Jude vs 17-19 Contend By Recall

All right, let's open up our Bibles to Jude. There's only one chapter, so that makes it easy. And we're gonna begin by reading at verse eight down through 19. The topic today is contend by recall of God's word. So let everybody get their Bibles open if they're not already. You know, it's interesting, if you listen to Macaulay's tapes, he always, you know, it's amazing when people will turn to Psalm 114, verse 10, and people begin reading it. Well, you know, I don't know about you, but it takes about 10 seconds at least to find the book, much less the chapter and the verse. With Judas, once you find the book, you know you're in the right chapter, because there's only one. All right, beginning at verse eight.

Likewise, also these dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities. Yet Michael, the archangel, when contending with the devil, he disputed about the body of Moses. Durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, the Lord rebuke thee.

But these speak evil of those things which they know not. But what they know naturally as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves. Woe unto them, for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the heir of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Cor. These are spots in your feasts of charity when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear. Clouds they are without water, carried about of winds, trees whose fruit withereth without fruit, twice dead, picked up by the roots. Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame, wandering stars to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness forever.

And Enoch also the seventh from Adam prophesied of these saying behold the Lord comes with 10,000 of his saints to execute judgment upon all and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds, which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against them. These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts, and their mouth speaks great swelling words, having men's persons in admiration because of advantage. So our verses for today, verse 17. But beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ, how that they told you there should be mockers in the last time who should walk after their own ungodly lusts. These be they who separate themselves, central, having not the spirit.

All right, the reason I read what preceded this is because it really relates to the theme of the entire book, doesn't it? So let's begin. We've just finished warnings against false teachers, or have we? I mean, I'm gonna say, have we really, because the next few verses relate to this.

But now let's turn to the words of those who came before us. And now we look at verse 17 and 18 in combination. But beloved, remember the words which were spoken before by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ, how they told you that there would be mockers in the last time who would walk according to their own ungodly lust. In a sense, I look at those two verses kind of summarial of what we just read about all these false teachers that are exhibiting their presence in the body of Christ.

So let's drill down now. Beloved is agapitos, which again, agape, we all know what agape means, which I think here reflects on a very special bond, doesn't it? So let's drill down on that a little bit more. The word beloved, according to Wiest, does not refer to Jude's love for those to whom he's writing. It's not us, but to the fact that the saints are loved ones of God. So we could debate that left and right, but either way, I think we're okay. Whether Jude's writing to us is beloved or to the church at that time, ultimately that's called the beloved, or whether we're beloved ones of God, I think is irrelevant, but yet it's interesting the way Wiest interprets that.

So we'll leave it at that. Any thoughts about that? Why not? I mean, you know, I just am giving that as an example of how scripture can be differently interpreted, but it's a small issue, isn't it? If we're beloved of God, we ought to be beloved of one another, right? I mean, so anyway, let's leave it there.

So the question I'm asking the class today, do we today, Remember the words which were spoken before by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ, how they told you or us that there would be mockers in the last times who would walk according to their ungodly lust." I mean, is that something that we're recalling for a day-to-day basis?

Well, if we're studying 2 Peter, we're seeing, I mean, there are so many books of scripture that do address this issue, so I think that's what It seems like he's, how experienced may he be, or what has been recorded about these mockers? We'll come back to this, Roger, but we've mentioned many times that second Peter and Jude, who's copying whom here? I mean, there's a lot of parallelism versus it really kind of similarly state the same issue.

Don't you think also that because this is in the word, from this very time that this was written, people have been thinking that these, there were mockers out there. There were people, I mean, this has been going on since Christ was here. These mockers and these ungodly lusts. I mean, this is, look at the Roman times and all the things that have happened through history. People have thought this was the time right now. I mean, you know, whenever they live, that was the time. We're going to come back to that. Okay. Good point.

Interestingly enough, this is the first time Jude has used a verb in the imperative sense. Remember, is errors passive imperative? What do you make of the verb tense, the voice and the mood here? Remember the verse. Remember, ultimately, where are we here? Remember ye the words which are spoken by the apostles. Imperative, what does that mean?

One of the stands out here, why did he use passive voice? I mean, it's like, don't you remember the Holy Spirit? telling you these things. I guess that's about as close as I can say it. I like that, Roy, because I would think this would be not passive, but active.

