Special November Q&A with Pastor Osman

Okay, so good morning everyone.

Today, we're doing another question and answer.

Just woke up this morning with a sore throat and a cough and he's unable to be here.

So he texted me and asked me if I would do a Q &A this morning for adult Sunday school class.

Instead of asking Cornell to teach because Cornell has already taught several times and he needs a break and he's preaching on

December 1st.

For me, so it will be good to have give him a little bit of a respite.

I mean, I teach every week, but we're not gonna judge those who teach every other week and still need a break.

We won't do that.

All right.

Let's pray together before we begin and then I'll kind of lay out the the parameters for a question and answer.

It's powerheads Father we are grateful for this day that you've set before us.

We get another day to use for your sake and for your glory and to gather with your people and worship and fellowship.

It is such a joy such a delight.

We're so grateful that this we have this facility in which to meet and to teach and to learn and to fellowship and worship.

We're so grateful for the Saints that you gather together here that we get to worship and fellowship with.

Everything that we enjoy all these spiritual blessings and all the blessings of this church body and fellowship are all The result of

you working through your word and through your people and by the power of your spirit and we're just grateful for it.

We pray that you would be glorified through our time and our study and our reflection here.

We pray that we would have some good questions and be able to give clear answers as well.

And we thank you for the time that we have together and ask that you would watch over us and give me clarity.

And and all that we teach and and all that I teach and say this morning.

I ask in Christ's name.

So here are the parameters for our question and answer for adult Sunday school class.

It's not stumped the pastor.

It's because that's easy to do.

So it's just ask me and if I don't know the answer to a question I will just tell you I don't know.

I have no problem saying that and I have no problem Telling you what the limitations of my knowledge are and

you can ask anything that has to do with Scripture a passage of Scripture Theology doctrine something we've been teaching through

church policy pastoral ministry.

Life sanctification anything that pertains to what we would normally study or cover here and anything that it connects to so

with that.

Do we have anybody with a question?

Landy do you want to start us off?

You usually have one.

Okay, good question.

So in the book of Esther It says that children not be punished.

Well in Scripture says the children not be punished for the sins of their father and fathers not be punished for the sins of their children.

Ezekiel 18 lays that out that every man bears the responsibility of the guilt for his own sin and yet in the book of Esther you see that

the the Lord that.

A.

Haman I should know that it's my mother's maiden name Haman was was hung on the gallows him and his ten sons and and

people who related to him and This goes back to something that I think is a biblical concept when we talk about this actually today in the

message at quite some length and it's the idea of headship or federal headship and in you see this in the

Old Testament often where the the the actions of a certain individual can have Ramifications

for other people who are in his family.

So I don't believe that they were hung because they were descendants of Haman.

They were likely hung or executed because their father plotted to do something and these were

people with given Haman's amount of power these are people who obviously would have been able to wield as much power or

close to what their father had and Be able to come back and go after the Jews.

So it was an action I think in in that ended up preserving the Jews by doing away.

Not just with one person who was a threat that would be Haman But also anybody else who could have taken up where Haman left off

and also posed a threat to the Jews.

In that way his children were not punished for Haman's sins.

But they were handled in a certain way because of what their father had done.

It's not the his sins that they were punished for in a divine sense.

It's that they Suffered as a result of their father's actions their father acting on their behalf

Caused them to be treated in such a way because of the threat that they could have also posed to the Jewish people.

That makes sense.

Yeah.

She used to see it also with when God commanded the children of Israel.

This is Landy's question when God commanded children ridges will go into the land of Canaan and to wipe out.

Everybody just entire the entire races the entire tribes and tries to tire cities and to leave no one standing.

There were obviously little children.

That had grown up in that environment who in terms of their own participation some of the evil and wickedness.

They were innocent.

But they were part of that group of people that God was executing judgment on and this this is a biblical principle as well.

Is that when God executes judgment on a nation or a people not every not all the good people are innocent people are spared from that you see this in the

book of Habakkuk when when Habakkuk is lamenting all of the wickedness going on the land of Israel and God says well, I'm bringing in a swift

people to come in and destroy Israel and they're gonna they're gonna wipe out and execute Justice in the land my judgment

upon Jerusalem in the surrounding areas.

And Habakkuk then realizes that if that's gonna happen.

What am I as a righteous person in the midst of Jerusalem, which is suffering this judgment?

What am I gonna experience?

What am I gonna see.

