(Transcribed by TurboScribe. Go Unlimited to remove this message.)

Hey, you're listening to Cut for Time, a podcast from Faith Church located on the north side of Indianapolis. My name is Claire Kingsley. And I'm Dan Breitwieser.

Each week, one of us will sit down with the person who gave Sunday's sermon to discuss their message. Cut for Time is a look behind the scenes of sermon preparation, and they'll share with us a few things that we didn't hear from the sermon on Sunday. Thanks for listening.

Well, this is new. It's new. This is something different.

You get the combo of Claire Kingsley and her husband, Nathan Kingsley, on the same episode. It's weird. We know it's weird.

But that's why we've avoided it for years. And people insist that they want it. So we're going to just give it a shot.

Yeah. So I think we should start with everyone's first question. Claire, what do you think about when I'm preaching? All right.

Well, how do I feel when you're preaching? I used to feel really nervous for you. But now I feel like you've grown so much in your preaching that I really enjoy listening to you preach. And it's a gift to me.

So I'm not just saying that because I'm on the air, but I say that to your face. Yeah, that's true. Another question I get that maybe you get as well is people will ask me, well, you know, when you ran this sermon past Claire, what did she think before you preached it? As if as part of my practice, I preach my sermons to you in our downtime.

And I'm like, nope, that never happens. When you hear the sermon for the first time, that is also Claire's opportunity to hear it for the first time. So I don't know if you ever get questions like that either.

No, I don't. But the only time I ever have a heads up is if I ask sometimes if there are any fun illustrations or stories. And even then, I don't think you really give much away.

So I enjoy it. Keep you on your toes. Yeah.

So, all right, let's jump into your sermon. You covered, not a big deal, just the entire second chapter of Second Peter. And so can you give us a rundown of your sermon somehow, that'd be great.

Yeah, it was a full chapter of Second Peter, but it was one cohesive idea. This whole idea of Peter talking to the early church about the false teachers, false gospels in their midst. And so the way I broke it down was, he's asking us to do one thing, which is consider.

So we need to consider the source, consider the outcome of these false teachers, consider their lifestyle, and consider the reality. And then I kind of go into detail in the text about what exactly he's saying. But ultimately, the point he's making is, these false teachers are leading towards destruction, and everything about them points in that direction.

When you think about where they come from, or who they're influenced by, who they serve, and what their lifestyle looks like, and all these things, they are headed towards destruction. And so while what they're doing, they are proclaiming as freedom. Like, hey, Jesus isn't coming back, so we can do whatever we want, and look how much fun we're having by living in our sensual passions, and just doing whatever we want, and not living with any morals or ethics.

What they're portraying as freedom, Peter is saying, hey, don't be fooled. This is actually still slavery to sin. And so I summarized the whole chapter with one implied imperative, right? Because he doesn't give any imperatives telling us what to do.

He just talks about these false teachers. But the implied imperative is to not be drawn in by what ultimately destroys. That it might be alluring, it might be tempting, but don't be fooled, don't be drawn in by what ultimately is going to destroy your soul.

So that's kind of where we landed. Then we had some application as a result of that. But yeah, it was quite the challenge to narrow down and edit what of all the things I could talk about in the chapter, how to try to, on one hand, try to cover the whole chapter cohesively, and on the other hand, not get so bogged down in the details that I'm up there for an hour.

I think I did go a little long, but I felt like there wasn't really much else that I could have done. So and hopefully people don't notice when pastors go a little bit over their time. But I do know that some people are aware.

Yeah. You had mentioned something to me afterwards, which is like, if you were a guy that used props, then you might have used a prop on Sunday. What would that have been? Oh, right.

Yeah. In the sense that Peter says in, I think it's verse three, where he talks about how they are sneaking in their heresies in a sense that it's almost this idea of smuggling. And it makes us realize like, yeah, false teachers don't just come right out and say they're a false teacher.

The prop, if I was a prop guy, I would have had that Groucho Marx mustache, nose, glasses combo, you know, the really fake disguise that is in cartoons and old movies and just gone up there and said like, hey, no false teacher is going to make it this obvious that they have this disguise on. But obviously, I'm not a prop guy. So hence why I didn't use a prop.

Also, I don't own those. So maybe if I owned them and they were just in my office, maybe I would have used something like that. But yeah, not for me.

Okay. Yeah. Not best.

