Open Phones on the Third Dividing Line of Coronavirus Week #1

So just as the program begins, I get a tweet. I see a tweet. I got nothing on the screen. I see a tweet. Says walking at night listening to dr. Oakley 1689 Trinity got it from chirp books. My pace falters occasionally in sync with my ponderment.

Which means that I'll get sued next week when they trip over a tree branch and break an arm. That's. That's sort of how that works. You know speaking of Twitter. I actually I Follow Jonathan Merritt on Twitter.

And I do it. Basically so I can keep an eye on what the people that are were once more mainstream has gone off to the left and He just nine minutes ago tweeted follow bio log offs org, you know bio log us.

Is that you should. To stay educated on how faith and science can coexist. Do it right now. All caps. It's never been more important for religious folks to strengthen their confidence in expertise. Expertise in what exactly not in Scripture.

That's for sure. Oh goodness. Yeah, I'll tell you it's um. It's sometimes painful, but I you need to you need to to know you need to know where it is. Oh and then now now someone just took a picture. Yeah, Sporting Hill Elementary School.

Yeah. That's that one was built Wow 27 years ago, and that's not the one I went to that I 1993 I got to visit and it was I got to visit the classrooms that I was in the whole nine yards but they told me then that they were tearing it down that summer and building a new one and they did so Rossmoor is still the same but Sporting Hill is totally different than it was when I was.

I was there long long ago anyway, sorry Twitter does does that type of thing or once in a while? We're gonna be taking your phone calls today at eight seven seven seven five three three three four one a Couple of questions from yesterday that I didn't get to real quick.

Word-Faith Movement, Divine Sovereignty, and Prayer in a Pandemic

Fellow From Oklahoma says I was ordained at a word-of-faith Church, and I'm now having doubts about what is going on. Would you care to discuss this. A certain minister prayed that all Corona would go away, but it hasn't yet.

Are we just too impatient and spoiled? No. The word-faith movement is a false religious movement that is fundamentally flawed in its entire understanding of the Christian faith. It has a Completely flawed grasp of the fact that God is sovereign.

We are not. God has a purpose. He is accomplishing it and We are given his revealed will which is found primarily in well obviously in the scriptures and what the scriptures reveal to us as to how we are to behave and how we were to act and how to rethink.

But we do not have access to his decretive will his secret will which is what he's going to accomplish. So for example the the Prescriptive will of God is thou shall not kill but the creative will of God Involved the crucifixion of Jesus so we we go with only what God has given to us and Then we patiently endure when his will brings us through difficulty trial pain hardship and yes, even disease and nobody absolutely positively nobody has the Right as a believer to bind coronavirus or anything else.

The coronavirus is a part of God's creation and he's using it for judgment right now and we pray for Patience and endurance. We pray for individuals to be healed but we do not claim it as if there is some type of demand that we can make upon God and so the reason that this certain minister prayed that all corona would go away and it hasn't yet is because there's nowhere in scripture that Has ever said to be something that Christians are supposed to be doing in the first place we pray that God will be merciful, but we also recognize that there are times when God's Judgment comes upon a people and I'll guarantee you one thing and this is just an observation doesn't have much to do with the question.

The more Things happen in the world the more I realize That when Christian leaders address these things to remember a Lot of people don't do you remember 20 years ago? Not quite fully 20 years ago when 9 -11 happened?

There was a lot of discussion of God's judgment. There's I've heard almost no discussion from anybody of what God's judgment would even look like today. One of my fellow pastors Yesterday or day for posted something on his Facebook page about This is what judgment looks like when we murder the innocent and The the response is like whoa.

Why well, how do you know that? Give me chapter and verse hat, you know. And you know, I stepped in and asked the one fellow it was, you know, sort of going after him. I said, well, do you think God's in control of all this stuff?

Do you think he didn't didn't realize this was gonna happen? If you again if you believe that there is a divine decree you take a completely Any belief in divine decree makes all of Christianity God-centered.