And the reality is that there are even there are righteous people in the midst of places that are judged.

That receive divine judgment that also that judgment affects them if judgment comes to this nation in some form.

The righteous are going to suffer.

It's going to be uncomfortable for us, even though we don't deserve that.

Even though we are protected and preserved eternally if judgment were to come to this nation for instance in some way we we will

Experience the effects of that.

There's no Bubble that God puts around his people that preserves them from any and all difficulty when he brings judgment upon the people

that surround them.

You see it all the time in the Old Testament.

There were righteous people in Israel 7 ,000 people who had not bowed the knee to Baal and yet God brought in judgment

upon those people groups even though there were righteous men like Jeremiah who suffered in the midst of that judgment when Babylon came in

and invaded Jerusalem and took all those people captive.

Daniel suffered in the midst of that judgment.

Isaiah suffered in the midst of that judgment.

Even though these were righteous and godly men God did not see fit to preserve his righteous ones through the midst of that judgment

that fell on people all around them.

So it's the same thing with the the wicked Canaanites.

Even though you may have had innocent babies who were innocent not of any and all sin.

But innocent in terms of what God was judging those people for they did suffer the results of that judgment.

Yes, and that is just it is just the judge of all the world to do what is right and execute judgment in that

way.

What do I think happened to the innocent babies where they go to heaven or hell?

Okay, so let me answer this question finish make sure I'm done with this question before we go back to that.

Okay, and so one other thing I would add on to this is there's not only that principle that God does not

shield his innocent Ones or righteous ones from judgment that takes place when it's poured out upon a whole nation.

There's not only that principle, but there's also the principle of headship that you see in the Old Testament as well.

There are individuals with whom God makes a covenant that He

considers as a Head in a federal sense acting on behalf of others whom he

represents.

So the nation in some ways was punished for David's sin.

David's sin had an effect not just upon his old household.

But upon the entire nation because he acted in a certain way as one responsible for the entire nation over which he ruled.

Other people suffered as a result of David's sin we are

represented by Adam and we fell in Adam.

We're also represented by Christ and so he acts on our behalf as our federal head.

So this is a principle that you can trace all the way through a number of places in the Old Testament.

We're gonna see it today in connection with Abraham and Melchizedek.

That Abraham acted on behalf of his entire nation.

Melchizedek acted on behalf of his entire priesthood and there's a parallel there that they are representatives they represent others in the actions that they do.

And so when we see for instance God judging the nation of Israel because of what David had done a Decision that David made for

instance to take a census and God God punished the nation for that decision.

It is because David in that position is acting as a head of those people in some way and so the entire nation suffers the results of the

sins of its leaders and It happens today that way as well.

I think that was all I was gonna say about that.

So now was there yes.

Yeah, right and there's this and the same thing is happening with Israel coming into the land of Canaan.

They're destroying everybody who could come back later on and be an issue and that was the just judgment of God that fell upon those

people.

Yeah.

Okay, there's another question about that.

What happens to babies who die in innocency?

It is my belief and I don't think that scripture.

I think the scripture gives us enough reason to have a confident expectation in the answer that I'm about to give you.

I.

Don't think that we can point to a single passage of scripture that says all babies who die In as

babies immediately go to heaven.

I don't think there's a single passage of scripture that teaches that.

I think there are issues.

I know that some people want to point to David's Expression when his child conceded through Bathsheba died and he said I will go to

be with him.

He will not come to be with me.

And I think that in that context what David is talking about is not heaven or an eternal reward.

He's talking about death.

He's saying I will go to the same place that he is that is death.

She'll and not that he can ever come back from the dead.

You can't come back here.

But eventually I'm going to join him in that place of the dead.

So I don't think that that's an ironclad Passage of the deals an ironclad passage you can point to the talks about children going to

heaven children who die or infants who die.

So let me lay out a case for you that I think answers this issue.

Ultimately you and I are saved on the basis of a righteousness that is imputed to us on the basis of faith, correct.

It is nothing that we can do.

It is all because of what somebody else has done on our behalf that you and I are saved so righteousness is credited to our account

on the basis of faith and By that we are declared righteous and our sin and guilt is taken away

on.

What basis then could an infant who never has an opportunity to express faith in Christ

on what basis?

Could that infant possibly enter heaven?

What would need to happen for that infant to stand clothed righteous before God because every being?

Every human being conceived is conceived a sinner in sin by virtue of what Adam did.