We should remember that's imperative that we should do it. But it's imperative in terms of what was given to you. So that's something we've received. So that remembrance is what the spirit has done in our lives to make it apparent that these things we should make part of our day to day existence, that there's going to be mockers and scoffers at these last times. Well, I'm wondering if, you know how, when these mockers and scoffers are mocking and scoffing, we may be surprised about it. And like, why is this happening? It's like, well, don't you remember? This was going to happen.

Well, we're challenged here to remember, but it's not to be actively remembering, although I can't think of a better way to do it than thinking about it and consulting with my experience that this is what God has said. But the passive imperative really just indicates that that's who we are. We've received this message, make it part of your life, understanding that these people are about us. I mean, since it's passive, that means we're a recipient of this. So remembering this is something that we've received. Wake up, everybody. You've received this message. And ultimately, the call here is to remember what? It's remember what the apostles had said, right? All right. Who are the apostles?

Is this 12 plus Paul, which is stated pretty clearly in Matthew? So Margaret, would you look at Matthew 28, 19, and 20, or more broadly interpret it as those who followed to teach and preach and spread the gospel, indicative by a series of verses, which we don't need to look at. So what do you think here? Are the apostles, this general class of teachers and preachers who have spread the gospel at the time of the new church, or alternatively, are we talking about the 12 plus Paul? Is there an opinion? The word apostle doesn't, it means sent ones, so could it apply generally to those? Okay, so Patty thinks maybe it's more of a general application. I don't know. Other thoughts?

Well, we know that, in fact, Secretary Peter, we know Peter who's an apostle, he directly addresses this issue, so that gives us some, you know, clue that it possibly works. Okay, Margaret, why don't you read the Matthew passage, if you would? Okay, Matthew 28, 19. You got your mic on? Uh-huh. Okay, good. And 20.

Go, therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you. And lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age. Amen. Okay, so that's the commandment given to the 12. Of course, Judas Iscariot wasn't part of that, right?

He'd kind of been left behind here, but Paul, in addition. Now, I'm going to raise a position here that we can discuss if you want. It seems to me that the apostles here are the 12 plus Paul, and I think Roger alluded to that, in that those to whom Jude is addressing is reminding them of those who are contemporaries. Now that couldn't, Patty, it could be more broadly applied, but this is discussed by a lot of Western commentators as to who the apostles are. But I think, you know, Jude was one of the apostles, was he not? And Peter was one of the apostles. And the word is being spread now, and many of these people, meaning the apostles themselves, are still alive. So he's- Go ahead, Roy. Just a short word here.

I think Jude was one of the, half-brothers of our Lord. I don't think he would be considered one of the twelve, okay? Peter was, but Jude was not. Jude was one of the half-brothers of our Lord Jesus. I thought he was. He was an unbeliever during Jesus' life, remember? Oh, that's true. And so he was not one of the twelve followers. Does anybody else want to? What's that? One of the apostles was named Jude, right? Judas, the other Judas. And Judas and Jude can be used interchangeably. The other one that is very similar in characteristics would be James, who also was a half-brother of our Lord Jesus.

But he took, I don't know that you would call him one of the twelve either, because he was not one of the twelve. They're listed. I did not go back and confirm that. But anyway, homework for the class to go back and look at who the 12 are. All right.

James was a brother of John, and he was martyred right along in the early church. I mean, he was one of the first martyrs. And he was an apostle. Well, I always interpreted the other Judas was Jude himself. But nevertheless, I think it's a small point here. The question is, are these, in general, all the apostles, or in fact, is it the 12? I think it's probably the 12, but that could be debated.

All right, recalling the similarity of the epistle of Jude to the second epistle of Peter, mockers is used just twice in the Bible, and that's 2 Peter 3.3, and also here in Jude. So mockers and scoffers are the same word, okay?

So there's 2 Peter 3.3. Knowing this first that scoffers or mockers will come in the last days walking according to their own lust.

So that begs the question, when is the last days or the last time Is it just up to the rapture or is it after the tribulation? And do you agree with Constable? And I'm not going to show you what he says first. What are your thoughts here? What's the last days or last time? Boy, Bonnie just giving me an expression that she's, because I think we're all puzzled by kind of sometimes it refers to the rapture, sometimes it refers to the tribulation period. Nobody has an opinion here, right? All right. I always thought it was up to the rapture. Well, I think in context, that must mean what it represents.