Word faith movement everything else is all man-centered. You may you may give God a big part but still man still in charge no matter what you do. No matter what you do if God doesn't have a purpose that he is accomplishing and I don't mean some vague.

Well, I'm gonna create then I'm gonna get to this point somehow someway, but you know, it's gonna go pretty crazy in between. I'm not talking about that. You've got man-centeredness and God-centeredness.

That's just how it works out. So Anyway. So in answer to the question my suggestion to you would be to leave the word faith movement and embrace a solid Orthodox understanding of God's sovereignty over man's man's affairs.

So I hope that that will be helpful to you. Second question real quick were any of the New Testament Gospels written after the fall of Jerusalem? Well, that's the big that's the big debate. If you read the vast majority of Commentaries written today.

They will date. You know if they're being really Conservative they'll they'll date mark probably prior to the fall and then they'll Put Matthew and Luke around that time or afterwards and John long afterwards.

Obviously it was very common in the 19th century to have John as late as 150s 170s. We do not have dates for the New Testament any of the New Testament books we we can get closer with some of Paul's writings because he mentions specific people and we know when certain events took place and so we can actually get a little bit closer in dating Paul's writings, but The Gospels are meant for wide distribution.

And so you don't have the same kind of greet this person greet that person type of situation. So we don't have dates we do not know the order in which they are written. It is common if you go to most Bible colleges and seminaries to be taught mark in priority that mark is the first and Matthew and Luke used him and edited him and changed him and contradicted him and John was just off doing his own thing.

So it would go mark then Matthew Luke somewhere in between and then John. There are lots of reasons to question that as well. That I won't get into today. I've discussed some of these things that years and years ago when I did the synoptic gospel studies.

But I'm not sure those early I don't think those earlier ones are available and anything other than cassette tape, which I don't think you can get hold of anymore anyway. However, there are good reasons to believe that all the Gospels were written prior to 80s 70.

Minimally that Matthew Mark and Luke were there is so much in Matthew Mark and Luke especially in regards to all of it discourse and things like that. That if there if it was written post 70 would have been written I think differently.

But Then there's there's like I said, there's there's good argument that John is as well though. It's common for people to date John. I certainly I was taught that John is mid to late 90s the world doesn't end if he is but there's there's Arguments pre 70 for for everything.

Can you prove any of that as far as you know, like in a debate what I would I take a debate that all the Gospels are written Before the destruction of Jerusalem. No but what is important to keep in mind is that when you buy those commentaries at the Christian bookstore There Are again turn that we used a lot last time presuppositions on the part of those who are writing those commentaries and I think one of the places where Christians struggle is Very often the presuppositions that are found in material such as that do not Get transferred into The pulpit and into teaching in that way and so sometimes our people are just not even They're just completely lost because they start reading something.

It does not make sense to them because they don't have the background to know You know this all this author assumes this so this author is definitely assuming this order of the Gospels. And and so that's where this comes from and stuff like that.

So we're in the New Testament Gospels written after follow Jerusalem possibly and possibly not. It's it's hard to say we're not we're not we're not certain. Okay. Let's see here. I guess we're sort of starting to top and going straight down.

The Sufficiency of Scripture and the Influence of Tradition in Church History

All right. Let's talk to Casey. Hi Casey. Hello, can you hear me? Yes, I can. Hello. Hello. Can you hear me? Mr. White? Yes, I can. Oh Thanks. So I'm neither.

Protestant nor Roman Catholic. However, I've been watching your debates and I'm pretty convinced that the early church did in fact believe in the sufficiency and supremacy of Scripture and their doctrines such as the papacy the bodily assumption And the Immaculate Conception were not taught in the early church.

However, I am aware that such doctrines such as you know, like the perpetual virginity and physicist of Mary Although being a development over time We're still believed by Church Fathers who believed in the sufficiency and supremacy of Scripture.