So, how can an infant stand in the presence of God?

What would need to happen for it?

What's the answer to that?

Wouldn't it need to have the righteousness of Christ imputed to it as well?

It would okay.

Whose righteousness is it that is being imputed in both cases?

It's not ours.

It's belongs to another it is on the basis of what works on.

The basis of those of us who can understand and believe the gospel.

It's on the basis of faith on.

The basis of an infant what would be the the the reason or the means?

What would be the basis of the ground of that imputation of righteousness?

It'd have to be grace, wouldn't it?

Are we saved by grace?

Okay, so how is that grace?

Expressed and experienced and imputed to those of us who have the capacity to understand to believe the

gospel and respond to it.

That grace is experienced or expressed by faith.

A faith that God gives to us God can and I'd believe does impute the

righteousness of Jesus Christ to infants by grace on the basis of it.

It expresses his good pleasure.

So for us it is faith.

For an infant or one who dies even at 25 or 30 years old who is severely mentally handicapped and cannot explain it cannot

understand.

Anything that they need the same righteousness that we do to stand faultless before the throne of God.

I believe that that righteousness is imputed to them by grace on the basis of something other than faith since faith that they are not

able to experience or express faith.

Or to to be to be given the gift of faith.

So that is my I believe a reformed Non -catholic approach to how babies can go to

heaven.

It's not because we baptize them as infants.

It's not because they are born into the covenant.

It is not because they do anything worthy of that.

It's not because they are innocent.

They're not they're guilty of Adam's sin.

But here's something to remember we are not punished and thrown into hell on the basis of Adam's sin.

We are constituted sinners and declared guilty.

We are born into a state of sin because of Adam's sin, but we are never punished in hell for Adam's sin.

What are we punished for the deeds that we have done right because we are liars thieves blasphemers fornicators adulterers idolaters

greedy lustful, etc.

We are punished for our own iniquities our own deeds not the sins of our great -great -great -great -great -great

-grandfather Adam.

So that principle applies.

I cannot say that a baby is punished in hell because of Adam's sin that would violate Exodus or Ezekiel 18 where God

says that the Children will not be punished for their parents sins nor the parents punished for their sins for the sins of their children.

There is a Simple straightforward, I'll get you in a second Thomas.

There's a simple straightforward equation that that God punishes the sins of people for.

Punish people for their own sins the things that they have done the deeds that we have done.

What deed has an infant who dies in the womb done that is worthy of eternal damnation?

They have done nothing.

Are they guilty of Adam's sin?

They are but we're not punished for Adam's sin.

Scriptures clear about that.

So therefore I don't believe there is any basis for which its infant could be punished in hell.

It wouldn't hell would not hell would not express or glorify God's justice or judgment if

somebody not deserving of anything that they're being punished for was punished.

For something that they didn't deserve to be punished for.

What's that.

It's just grace.

So it is my belief then that those who die in infancy God has chosen in Christ before the foundation of the

world.

Knowing what knowing what he has already mapped out for them and that because they are chosen in Christ before the foundation of

the world that he grants to them or gives to them the Righteousness of Jesus Christ as an act of grace.

That delivers them from that guilt of Adam and puts them faultless before his throne with exceeding joy.

That that's how that is the theological case that I would make for the delivery or the the salvation of infants.

Now something that's tied to that before I get to Thomas and is I'm assuming this questions connected with this.

Okay, something that's tied to that.

There are passages in the

Old Testament to speak of unbelieving in pagan nations who sacrificed their children to idols.

Infants to idols on an altar and God calls them.

God judges those nations because he calls those children who were sacrificed to those idols.

Quote my innocent ones close quote.

I think it's in I Think it's in Jeremiah chapter 1.

I think it's in Jeremiah chapter 2.

I think it's in Jeremiah chapter 3.

And it might be in Isaiah where God describes these babies who are immediately after they're born sacrificed pagan idols

as my innocent ones.

One that is innocent that God possesses he calls them his own.

So the Job Job says it would be better for me to have never lived Than to have

lived and endured what he did but Job knew that he was righteous and he was going to heaven.

So if if Job would if he had died in his mother's womb and he would have gone immediately to eternal damnation.

How can Job say that that was preferable to living and enduring what he did and eventually being righteous and being in heaven?

The only way that Job could make that statement or that equation is if it were true that he could have if he had died in

his mother's womb immediately gone to presence with to God and skipped all of the Pain and suffering that he experienced in this world.