All right. So you had mentioned that you had to cut some things along the way for the sake of time. And one of them, I think, is a great way to start off, which is just context for the author and some other books in the Bible that also talk about similar topic.

So would you tell us what that's all about? Yeah. I think something that as I was studying for this passage that I maybe, honestly, I maybe learned in seminary and forgot. But honestly, it felt like I was learning it for the first time is the strong connection and parallels between this particular chapter of 2 Peter, 2 Peter 2, and the book of Jude, which, as you know, is just one chapter.

It's a pretty short book. But the strong connection between the two. Peter, as he was writing his letter, used Jude, like had access to a copy of Jude and used Jude in his writing of this chapter about false teachers.

Now, there's some reasons why, you know, historian or biblical historians and commentators think that Peter used Jude and not the other way around. And, you know, I could have, there's a lot of different ways where you could have drawn the parallels between the two books of the Bible. And in fact, most of the commentary sets that you get that go into all these details, not every book of the Bible gets its own book in the commentary series.

Sometimes you'll get like, oh, 1 and 2 Timothy joined together, or you'll get Colossians and Philemon together because those, you know, from Paul kind of go together. Well, most of the commentary sets group 2 Peter and Jude for the same reason. And some of the ones I was reading through even have Jude in the book first, even though in the Bible it comes after 2 Peter.

So anyway, there's just some really interesting connections. And then the decisions that Peter makes where he does make changes to what Jude says is interesting as well, because it's like clearly that Peter is taking Jude and then contextualizing it for his audience. He's writing to an audience that's maybe a little more Gentile, less rooted in Jewish apocalyptic literature.

While there is some of that, Jude is very heavily influenced, similar to Revelation by Jewish apocalyptic literature. And so there's these really interesting connections, which, you know, I kind of nerd out about. And as I'm reading through it and like really getting excited, I'm like, yeah, there's no room for this in the sermon.

I can't preach any of it. Yeah. There's no way that this really matters to the point that Peter's trying to make or the point that I'm trying to make.

It's just kind of interesting facts. And so there's a lot of that in 2 Peter 2, especially when it comes to like the historical examples he uses of the angels and the flood and Sodom and Gomorrah. And then he brings up Balaam and his donkey.

And it's like, why does Peter choose to use these examples? What's the point? Why is it different than Jude? Anyway, there's a lot in there that we just didn't have time to really dive deep into. That's why I kind of gave the disclaimer at the beginning of my sermon of, hey, there's a lot in here. This is a flyover.

This is a flyover of the chapter. This is verse by verse, but it's a very quick verse by verse. Yes.

And you invited people to text in questions, which we've got a few today, which is really helpful and fun to work through. And you just mentioned some of the historical examples that Peter uses in his writing. So let's start with that.

I'm going to read chapter 2, verse 4, just for context, and then I'll ask you the question. So it says, For God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to chains of gloomy darkness. That's intense.

To be kept until the judgment. So gloomy darkness. Someone says, what in the world is this theology all about? How does this relate to demonic forces at work in the world? Are only some of them imprisoned? And what do gloomy dungeons or gloomy darkness mean to original readers? And how does that fit in with other descriptions of hell? So four in one.

Yeah. Four questions in one. Yeah.

Love whoever sent that one in. This is one of the verses of this whole chapter that make you scratch your head a little bit. Also, because what we know about angels and demons, as we might call them, is from Scripture.

And yet, Scripture is not a handbook on angels and demons. And so there are some verses that talk about it, talk about how they interact and that kind of thing. And it's not always clear.

And so we are often left with more questions than answers about how spiritual warfare works, what the role of that is in history and in creation and life. Peter here, I think he, and it's not me, but commentators, people smarter than I, think that he's kind of referring back to the example in Genesis chapter 6. If you think about the three examples Peter gives, they're all from Genesis, and they happen chronologically. So it's the angels in Genesis 6, then it's the flood in 7 and following, and then Lot and Sodom and Gomorrah, which happens, I think, in like chapter 20 something.

So in Genesis 6, Genesis talks about how the sons of God, meaning kind of the angels, saw that the daughters of man were attractive and they took them as their wives as they chose. Then the Lord said, My spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh, his days shall be 120 years. The Nephilim, which there's a lot of debate about what that word means, were on the earth in those days and also afterward when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children of them.