So considering the fact that they never said that those can only from Scripture Nor did they ever make reference to another source of revelation? Would you say that they deduced it like from Scripture by like bad exegesis and things like that?

No, so like the word faith movements. I mean things become popular. And especially in the early church you have a tremendous influence from The culture around them and so for example, I forgot I was gonna do a little discussion about this book today.

Well, I was and and one of the issues the book that I'm talking about here is is dealing with is the influence of Greek thought Various religious movements of that day upon early writers. So we know that Justin Martyr he was influenced by certain forms of Greek philosophy.

Tertullian eventually joined a ascetic type group called the Montanists and so we know there are groups like that out there and Sometimes we know exactly what the influences were upon a particular writer.

Sometimes we do not sometimes we can sort of guess at it. Sometimes it's a mixture of things and so someone can believe in the unique authority of Scripture and Still have a very thick lens. So, you know, a lot of people are familiar with the Dialogue discussion actually is an interview that I did with the late Dave Hunt back in the year 2000 as I recall and my Statement to him at one point during our conversation He had responded to me about something about John chapter 6 and instead of giving me an exegetical response something was based upon the text.

He gave me Something that really wasn't connected the test text at all. And my response to him was Dave. That's just your traditions and His response to me was James. I have no traditions. Now when someone says they have no traditions what that means is Their traditions have them Completely under their control.

They're not even aware that they're there and therefore they cannot test them. They cannot look at them. And so We have the advantage in in our day with as much communication as we have to have others challenge us when we Give evidence that our traditions are getting in the way of our exegesis of Scripture.

You didn't have quite as much of that opportunity in in the ancient world. And you didn't have quite the you know, the library of sound books and especially in the early church. You have people writing who actually have a limited canon of the New Testament.

I don't even have all the New Testament books as yet that they're even familiar with and so there's all sorts of reasons why someone might come to a conclusion for example you have the rise in the middle of the second century and really flowering by the middle of third century of monasticism the Desert Fathers in Egypt and places like that all the way up into the area regions around Caesarea the the the pillar saints and and the whole development of a monastic movement and that monastic movement was originated from a lot of extra biblical extra Christian sources and So once someone who has those concepts in mind encounters the Christian scriptures unless there is a you know a real opportunity for being pushed to have balance and to filter and to examine all those presuppositions you End up with some weird stuff.

I mean, I mean seriously if you know what one of the pillar Saints were. Then you know, these were people that built up these pillars and and lived on the tops of these pillars and Some would get so tall that have to have disciples that would that would climb up these pillars and bring them food and take their waist down and you go.

What how do you get that from a balanced reading of the New Testament? We're supposed to be going out into the world and we're supposed to be salt and light and it how do you get that? Well You get that by by?

Imbalanced an imbalanced understanding of certain texts that become all in the all-important lens through which everything else is seen and. So, you know Am I saying that every single one of those people wasn't saved or something?

No, I mean, it's really weird to me. But I think I think you know they may well have been Christians who once they got to heaven God's like Dude, you know what you could have done during that time. I mean, come on, you know so, you know it really Church history does give us the opportunity the church ends up struggling with things and issues come up and clarification takes places as a result and so the early church had to struggle with Christological issues the nature of Christ a Polynarianism all the rest that type of stuff and As I've pointed out many times didn't really go nearly as in-depth in other areas such as for example eschatology or the atonement or things like that and then up up pops a a great controversy plagianism which refocuses attention and causes You know a major works to be written and and things like that and frequently what it is is it's a pendulum swing so all of a sudden this big controversy comes up you get a pendulum swing and it may go past a biblical center point to something to the other extreme and but pendulums swing back and Eventually you have you have something hopefully more toward the middle.

However. What you have in history is a situation where external tradition becomes normative more and more over time and that's why for example unlike some of my Baptist forebears I can look at the medieval period and I can see Christians in the medieval period.