So there's a bunch of other kind of little details like that in Scripture that I could throw out.

Those are the ones that just kind of come up to me off at the top of my head.

There was a There was an excellent article written a blog post written at cripple gate.

Cripple gate .com is the name of the blog and if you go to cripple gate and you search for I think it's salvation of infants

or Something like that.

You will see I think there's the Jesse Johnson is the name of the guy that wrote it he is a master seminary

graduate if I remember correctly, I reserve the right to be wrong on that and he wrote the the article that gave 21

evidences from the Old Testament that and and like another 21 from the New Testament that Infants go to heaven and he just

deals with those passages and exegetes them in their context and does a good job with it Thomas.

Yeah, can I give you a strong chapter verse argument that says that no, that's why I began by saying There's no single verse that you can point to that just says this

is what happens there.

Could you use the similar type of argument against it?

I suppose you could say I feel or I think that some infants are punished and here's why they're guilty of Adam's sin.

But see then then what we're talking about or if you tried to make a case on the other side then what we're haggling over is

how do we how do we deal with the issues of divine justice and what warrants that and

What is just and what is not just and what is righteous and what is not righteous?

And what is necessary for an infant to go to heaven?

That's why I'm laying out a theological case that I think is consistent with the doctrine that we find in Scripture

regarding God's election and imputed righteousness and the importance of faith and the justice of God and what that means for

the case of infants and I think that that is consistent with Job's testimony as well as God calling

infants who were sacrificed his innocent ones and other passages scripture where children who die are

Declared to be innocent.

There's more than one passage and I mentioned that one just simply because you could Google it.

But there are other passages as well that describe children being innocent and it's not that they're innocent in terms of that.

They're not sinners.

It's that they're innocent in terms that they haven't done anything worthy of this judgment.

Right when you stand before a judge and he says look I'm gonna you kill this person and you say I'm innocent what you're not saying you're

not saying I'm perfect you're saying I'm not guilty of the crime for which you want to punish me and An infant can say the same thing in the justice bar of God.

God can say I'm gonna I'm gonna punish you for your lying of thieving your adultery your blasphemy your idolatry your greed your homosexuality Etc.

And what would the innocent what would the baby say before the final bar of God?

I'm I haven't done any of these things.

I'm innocent of these things.

So what then does hell mean to that infant?

How has God glorified in the destruction of that one for its own personal cognizant?

Intentional willful rebellion and rejection of light it has received no light.

Therefore therefore justice is not due to that infant.

So.

That's kind of the case that I would make for that.

Yeah, Jan.

Yeah what is the age of accountability because I don't think that what I'm describing is an age of accountability but probably a condition of accountability

and I Think that for every child or every person that's going to be different.

I think that the the there has to be a point and God the important part of this doctrinal discussion

is only that God knows When that person is guilty of rejecting the light and rejecting the truth.

Yeah, that's right.

Yeah, that's right.

My four -year -old daughter would understand her guilt and I'm talking about Taryn now.

My Taryn is a four -year -old could understand her guilt and her willful rejection or willful rebellion

in a way that Somebody else who's mentally handicapped.

I won't use my oldest son as an example, but somebody else who's who's mentally Who's mentally handicapped might not

understand that same degree of account that the same moral equation God does know because God knows the heart

and this is what we're ultimately we're going back to.

God knows the heart and he knows When this one who has received this light has rejected it and is

therefore accountable or guilty.

So we're talking about a condition of accountability not an age of accountability.

I do think that that varies.

I do.

This is why we are assured in Scripture that God himself.

He knows the heart.

He knows the heart and he sees it and he reads it and there's nothing hidden from his sight.

And so we can trust in and rest and relax in the fact that The judge of all the earth will do what is right and he will do it in

accordance with how each how much light each Person has rejected.

Yeah.

It isn't and because.

Because it's not a cut -and -dry thing like that.

I think that that's why scripture is not it doesn't absolutely lay out this case that you know.

Children when they reach six years old or therefore morally accountable.

Well, not every six -year -old would be.

It doesn't mean that they don't sin.

It's that when that infant who is Who is six weeks old and they're thrashing and they're red in their face and they're

screaming because they're hungry.

They're frustrated.

They're itching or they've gone to the bathroom or whatever it is.

That is an expression of a sinful nature.

But how is it morally accountable for that?

What light does it understand now?