I mean, you know, there'll be people saved during the tribulation. And of course, during the tribulation, it's going to be mostly unsaved people, right? Some of them who may be camouflaging as believers. But here's what Constable said. And let's see if we agree. Constable says, the last time refers to the end of the, the, sorry for that, historical period that encompasses the church age and the tribulation. After this last time, God will rule directly over humankind, first during the millennium, and then in the new heavens and new earth. It is the last time in relation to Jesus Christ's return to reign on earth.

Now, what did Constable say? Yeah, he's including the Tribulation. Well, you know, the mockers and scoffers have been here since the origin of the Church, right? So this is not a new entity, and it's likely not going to occur only in the Tribulation period. It's part of who we are as a Church today, is it not? Hey, Bob? Yes, sir? I don't know if this will help, but I'll say it. The tribulation period is not a period of in-between anymore. God is dealing with judgment there. And people will rise up against Him there. Right. Right now is the time of scoffing. Oh, He's never going to come back.

What are you talking about? It's always been this way. That's the evolutionary thought, isn't it? I mean, it prevails in man's thinking today that everything that's real is material. There is no outside of the material universe existence, even, if you talk to the average person. And anything that has to do with our Lord Jesus coming back is scoffed at. It's laughed at. Things have always been this way. And they're just going to continue. I think that that's really prevalent before the rapture. OK. More so than today. Are we getting close? That's what our Wednesday evening studies are going to be all about.

There's more scoffing today, just across the board. Well, and it's not just scoffing, it's defiance. I mean, it's open, totally open defiance of that view. So it's not just, oh, you're off your rocker kind of stuff. It's really now become, I mean, just open territory, really. Open season on that belief.

Well, I've hung out with a lot of Jewish people over the years, and I would kind of generally say that most of them look at the stories of the Old Testament as just a bunch of myths, like the parting of the Red Sea and all those kinds of events that we turn to in the Old Testament scripture to indicate that God's principles are applied in a miraculous way. They think those are just a bunch of stories. A bunch of stories.

And I love to tell them about how now evidence has really shown, you know, wow, look at this, Esther really, she actually really existed. Well, and they don't know what to do with that. They really don't, you know, even though all of this evidence has shown now archaeological evidence, they found all these places. They still, it's absolutely so ingrained in their brain that these are just all allegories and stories and Another metaphor that's existed here in the texts of Jude, right? Yeah, right. All right, let's go ahead. Ironside has a comment here. Ironside says, God is silent now.

While men blaspheme his name and stumble over his word, soon he will speak from heaven when all shall know with whom they have to do. Well, one's going to see that as a tribulation period. Now, to take everything Ironside says and reduce it to one or two sentences, it's really a task. But I kind of felt this was kind of jewelish, if you will, if that's really a modifier to say, this is kind of Ironside's view of this whole thing. I'm not being cruel. Ironside just has a lot of thought that he expresses time and time again. But nevertheless, I thought this was pretty profound. Bob? Yes, sir.

Could you say, you know, This is kind of a warning from Jude, telling us that that's when, so he's speaking to believers. So the last time, wouldn't that refer to the believers, that the last time they're gonna have to put up with this kind of stuff, and be warned, will be taken out of here.

So my thinking, that would mean rapture. So pre-rapture, yeah. I think in context, Wayne, that's the way I would interpret this. But nevertheless, I mean, I'm just giving you some other views of people that are much smarter than me, for sure. All right, let's go ahead.

Who would walk according to their ungodly lusts is the end of verse 18. Well, in the current state, they have no choice, do they? I mean, the unsaved, what other choice do they have? I mean, it's not like we choose to live in Christ Jesus. I think the life we have in Christ Jesus is a life, not a choice. When we think of a choice, should I turn left or turn right? I mean, anyway, the Christian life is a life of the Lord Jesus Christ activated by the Holy Spirit. But does the unbeliever have any choice?

And I'm going to reflect here just in multiple sections of scripture that we could turn to. In 1 Corinthians 2, I think that's really, I think, verse 14, but the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of the God for they are foolishness to him, nor can he know them because they're spiritually discerned. So, I mean, it's that simple. Someone who's unsaved can only be critical and defiant. and not be in a position to do anything that's different than according to their own ungodly laws. Roy, did you have a comment?