Not everybody there's a tremendous amount of nominalism tremendous amount of nominalism, but there are still Christians there. The church didn't cease to exist. It's it's not you know, we're not Joseph Smith and now it's 1830 all as well and so There it does require a level of Grace, I guess to look back and to See these individuals and to see what might have influenced them that helps me to see what might influence me.

There are controversies that I could think are very very important that end up, you know, pushing me one direction or another. But I'm just thankful that God has always had his people and I am thankful that each generation has had the Word of God.

It's been preserved for us it remains that strong bulwark, but when I. If you if you sounds like you're doing the reading anyways, just look at the second Nicene Council 8th century. And look at the argumentation that was used by the second Nicene Council long after the after the original Nicene Council in 325.

It was used by the second Nicene Council to substantiate the veneration of saints and images compare. The biblical the level of biblical literacy and argumentation there 400 years after 325 and you'll be I think stunned because there's there's there's a huge change.

There's a huge change. So yeah, there's Once. Especially when it comes to for example something like celibacy Mary the things that were deeply associated with the monks. Hey, the monasteries and the monks became the primary theological faculty of the church shall we say and so what's really important to them becomes really important during that time period and.

So the the exaltation of Mary especially such things now I'll make one exception there, even though it was foundational the perpetual of virginity of Mary is first found in clearly Gnostic sources. Right and so.

Yeah, that's it. That's a real to me a clear example of where you have an external consideration. That ends up in my opinion when I read even modern Roman Catholic writers attempting to defend that over against the natural Language of the New Testament about brothers and sisters.

Even to the point where in essence you I would argue very strongly that the Orthodox understanding the perpetual virginity of Mary since it involves the maintenance of Mary's physical virginity. Fundamentally means Jesus beamed out of Mary there was no natural birth.

I was listening. I was listening. What was I listen? Oh this morning. I went on a walk this morning and I was looking for material on a specific really really esoteric subject and I had done a search on On the podcast app on on Apple and I start end up end up listening to this Roman Catholic priest.

It was supposed to be talking about the subject that I wanted to get to he never got around it but one of the things that he somehow got on to was a perpetual Virginia Mary and The fact there was no afterbirth.

There was no normal any of the normal associated things with with with birth. And so here's a guy he was talking about Pope Francis. So it's been within the past couple of years and it's still the same no natural birth of Jesus.

So, I mean that I would think that most people would recognize that fundamentally attacks the incarnation the reality of the of the human nature of Jesus, but That's put off to the side because we need to have Mary have this particular set of attributes.

So there's there's a good example where you know, Jerome is going to engage in Good exegesis of many passages of Scripture. He's very insightful he knows a lot about the original languages and backgrounds and stuff like that, but when it comes to that since he's in a monastery and Since there are certain things that are vitally important in the tradition that he is now living in you can see How his exegesis completely changes once he encounters these types of things so It helps us to see when that happens today I mean there are great brothers and great interpreters and Then all of a sudden they'll say something and I just go, huh?

Where did that come from? And it's it's because of some quirk in their past. It's some something that they experienced and still happens and it probably happens to me. And the problem is you generally don't recognize it when it happens to you.

But church history helps you to be looking for it. So.

That helpful. Basically had the same assumptions as well. And I just wanted to confirm me. So I really do appreciate your comments.

Okay. All right. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Have a good day. Stay healthy down there. All right. Keep hiding. Hasn't gotten you yet, but it's coming for you. Let's talk with Paul down in Alabama.

Hi Paul.

Hey, dr. Wright, thanks for taking my call. Yes, sir I'm not exactly sure how to lay out this question. So just kind of bear with me a second, but it's pertaining to Genesis chapter 15. Verses 17 and 18 this passage is in light of New Testament scripture Galatians chapter 3 verses 28 29.

Reference might again in Romans Chapter 9 the book of Papers chapter 6. Also, could you could you kind of expound upon? the nature of those verses in Genesis. Well.