My 20 year old 21 year old son who does decides to do that.

It's a totally different thing than a 21 week old child who does that?

He's morally he's more morally accountable now for that type of behavior when he does that and he starts screaming and yelling and

crying.

Because he's not being fed.

He's far more accountable now when he does that so much fun having my kids in Sunday school.

It's it's uh, he's far more accountable now for behaving like that than he did when he was 21 weeks old.

Only one week's old.

He didn't understand any of those moral issues or Or anything it doesn't he's still expressing a sinful nature, but he

is not expressing a hatred for the light.

That's two totally different things.

Yeah, Peter.

Now, what do you what do you say to somebody who's in that situation who's lost a child?

I don't think that that is the best time to say.

Okay, sit down.

Let me explain to you imputed righteousness and the theological case for this there is a point where you you're enter into the pain of that individual

who's gone through that and say look I I Think as from what I read in Scripture that we have every hope that we

shall see your loved one in heaven.

I believe that that is the case and so I hope in that I trust in the judge of all the earth to do What is right, but ultimately we have to fall back on the

sovereignty of God who has allowed this in this situation.

He knew this from before the foundation of the world.

He appointed this for you in this situation at this time because he knew he is going to do something through this to

Sanctify you and to work out his grace and his good pleasure in your life.

And he is accomplishing something in this so trust him and believe in him and and worship him through this the Lord gives and the Lord takes away

and Ultimately, we have to come back to the sovereign hand of God who has appointed all of this for his children.

And so that's ultimately what we trust him and Yeah, that's

that's what I would do.

And one last thing I would I would say about this issue if if we're gonna be able to move on to something else

after this is that You're a disagreement on this issue does not mark one as a heretic.

So I know good theologians on the other side who will say That they believe that some infants go to

heaven some infants go to hell there would be some people who would say all infants go to hell and that's just God's mercy

is is Allowing them to die before they had an opportunity to grow up and express their depravity and then keep up judgment for

themselves.

Some theologians would say we had no absolutely for sure chapter and verse that all infants go to heaven.

Some people would say we just can't know either way whatever your position on this.

This is a non -essential issue.

And I'm all I'm all I'm trying to do is present to you something that I think is true based upon Scripture that I think there's a solid

theological case that's consistent with this and this is consistent with our view of grace imputed righteousness and

faith and God's grace and all of this and It's consistent with the judgment of God.

I brought up walking one last point I brought this up before.

Imagine take let's let's take for instance a scenario in which a baby dies in the womb as

a result of a miscarriage.

Our belief is that that baby is a whole living and distinct human being right from the moment of conception

that they are made in the image of God that they're valuable and that there is a soul there.

At the moment of conception that baby dies in the womb and is miscarried.

What is the next thing that that baby knows or experiences if it is an active living soul?

If you believe that that that baby goes to hell then you would have to say it wakes up in eternal damnation.

Now.

What does?

What does the justice of God mean to that infant?

If it wakes up in eternal damnation, what's the first thing it would say?

How did I get here?

And why am I here?

Right this justice does not make any sense.

Justice is not just in that situation.

Because it is not aware of any crime that it has done that warrants this judgment.

Justice only makes sense if The person who is being judged is aware of their wrongdoings and

their crimes and their guilt.

Then justice is just then justice makes sense.

And in the eternal analysis for the reprobate or the unbeliever who is cast into eternal lake of fire

Judgment will be just and they will recognize it and they will acknowledge it and they will bow the knee and then they will perish.

Everlastingly, but justice will be just in their sense because they will understand exactly that for which they are being punished.

Peter.

Yeah, the question being is there seems to be two states of our guilt.

The removal of our guilt because of what Christ has done.

And the imputation of his righteousness.

I don't know if I would experience that as two states.

That's definitely two sides of the same transaction.

I would describe that as the same transaction.

That is justification because justification is not just having my sins not just being declared innocent.

It is being declared righteous, which is a positive righteousness.

And so those two things do have to go together.

They are appropriate.

You can't have one who is who is declared innocent of all their wrongdoing and not also declared righteous.

Because the one for whom that sacrifice has been made that atones for that sin That one is also

declared declared and made righteous by that same sacrifice.

Yeah, that's what that's why I laid out when I laid out the case I started with that why what must an

infant have in order to stand before God in heaven?

It must be declared righteous must be righteous.

Innocence is not sufficient.

Yeah.

That's fine.