Well, the only thing I would say is that we do have, as unbelievers, the choice to believe or not believe. And choosing to not believe, obviously, is the norm of humanity. The exceptions are those who believe the Holy Spirit comes in and dwells, and gives us a God-sensitivity. Otherwise, we're dead to Him, we're separated from Him, using the technical word separation. We'll come back to separation in a moment here, and the role of the Holy Spirit here.

But I was saved at age 30, and I was skeptical of the Bible left and right. And I thought anybody could find a verse or two that fit their own subjective opinion about any issue, and that it was flawed. The Bible had no relevance. But when you get saved, something happens, that the scripture starts to get opened up to you in a way you couldn't perceive or understand before. So that we're thankful for because now the ability to grow in grace and understand that all the scripture is for us may not all be about us, but it's the principles of God never change.

But the unsaved, believe that they're following the spirit of foolishness that really is indwelling them. And remember to the Jew, Christ was a stumbling block, but to the Gentile, he's foolishness. And I think many of us who were saved as an adult, I think can really realize what the worldview is all about. And the Gentile just is using their intellect with the evolutionary mindset that really sets the standard for their entire belief system, so.

All right, let's go ahead. But we have this privilege to remember and walk accordingly. And first, John, which we're very much looking forward to teaching with you going forward. We are of God, he who knows God hears us, and he who is not of God does not hear us. By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error. Isn't that precious? were set apart, sanctified in truth by the working of the Holy Spirit.

All right, let's turn to verse 19. These are, in our Lenten Greek, these be central persons who cause divisions is not in most original text. That's in the verse in my translation, but may not be in yours, not having the Spirit. So let's reread this.

These be central persons not having the Spirit. Don't say anything about who caused divisions, but we know they do. So what do other people's Bibles say there? Do you have who caused divisions in your translation? These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the spirit. Okay, so the nerd alone in Greek would be consistent with that. I'm not sure it's right or wrong. It's just I think, you know, who caused divisions could be implied here, which they do.

And we'll come back to that in a second. How should we interpret sensual? I found this kind of interesting. I tend to think of sensuals very well. Anyway, I think of it differently than what what the words meaning. I'm thinking sensual, self-pleasing, I'm often referring to sexual kind of desires and things like that, but it's not really that. For the senses. Okay, okay. You believe in your senses rather than believing in truth or believing what is true. Or going by your feelings. All right, that's close. And I think this is interesting. This is the only New Testament use of this word.

It needs to be disjoined, separated, or literally animal-souled. Animal soul. I can't tell you how many commentators I went to that went to this translation, animal soul. So what do we think about having a soul of an animal? I mean, we got a couple of dogs and their behavior often is disturbing to me.

They go by instinct. Okay. Where's the food? That's right, and when there's no food, they're looking for it anyway, right? Because I don't know if you pick up something to eat your own, but the dogs are just sitting there waiting for me to spill something.

Margaret, don't comment on this, please. That's learned behavior by the dogs. But think about calling our non-brothers and sisters who live in this earth as animals sold. All right, the animal has no thought of God, right? Well, the animal doesn't have any thought at all about himself, other than himself. That's all his own, you know, food, sleep, warmth. I mean, it's just, there's no thought of really, although I have to say, I think our dogs, care about each other. You know, because when one dog has been missing or whatever, they seem to have, it's kind of interesting, they seem to recognize that that dog is gone and they're looking, I mean, so there's something there. Dog shit. Dog shit, right. That doesn't sound okay. Hey, we'll just leave it there. They can't help themselves, you know? They're driven by their nature. That's right. Self-satisfaction, right? Entirely. Right.

And the same for the unbeliever. They're driven by the sin nature. But don't you find it very interesting that that's the interpretation of sensual? I mean, it really... Actually, Bob, I know that Rick Astaire has worldly mind. Oh, really? Okay. But I, you know, I went to the Greek and that's what the Greek says.

Don't you see that in the difference of evolution and creation? And that's what, you know, man has been inundated with evolution. What else can you believe that everything is animal? Well, if you think of evolution, things should be improving, right? Well, that's what they think, but it's improved from the same old thing. We don't see that, do we?

There has to be a new creation involved there. Strong goes on and says, those who by their wickedness separate themselves from the living fellowship of Christians. And I think in context, that represents this group of people who are called central. But outwardly, oh, somebody had a comment.