That's a that that's not really a question that's a sermon request. Really when when you think about it Can I give you a Immediate exegesis of four different texts of scripture in regards to the nature of covenants.

No, not on a not on a webcast call-in program. I can simply point out that what's being referred to here is the fact that in Genesis chapter 15 You do have a incredible picture provided of what cutting a covenant means and that is in verse 17 it came about when the Sun had set that it was very dark and Going out to Most of us today don't know what very dark is.

We are so rarely in a place that is totally dark that On a sunless on a moonless night. Wow, let me tell you so you all you got starlight. Of course could have been cloudy too. And then it's really dark.

I came about when the Sun had said that it was very dark and behold there appeared a smoking oven and a Flaming torch which passed between these pieces. So these these pieces. If we Scroll back verse 9 so I said to him bring me a three-year-old heifer and a three-year-old female goat the three-year-old ram and a turtle dove and a young pigeon.

Then he brought all these to him and cut them in two and laid each half Opposite the other but did not cut the birds birds of prey came down upon the carcasses and Abram drove them away. Now when the Sun was going down a deep sleep fell upon Abram and behold terror and great darkness fell upon him.

God said to Abram know for certain that your descendants will be strangers in a land That is not theirs where they will be enslaved and oppressed 400 years by the way for those of you who are open theist God was not guessing about this.

But I will also judge the nation whom they will serve and afterward they will come out with many possessions as for you. You shall go to your fathers in peace. You'll be buried a good old age then the fourth generation.

They will return here for the iniquity of the Amorite is not yet complete now. Stop on that, but that's verse 16 is extremely important In regards to well lots of things theodicy and everything else. So that's the context.

So you have the the the carcasses have been laid out and They are separated from one another and so now in the darkness a smoking oven a flaming torch passed between the pieces. So when you talk about cutting a covenant, this is these pieces have been cut.

These carcasses have been cut in half so Passing between them and on that day Yahweh made a covenant with Abram saying to your descendants I have given this land from the River of Egypt as far as the Great River the River Euphrates The Kenite and the Kenizzite and the Cadenite and all these other guys I'm not gonna spend my time all the way through the Jebusites.

And so this is a picture of a covenant and The issues of the covenants made with Noah Abram who becomes Abraham the father of many nations and the Mosaic Covenant and how they Relate to one another how they relate to the people of Israel in the land to the driving of the people from the land into captivity and Then how all of this then relates to Jeremiah's discussion in Jeremiah 31 of the new covenant and what the distinctions are is the whole reason that I was supposed to have gotten on a plane this morning and Flown to Moscow, Idaho to have a debate with Doug Wilson this weekend on pedo-baptism and pedo-communion because we will have different understandings as to what the relationship between those covenants is.

That in the new covenant and the differences between what applies to the people of Israel What applies to all of those who are of the faith of Abraham by by faith in the same God as Abraham? It's a huge huge huge area and given that a large majority of evangelicals in the United States Will read Genesis 15 if they read Genesis 15 and Have no concept of of covenant of of what it means of how it's applied.

That that gives you an idea why? Those areas of debate and dispute Don't get settled very often. In fact, a lot of people don't even know why we're arguing about those types of things now if there was a specific element of Of the New Testament fulfillment that I could comment on but I'm not sure because because you were basically asking for a extensive sermon there that you can't you can't do well.

I I think that's a better way to phrase it. Maybe an element because I'm looking at this as far as the salvation being monergistic in light of Galatians Chapter 3 verses 28 29 where it talks about those that are in Christ Are children of the sea and heirs according to the promise of something similar to that?

Specifically when it talks about the smoking pot going between the pieces at this particular time in Genesis. Was not Abraham in a deep sleep. So he didn't actually Walk through the pieces that it was God alone that walked through the pieces or am I am I reading that right now?

No, there would be.