I'm glad to have another question off of this topic.

Go ahead.

Oh, okay.

Darn When a child dies, what are they going to be in heaven in the glorified body?

Yeah, I.

Perfect age land.

So Lanny's hoping for if he.

Because if it's some reflection of our age here, then I want to die young and And healthy and physically fit and

everything else and then.

Let me you're you're in trouble.

So I do think that our glorified bodies will have some some whatever the ideal condition for that will be it will be.

That's what we will have in heaven.

How many of you read the book heaven by Randy Alcorn.

Okay, so this is not one of those.

You know you get to go to heaven and see what's there and come back and tell everybody about it books that I criticize.

It's not one of those.

It is a theological it is a theological biblical study of what scripture says about the eternal state both for the wicked and for

the for the righteous and so Randy Alcorn in that book and I would commend it to you highly because in the first part of the book he

goes through a Theology what scripture says about heaven all the way through it's all biblical the last part of the book he answers a whole bunch of questions

and When he answers those questions, he says based upon what we know in the first part of the book.

Here are the possible things that we might be able to sort of he calls I'd call sanctified speculation.

We can speculate about these things we could suggest these things so Randy Alcorn lays out something in the book that I think is.

There's no chapter and verse on this subject.

And I don't think that I can't lay chapter and verse to this but you can say this this would be fantastic.

This would be amazing.

If it if in the eternal state women who had miscarried their children here or?

Lost infants and children here if when they get to heaven in the new heaven in the new earth.

They would be allowed to raise those Children who would be kept in that condition for them in the new heavens in the new earth

without any sin.

That would be awesome.

Now is there a chapter verse that says that no there's not just says that we're gonna have glorified bodies.

It doesn't say what the age of those glorified bodies will be it doesn't say if those bodies will develop or get better over time or

Or what but we will have glorified bodies in heaven.

So wouldn't it be gracious?

This is what Randy Alcorn's point is wouldn't it be gracious and awesome and just like our God if every woman who suffered that loss Here got to

experience the joy of raising that child in the sin -free environment glorified bodies there.

Wouldn't that be just like our God to do that?

And yeah, it would be just like our God to do that.

It's consistent with everything we read about scripture, but is there a chapter and verse that says that's how it's gonna be.

No, there's not so don't I'm not holding that out for anybody.

You might you might we might show up and find that everybody there.

Whether they died in infancy or as a child or as a teenager or whatever is in a state of perfect adult maturity.

That would be it would still be consistent with the nature of our God if that were the case heaven.

Just heaven by Randy Alcorn.

Yeah, I highly recommend it because there's no because it will make

you think about the eternal state in such a way that you long to go there and.

And you look forward to it and it there's scriptures as far more about.

What how we how and where and what our eternity is going to be like then then we might at first

Even think or recognize.

All right.

Hold on.

I think I had one back here first.

Go ahead.

Okay, this is yours related.

Nora, okay

if we're not given in marriage.

Yeah is marriage necessary to raise a child.

Okay.

That's how I would answer that.

It's yeah, but even if it's even if it's not

You could still raise it.

Yeah.

And just because I'm not going to be given in marriage does not mean that I'm not gonna have a special relationship with my wife whom I've spent my entire life in marriage

with.

I Don't.

I don't expect that my relationship with Rick is gonna be the same as my relationship with my wife as great as you are brother, but it just.

So I all of our experiences and our knowledge and our our relationships and everything they go into eternity.

That's it's this.

It's a continuation of what this is, but it's sin free.

So.

Did you connect it to this or not?

Go ahead?

Right.

Yep.

God will give it a body.

So.

Alcorn's position on that when he states that is simply to simply to say that if this were the case There's

nothing inconsistent with what scripture does say about heaven, but we don't we don't know that ultimately.

We don't know the answer to that question.

Yeah, sorry, we don't know the answer the question of whether infants will be able to be raised by

by mothers or not.

Right.

I understand

22 and glorious gorgeous.

All right.

It'd be interesting to see what you look like at 22 and gorgeous.

Oh.

Okay, all right.

Can I explain what federal vision is and who some of the pastors or authors are who hold to that view?

This is okay.

Seven minutes.

All right.

Federal vision is.

It's kind of come into it's kind of come into Popularity in the last several years.

I think largely though not solely through the ministry of Doug Wilson From Moscow.

He has done a lot of work in talking about the federal vision and presenting it.

