argument that he's going to present is that Jesus never did a miracle on his own folks.

That's exactly what Christians believe. Think about for just a second. What does John chapter 5 say. I do nothing what I see my father doing perfect unity between the father and the son. Jesus is not a renegade deity out there doing his own thing and as the incarnate son.

Normally Jesus is dependent upon and utilizes the Holy Spirit. Because that's what we do in our lives as well. So the argument is Aimed at a straw man. The immediate response should have been we don't believe that Jesus acts separately from the father in fact.

We don't believe the father acts separately from the son or the spirit. There's perfect unity between the divine persons. That should be the response. But what would be the natural inclination of most Christians is to start racking your brain going harder.

Jesus do something on his own now. The argument is flawed not only because it's against a straw man. But it's also flawed. Because it doesn't take into consideration the purpose of miracles. And it does not take in consideration the fact that Jesus does do things that no mere prophet could ever do and I think the greatest example of this and I hope you're thinking about this.

I Realize sometimes when we talk about Islam people tune out. I'm never gonna talk to one of these folks. You don't know that. But if you're sitting there thinking All right, where would I go to having established the Jesus doesn't do anything apart from the father.

Does Jesus do things that no mere prophet would ever do. Well, there are a couple possibilities there but I think the clearest one that I would go to is John chapter 2 and What does Jesus say? Destroy this temple and in three days.

I will raise it up again not By Allah's permission or something like that. I will raise it up. Then you can go through the text of Scripture and say Well here in the book of Acts This Jesus God raised up the father raises up Jesus.

Jesus own prophecy is he will raise himself and it is the Spirit of God that raises Jesus father son and spirit. Doing what Jesus said he himself would do that's the perfect unity of the Trinity and you're back to allow using all the text of Scripture and You want to make it a testimony you want to make a witness that the text of Scripture is consistent in these matters.

That's what I'm gonna be trying to do, I hope you'll pray for our encounter. But that's what I'm gonna be trying to do here in just a matter of weeks.

Believe me Jesus Christ never performed a single miracle in the Bible. Not a single miracle. I've never seen it yet and I read the Bible from cover to cover. Different versions for more than 20 years.

I have never seen a single miracle performed by Jesus. Not even one. You know why I say that. Let's ask Jesus if he do the miracle way. Book of John chapter 5. There's 30 Jesus Christ is speaking. He said I Can of my own self do nothing.

The way I hear I judge because I'm not seeking my own will but the will of the father who sent me. Did he do miracle? He didn't do miracle. He said I can of my own self do nothing. Whatever. I do. It is my father book of John chapter 28 verse 14.

He said my father is greater than.

That would be John 14 28 not 28. But hey, you know. At least he's trying to quote it off the top of his head.

My father is greater than I if I do any miracle in performance. It is not I that do it but the father in me who sent me and give me the power with the Holy Spirit. Then I do this where the Jesus perform miracle nowhere.

You say he walk on water. Therefore. He's God. Therefore. He's there to die for you. You say, you know, somebody died and he raised him up. You said Lazarus died. Look, they always give you. Lazarus died and Jesus Raised him up.

Only God can raise you up when you die. Let's ask Jesus if he actually Raised Lazarus from the dead.

This is the book of John chapter 11. Oh now before he goes into the Lazarus thing and it is interesting. He he makes a fundamental error in the Lazarus Presentation in the order in which he presents things that if you again if you know the scriptures You you catch those things but I did want to make one again.

We've talked about before but we always have new listeners and and not everyone the audience is algo I never have to repeat anything for algo. That's that's the amazing thing is algo knows all but I did want to emphasize something in the citation of John 519.

May I suggest that for dealing with with Muslims Dealing with any subordination is at all So that would include Jehovah's Witnesses and well most liberal Christians and so on and so forth who would call themselves Christians anyways may I suggest reading and understanding having More than a mere passing knowledge of the fifth chapter of John is extremely Important for you, and I will not apologize in the modern sense of the term apologize.

For calling believers to have a scholarly understanding of a text of Scripture. I mean, it isn't it amazing amongst Christians How there is this anti-intellectualism that that that tells you that You should you should never challenge folks to for example go deep into a particular text of Scripture.

That there's something unspiritual about that. And yet, like I said We'll buy we'll buy phones that have a have a user manual that's thicker than the New Testament you know, and we'll spend hours figuring out this function that function everything else and Yet there's something unspiritual about going in depth on a text of Scripture.

I think there's every reason why housewives and Mechanics and schoolteachers and I don't care what you do engineers, whatever. I Don't apologize for a second and saying I think that you should take the time to If you if you don't want to buy the books go to a library get hold of some decent commentaries on the book of John FF Bruce Leon Morris just some of the ones you can look at da Carson's pillar commentary on John and Work through this text so that you Have it clearly in your mind to the point where you could explain to somebody else.

That's when you can find out Whether you really understand text. Could you explain to somebody else? Because this is probably one of the most abused texts and if you know it well, and you know the context well.

You can shut anybody down from the abuse of this text for example in verse 19. Truly truly I say to you the son can do nothing of himself. Unless it is something sees the father doing for whatever the son father does.

These things the son also does in like manner. But the father loves the son and shows him all the things which he himself is doing. The father will show him greater works in these so that you may marvel.

For just the father raises the dead and gives them life. Even so the son also gives life to whom he wishes now. You will almost never hear Contextual citations of this text because there's too much about the deity of Christ in John chapter 5.

There are just too many words too many phrases too many assertions That demonstrate the deity of Christ for them to give you the whole thing. But I want to just briefly focus upon that one phrase in verse 19.