It would be correct that God is the one who makes the covenant and God is the one making the promise. He's he's saying to you. I am Yahweh your God and I am making this covenant. It wasn't lay these things out then come to me.

It was God who passed between in the form of those The flaming torches stuff like that. So that's true right. And and as far as Galatians 3 29 if you belong to Christ and you're Abraham's descendants heirs according to promise and The the way that you are in Abraham is Abraham had faith you have faith and you're accepting those same promises of God.

And those promises Those promises have a full their greatest fulfillment in Christ. Now there were there were land promises. There were all sorts of people who for example many of the kings of Egypt of kings each kings of Israel Bore the Covenant signs.

But did not have circumcised hearts. And so while their bodies bore the sign they themselves were not part of the the the lemma the the remnant. There's a lot of discussion of that once you get into the prophets and things like that and so fulfillment motifs and How it's so filled and in what way that's where there's there's entire volumes that you can that you can devour on that very issue and a Lot of debates you can listen to as well.

But could you could you pull me out a book that kind of talks a little bit about that and Maybe can make a better connection for me. For that being talked about Salvation and a monergistic. I know.

Salvation is all of y 'all. Well, you're gonna you're gonna run into two things almost everyone who's talking about Covenant theology Is going to be a monergist. Synergist just don't really discuss it much to be perfectly honest.

It's not my experience. So when you start looking for books on Covenant theology, you're gonna get you're gonna get all monergistic stuff pretty much. But you're gonna get two different understandings of fulfillment as far as the New Covenant is concerned.

Well a couple well, not just two you're gonna have differences amongst Presbyterians primarily and Reformed Anglicans on this type of a subject. And there's gonna be a spectrum of Viewpoints there there used to be pretty much unanimity amongst Reformed Baptists.

There isn't any more now. There's been a sort of a division there as well In regards to Exactly the relationship of Old and New Covenant and especially in regards to Abraham but if you look up Well, Soledadeo Gloria publishers will have not necessarily Solid ground does just both start with this.

Well, so Soledadeo Gloria still exists. I think they're Ligonier. I'm not sure. Anyway, Ligonier will have books Solid Ground has books Reformed Baptist Academic Press our BAP has at least Three or four that I can think of up top my head.

They're specifically on that exact topic Of Covenant theology, I'll warn you ahead of time. Not not many of them are are written in such a way as to Keep you up at night. Or let's put it this way if you suffer from insomnia most of them are written to help you with that too.

They can be rather thick. But the information is there if you want to if you want to dive into it. Okay. Okay. All right. I sure appreciate it. All right. Thanks Paul. Thanks for calling. All right. God bless Matthew.

New York, hi Matthew. Hey, dr. White, how are you? Pretty good. Are you in the city or out in the sane part of the state? Oh well.

The saner part. Let's just put it that way. Okay. Okay.

Well, I just the the city is the city and the rest of you guys I I think you ought to secede and At least join. I don't know Pennsylvania something to get just to get away because otherwise you're. Anyway, it's a mess.

I.

Agree, I agree. Definitely. It's different world down there. Go ahead. So a lot of my mind. Hope I can get it out. Well, so after watching your dialogue with Steven Anderson when he was doing his documentary about the different Bible versions There was a topic brought up at the end that kind of led to the end of the discussion regarding Jesus's descent into Hades.

Mm-hmm and From what I understand of your perspective you were saying that after Jesus's death on the cross. He descended actually into the world of spirits into Hades which has both a part where there were the believers and then the non-believers like kind of like a paradise and like a Tormentor prison or whatever you want to call it like Luke 16.

Yes. Yeah, the yes Lazarus in the rich man the parable I'm coming from a I used to be Mormon. So I'm trying to sort this all out in my head, you know. Because Mormons believe in the world of the dead with the paradise in prison, right?