Doug Wilson is I think is one is a fantastic author.

But I fear that from the things that I've read from him.

What he presents in terms of what the federal vision is it's a little he's it's a little bit unclear I

think because it dances around the idea that the federal headship that we enjoy in Christ

transfers down to Me as an individual and what I do and the righteousness that I can acquire for my family

and representing my family it almost becomes I think when when taken to his logical conclusion

and I'm not I Haven't studied this as much as I should but here's my initial assessment of it

taken to its logical conclusion.

It would almost seem to suggest that my children can be declared righteous or made righteous on the

basis of what I do is their federal head and That I think is the danger of it.

It's it flirts dangerously close.

It is it is I think covenant theology and the idea of federal headship.

Taken to an extreme taken to a point where scripture doesn't warn us taking it So much so that not only did Christ

do what he did on our behalf so that we could be made righteous.

But that I acting as a federal head and the head of the Covenant of my home can do certain things that

Impute righteousness or acquire righteousness for my children.

And and I think it plays in or it perfectly fits with infant baptism or pato baptism and how that's expressed in some

covenant believing communities.

So, I I don't think it's a healthy I don't think it's a healthy doctrine.

I don't think it's I think that there are a lot of dangers to it.

I think that it's borderline.

It's not heretical as as guys like Doug Wilson will state it but it is borderline heretical in the way that it's going to be

taken or Implemented I think in in some of its some of its manifestations.

So would I stay away from it?

Yes, I would.

I don't think that I don't I don't believe in Covenant theology or that my baptizing my child baptizes them into the community or

that by virtue of my belief that my children are part of the believing community.

They're not my children have to repent and believe on their own if they're going to be part of God's Covenant and to enjoy the blessings of

forgiveness.

They get nothing just because I'm their father.

They get no special treatment.

They get no special righteousness.

They get no special apportionment in heaven or anything like that and federal vision seems to suggest that there is a

federal headship and Acting as a federal head that has in some way Affects salvation or

bring salvation or conveys grace in some way and I think it is a dangerous doctrine.

I.

Don't believe that Doug Wilson's a heretic.

I'll go on the record is saying that.

But I think that he's dancing with some doctrines that are not healthy in that way.

Would I recommend staying away from the books written by his daughter?

I haven't read any of the books written by his daughter.

I don't read a lot on motherhood or Birthing children or anything like that, so I don't

know where she's at on that.

I don't know what her doctrine of theology is.

I would say you should stay away from If you're going to read stuff like that at least be aware of the

source and what could be coming from it and read with discernment.

I Just because somebody writes from a perspective that I disagree with or even that I find heretical if that were

the case It doesn't mean that I wouldn't read through something like that.

I would never read through anything and just take all of it in without any kind of discernment.

If I understood that there might be A concern with the source then I could read through it, but I would be very critical.

I would be reading through slow thoughtfully and really analyzing everything that said and the way that it said.

But my guard would be up in that situation.

But I if you're going to if you're if there's a danger with the source.

There are a lot of other good books on parenting and motherhood that I would read by other authors that would not be in any way problematic.

So if I were gonna There's so much available to us if I were gonna use my time to read something I would read something that is I know is a good

resource.

Even if people say well, this is great.

Well, the author is problematic and the issues here really are our dangerous issues or they could be concerns.

Why do you spend the time reading?

I just only have so much so much time in the day.

I'm the only reason that I ever read garbage is because I'm gonna critique it in some way and Try and provide a critique for somebody else that would be a

benefit to them.

But if I don't have to critique the garbage, I don't read the garbage.

I just don't have time to do that.

I'm not that fast of a reader and I just I have a wife and kids and I have too much to do.

So it's it's I just don't spend time doing that find another source.

There's good stuff put out by By Shepherds Press there's good stuff put out by

MacArthur's ministry on parenting and motherhood and things like that.

There are other good resources out there.

You could spend your time going through you're gonna get the same meat, but you don't you're not gonna gag on all the bones in the process.

Or potentially read something that is gonna deceive you and make you think a certain way.

That's gonna open you up to error.

So Jenny had a question first, I think yeah.

That's a very good point because the author that Jenny's bringing up I'm just saying it for the sake of the recording is that we shouldn't automatically reject the

writing of a daughter just because her father May write something that we would disagree with and the argument would go unless you openly repudiate what

it is that he has said.