Well, I was just wondering, one of the things that we teach at Holy Hills is the difference between soul and spirit. And if we're governed by our souls rather than by the spiritual sensitivity to God and the openness of our spirits to God so that the Holy Spirit can teach us who we have in us, The unbeliever operates without that. He's operating strictly on a human or a physical interaction basis. And he's separated from that sensitivity towards God more and more, as he doesn't believe anything that God is telling him, by everything that God has made in the heavens. I mean, he ignores it. And that's an evolving atmosphere that surrounds us, is it not? Now I'm saying here, but outwardly, as indicated by Jude, they did not at one time take part in church ordinances. So these were mockersy scoffers who in fact did relate to the body of Christ. And I'm going to quote Jude 12.

You all remember this. These are spots in your love feast. While they feast with you without fear, they're serving only themselves. They're clouds without water, all the metaphors carried about by the winds, late autumn trees without fruit, twice dead, pulled up by the roots.

I mean, these were people in the body who existed there for a period of time, who carried out their mocking and scoffing in the setting of the church itself. So these are just not the outside world system. These are people who enter in. I think that's where we have to have an antenna up all the time. And again, at Holly Hills, I don't think that's a big issue, but just think about mainline churches or even some covenant new evangelical churches where this kind of mocking and scoffing occurs within and not recognized often.

I don't have any data on that, but I'm just saying this is likely what's going to increasingly be present. Do they purposely cause divisions or do they have any choice? What are your thoughts? I would say both. Both are correct. Both are really correct. All right, so that's not a multiple choice answer, of course, but we can only pick one. No, I think both is correct too.

I think some are purposeful in what they're doing to mislead because they have their own view, which is not scripturally based, but others may be ignorantly going about this. Well, I think they're they're in the church because they want to convince people of their view. I mean, that's why they go there. They think that whatever is going on in that church, that's just incorrect information. And they want to they want to change people's viewpoint.

Well, you can think of it. I have an agenda. I agree. We want to make actually this guy I mentioned several weeks ago. I thought that response was he had an agenda. His agenda was not to glorify God, it was to bring in all kinds of people into the church. That was his agenda. Who was that, Roger? Spong, Reverend Spong. Spong. Yeah, he's gone to be called Episcopalian. Episcopalian. It's hard to hear. Oh. Okay, why don't you repeat that, Roger? Yeah, actually, the guy I mentioned several weeks ago was Reverend Spong, who's Episcopalian.

He was a bishop in the Episcopal church. And his goal was to insert his view, which was totally anti-God. And it's amazing, with his views, he believed hardly any of the tenets of the faith, none. But he was a big cheese in the hierarchy in the church. Well, Spahn may be gone, but he's still wrong. He's right. That's good.

All right, let's carry on here. So what spirit is this? The Greek term pneuma could mean various kinds of interpretation. And this is going to be a sequence of end thoughts about this verse. Well, let's look at them. Remember, the Greek word, again, can be any one of the following. It could be the third person of the godhead, the Holy Spirit. It could be the principle by which the body is animated, the human spirit. It could be a simple essence devoid of all or at least all grosser matter and possessed of the power of knowing desiring deciding and acting. can be the disposition or influence which fills and governs the soul of anyone, and it could be a movement of air.

So those are your choices here. This is a multiple choice question. Which would you choose if you had to answer this question? Is this spirit the Holy Spirit or is it the human spirit, one of the two through four? Well, Bob, you can take the no thinking approach here. You could say it's capitalized, so it must be the Holy Spirit.

And that's one. And usually most times I would agree with the capitalization inscription. But and I would pick the first one. But anyway. All right. Let's let's drill down on this a little bit more. But Vincent and Albert say that it refers to man's human spirit. So let's let's look at that. I'm going to quote. Alfred says, not directly the Holy Spirit of God, but the higher spiritual life of man's spirit and communion with the Holy Spirit.

These men have not indeed ceased to have spirit or pneuma as a part of their own tripartite nature, but they've ceased to possess it in any worthy sense. It is degraded beneath and under the power of the psyche or psyche, the personal life to have no vitality of its own. And Vincent says a higher spiritual life. So the adjective pneumatikos, or spiritual, is everywhere in the New Testament opposed to psychikos, which is the natural spirit. So there's a lot of verbiage there, but they're basically saying this is the human spirit, not really coinciding with the role of the Holy Spirit in their lives.