And So I've been studying this topic particularly and then the more I dove in the more I got confused because there's a wide range of views as to what happened if Jesus actually did descend into the world of Hades or If as Calvin believed he believed that Jesus kind of descended into the pains of hell on the cross.

He didn't actually Descend in spirit to the world of Hades, right? There's the Roman Catholic view where they say that he went to the upper part of hell, which is called like the the The limbo of the fathers the the Jews and the pagans and then he proclaimed the message to them.

And if they accepted he would liberate them. So I want to kind of understand from your perspective because it sounds like that you would disagree with Calvin. At least slightly because you were expressing that Jesus actually did send into Hades.

Yeah. Well, and there's lots of stuff I disagree with Calvin about but.

My understanding and let me just ask are we not taking more calls? Okay, I just I just know his first two lines are blank and I'm not doing 25 minutes for each call. So we still got almost half an hour there.

So that that opens up two phone lines, by the way folks at 877 -753 -3341. My understanding and I am I am NOT dogmatic about this. It is a it's a very difficult area and I am open to correction but Basing my understanding on the fact that you sort of need to take into consideration all that the New Testament teaches.

We are told that Jesus made Proclamation to the spirits that were in prison. I Think it's 2nd Peter if I recall correctly may have been Jude, but one of the two very similar books. And my understanding is that the the terminate the terminology that's used there leads me to believe that he was proclaiming his victory over them and what they had done because it says they were once disobedient in the days of Noah and so whatever that means.

What it what it doesn't mean is that it is necessary for Jesus to suffer in hell Soteriologically speaking or anything like that. I do not believe that there is any suffering on the part of Jesus after his physical death that is somehow necessary for Redemption or anything along those lines.

I think once he has when he says to tell us die it is finished it was There's nothing more it needs to be done at that particular point in time, but there is this Strange reference To making proclamation to the spirits who were prison who were disobedient days.

No, etc, etc so I'm just trying to leave room for that because There are only well there just isn't there's almost no discussion As to exactly what the nature of Jesus's activity was between the cross and the resurrection outside of just a couple half sentences or something along those lines and so It wouldn't seem to me to be if we're gonna use the Luke 16 Paradigm of Sha 'ul Hades Where you have Lazarus in the bosom of Abraham.

So in other words, he he is not suffering. He is not being punished whereas the rich man traditionally called divies he is and so there is an anticipation of the final judgment That is seen in the separation in Luke 16 now some people just Don't think Luke 16 is relevant because it's supposed to be a parable What out even it was a parable that that still has to be based on something to communicate to the people Some type of meaningful truth.

So using that as a as a as a paradigm It would seem to me that what's mentioned in Regards to the proclamation of those spirits were once it's been days Noah is a very specific group that I don't know would be Spatially in either one of the traditional two places, maybe the second the lower or whatever but there is a All I can see see in that is that there is a proclamation of the fact that his work has been completed and it accomplished what it was supposed to accomplish and there is a Announcement Two spirits who had attempted to stop that from happening That they have they have been defeated then you have the Somewhat tenuous but I you know, I I tend to think it's it's appropriate but you have Jesus leading captivity captive and What would that refer to?

Well? It The the promise of Paul for example is he is torn between two things to be To stay on which is needful for those who are alive or to be to depart and to be with Christ. Not to depart and to go into soul sleep, but to depart and to be with Christ.

I would think that if Paul's idea was that upon death he was going to either cease to exist or be unconscious for however long. That this would be extremely Problematic for him and something he would not want to experience Because of the fact that he is in close personal communion with God.

He wants to continue that so If that is the case He's not looking to go to be in some Hades Shaul context Upon death and so what has been suggested by many that seems to fit. Anyways, is that in the resurrection Jesus leads captivity captive those who were in Abraham's bosom?

Are taken into the presence of their Lord? Where all who now die in Christ enter into his presence immediately? Awaiting the final consummation the resurrection of the body. That's always Resurrection the body is always there because God made us in that way.