In other words publicly dishonor your dad in some way unless you do that I'm not you're not worthy of writing a book or being or having a voice

or anything like that and it's certainly a poor argument.

Because she may not want to publicly repudiate her dad.

Maybe she's working through it.

Maybe she isn't even aware of what her dad teaches or she hasn't thought through those issues for herself or whatever.

There might be a whole bunch of reasons why she might not repudiate for that.

But isn't to give her that doesn't that doesn't lessen her status there.

It might be a cause for concern, but unless.

Yeah, you shouldn't expect her to openly repudiate something in order for her to assume that she doesn't believe it.

What's that.

Right, what's that?

No, I didn't know if there's a concern there and that's why I said at the beginning I don't know what she believes

on that.

She might or she might not believe those things.

So if there's a cause for concern there Then there are other resources if you know that that is concerning thing and you know that she believes that

then read something else.

But if you don't you could read it, but knowing that there's a cause for concern.

I would be hyper hyper discerning with it.

Doesn't mean I would reject it.

I wouldn't reject it just because her dad believes something that wouldn't be right.

But knowing that her dad believes that it would be something that would make me be very discerning in my reading.

Yeah, I hope that balances both of those because is that what you're saying

Ron oh.

Okay, okay.

All right anybody else.

Yeah, let me grab her before you you've already spoken like 18 times so go ahead.

Right.

Yeah, that's very true.

Anything that we read we need to have the guardrails up and be discerning.

My my discernment filter when I'm reading John MacArthur is a lot less than my discernment filter when I'm reading.

Beth Moore.

Okay, so those are two radically different.

It's interesting that I raise up those two those just came off the top of my head after the recent controversy.

But.

So but but there is a discernment filter there when I'm reading John MacArthur.

There's a couple things that John MacArthur and I would disagree with but for the most part 99 of the stuff that I read from John

MacArthur.

I don't have any issues with them.

I mean doctrinally is there but I'm still reading discerning how it is that he's talking and what he's saying and the argument that he's making.

But somebody I don't know anything about when I'm reading them.

My mind is doing two things.

I'm reading the content for the content's sake.

But I'm also I'm also analyzing the argument that is being made in the writing so that I can understand the perspective that

they're coming from and I'm looking for.

Things that they're saying that might indicate the perspective that they're coming from.

Yeah, the only person's writings whom I uncritically trust are my own.

And you should you should not trust them uncritically.

Okay, Peter.

Do you have something else that's quick before we're done?

Good sources that I would recommend.

I I love John MacArthur's ministry and grace Community Church.

Almost anything that they produce is I say almost anything because they might there might be something in there I'm not aware of that's it's not great.

But anything that they produce is great.

I love that ministry and Anything by John MacArthur is good.

I like RC Sproul.

I don't I don't agree with him on everything but you know There I I know where our disagreements are at and those are safe

areas of disagreement.

I love RC Sproul.

Cripple great is a good blog used to be able to trust the gospel coalition, but they've gone full leftist woke social justice nonsense now.

So I I don't I don't read anything from the gospel coalition now without my critical filter ratcheted all

the way up to 10.

Some other oh, yes.

Yeah stand to reason ministries.

Great.

Cocoa is a good guy.

Again and and my saying that these are good guys are good resources not implicit endorsement of everything that they believe.

I had some good conversations with Scott Klusendorf while we're here.

He and I don't agree on a lot of things that I thought we did agree on some things.

I mean, they're not essential issues, but we could still be friends and we had some good conversations back and forth.

But we're not on the same page on every doctrinal issue.

And yet I would heartily recommend anything that is produced by Scott Klusendorf and his ministry as well as wretched

radio and Todd Friel's ministry way of the master with Ray comfort.

I'm trying to think of some other big national ministries.

Those will get you started but those are all things that you see out in the foyer and the stuff that we produce and etc.

Yeah, right.

Yeah, always go back to scripture with everything that we do.

All right.

Let's close in prayer.

Hope that was beneficial and edifying for you, right?

Father we are so grateful for this morning and this time that we can have to Exercise our minds and our hearts and our spirits and in

spiritual things a biblical truth.

And we pray that everything that is true and lasting and right and righteous would be remembered by us and everything that

we've said or That I have taught that is not in keeping with truth would be quickly and and forever

forgotten.

May you glorify yourself through our time together and our worship and our fellowship which is to follow and we thank you for the fellowship That

we do enjoy in your son in his name.

We pray.

Amen.