So anyway, I'm going to turn to some scriptural here, which may help us a little bit. I'm not sure it's convincing, but let's take a look at this anyway. Let me get to my last page. So 1 Corinthians 15, 44 and 46 says, it is sown a natural body. It's raised a spiritual body. There's a natural body and there's a spiritual body. However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural and afterwards the spiritual.

So let's go a little bit further into some of our commentators. Weiss says the present writer decided with Vincent, Alfred, and Plumtree. Now, I didn't quote Plumtree in here just because of time and space. But Plumtree also believes this is the human spirit that's not been adequately instructed or, in fact, uplifted by the Holy Spirit. And Weiss says it's on the basis of the contrast implied, which is not between the Pseudokos or a man and the Holy Spirit, but between man's Pseudokos, the man's pneumatikos. Of course, since these false teachers are devoid of the higher spiritual life and its accompanying sensibilities, it is clear that they do not have the Holy Spirit.

Now- Could you say that again? I mean, that's why I'm sharing this with you. This is encyclopedic garbage. I mean, I'm not saying, you know, and Weiss is someone we trust and understand and everything, but I don't think there's any doubt. And Ironside says, they are unregenerate natural men attempting to act as ministers of Christ, but their speech betrays them. All right, so I don't think there's any question what we're talking about here.

And by the way, James 3, 5, this wisdom does not descend from above, but is earthly, sensual, and demonic. Okay, that's where they're coming from. So what other conclusion can you make? Well, let's look at one other verse, Romans 8, 9. But you are not the flesh, but the spirit, and indeed the spirit of God dwells in you. Now, if anyone does not have the spirit of Christ, he is not his.

That's right. So, I mean, what can we conclude about this rather than to say, I think this must be the Holy Spirit? Sure, I agree. Yeah, Wayne? I think there's only two choices, the sin nature or the new creation. Right, and all this drilling down into the Greek and trying to understand in context what this means. This is simple.

These people are not indwelled by the Holy Spirit. And whether this is the human spirit acting out, but it's insufficiently controlled by the Holy Spirit, is a bunch of rhetoric and garbage. So, I hope Vincent, Alfred, and Plumtree weren't paid a lot of money for their definition. Should we ask who their attorneys are? Yeah, really. I mean, it's black and white. I don't think there's...

No, but the reason I gave you all this rhetoric was simply just to indicate that, you know, let's interpret the word of God as the spirit leads us to interpret it. And to go out and left field someplace and be overly academic about which spirit this is, as we look at the five options, maybe it's air blowing in the wind. Maybe that's what we're talking about. Anyway, are there any other wisdom here?

And I think Constable is, you know, I had to turn to somebody that's got it right. Constable said, in refusing the divine spirit, they had sunk to the level of an animal life, immoral and productive of confusion to the church. I mean, he says it well. And keep in mind, that's one sentence, not paragraph after paragraph after paragraph.

So it is only the Holy Spirit now who directs our lives, and it's not our own spirit. I mean, we have our own spirit that can get in the way. There's the human spirit that actually is just a human existence. That's a second definition of spirit. We're all created in God's image, and that includes the human spirit.

But the Holy Spirit specifically must be to whom this verse refers. Any other thoughts about this? One thing that sort of nails it, Bob, is the modifying words around it. What do they have? And having something in possession is a pointer, right, to the Holy Spirit. Well, again, I referred, and I hate to overly personalize this, but until I came to be saved, I didn't have anything but skepticism about the Word of God. And what opens that up? Is it my intellect? No, it's the Holy Spirit opening up the truth of the word of God. I think we've all experienced that day in and day out. And without the Holy Spirit, intellectually, we can be totally not convinced that the Bible is true.

Okay, I'm gonna conclude with those thoughts. Any parting words from anyone in video land out there or in the classroom? All right, let's pray. Father, we're thankful for this epistle. We're thankful, too, to look at some of the thoughts of others who study scripture. And sometimes we're getting to be misled. And I think that doesn't mean we have a corner on the truth, but we want the Holy Spirit to teach us. And as we look at these scoffers and mockers and times, whenever that may be, but we sense that that's even possible today and likely today. we need to rightly divide the word of truth and realize that it's the Holy Spirit who gives us that ability and power to do so. We're thankful for the class today. We pray for the service to follow. In Jesus' name we pray. Amen.