And they were mighty men who were of old and men of renown. So in some way, angels came to earth, had relations with human women, and gave birth to these Nephilim, whatever they were. And that's kind of the sinfulness of these angels that Peter is talking about.

So I think that's kind of the historical context of where he's pulling this idea from, that angels are kept in gloomy darkness. And then in terms of what is like, it says that he committed them or gave them up, and if you want to think about it a different way, gave them up to their chains of gloomy darkness to be kept until judgment. Is there like this secondary prison that these angels, slash now fallen angels, is there this secondary prison that these fallen angels are kept in until the day of final judgment? And short answer is, we don't know.

But I think where most people tend to understand what Peter is saying is that the theology of judgment and hell was kind of a given, in a sense that even in the secular Gentile world, they had these concepts of these layers of hell and judgment. And so that's kind of an idea that Peter is assuming that his audience knows about. In fact, what we see in English as the word hell is not the normal word you find in the New Testament when talking about hell or the place of eternal judgment.

He actually uses the term Tartarus, which is the only time in the New Testament that word is used. Fun fact, when you get these words in the Greek that are only used once, it's hard to use other references in Scripture to get the context because it's the only time it's used. And it has a fun term called hapoxlogamona.

And 2 Peter, if my memory stands me correct, has more of those than any other book in the New Testament. That for whatever reason, 2 Peter has a lot of these words that are not used elsewhere. So it's hard to get the context.

So why did he choose to use this kind of more secular version or idea of hell where the gods were kept by Zeus? Why does he use that word? We don't really know exactly, but that's kind of the idea. The point being, there's a lot of this in trying to understand these chains of gloomy darkness. How does Jude use it? Jude uses a different word.

I'm just going to read something from one of the commentaries that kind of are just, hopefully this helps whoever asked the question, whoever else might be wondering, what are these gloomy chains of darkness? The composite picture that Peter paints is one in which God is the actor and in a judicial act, handed over the angels, consigned them to the netherworld and kept them there bound in chains for the coming judgment. There shall be no escape for these who are secured for the final judgment. As these angels are kept for certain judgment, so too are the unrighteous and godless.

The point being, we don't know if it's the actual physical place, but the point that they're kept in gloomy chains is their judgment, their punishment has already been given to them. Meaning the courtroom has already been held, court has been held, they've already been found guilty. Their destination is judgment destruction and nothing can change that.

They are not there yet. They have not been fully destroyed. They have not been fully judged because final judgment hasn't come yet, but it's as sure thing as anything because it's like in God's mind, it has already happened, even though it hasn't finally happened, that is their end.

They have been given what they have earned. So that was a lot for one question. I don't even know if I answered all the different parts of the four parts of that question, but hopefully there's enough there or if there's things you need me to clarify, I can do that.

Um, no, honestly, that was great. Um, and I've done a lot of cut for time episodes and not once have heard that. Hawks look, um, yeah, never heard that.

So thanks for giving us something to hear first. Yeah. Um, all right.

So, you know, I feel like with this teaching, um, it's, it's possible for someone to read second Peter on their own or just hear this sermon and just be like, hmm, you know, I don't really need to worry about that. I know I'm in a solid church with good biblical teaching. I am a part of a Bible study with a leader who is, um, yeah, leading us through this process of whether it's like understanding scripture or inductive Bible study, whatever, you're like pretty certain that these people have got it figured out.

Um, and so you just might think, I don't really think I need to worry about this. And you can just toss it, um, or put it in your back pocket or whatever. Is that, is that an okay way to approach this chapter? What would you say? Well, I think you need to think about false teachers and false gospels within the context of greater, uh, of all of scripture.

And if you read first John chapter four, he gives lots of imperatives on how we're to treat anyone who denies Christ. Right. And so while Peter is just kind of leaving it implied, like, Hey, you're considering following these false teachers.

Let me remind you where they're headed and what their lifestyle is like. And that it just is headed towards destruction. Other parts of scripture actually do give us considerable ways that we are to test and discern what we're hearing.

So I even, I think just a week or two ago on a Wednesday night when I was teaching students, kind of brought up this point and said, Hey, even though I'm here telling you that I'm teaching scripture, you can find lots of people out there, whether actual pastors or just people on social media who sound Christian, who will say, well, here's what scripture says, and they'll give you their thoughts on it. How do you know that what they're saying is actually true to what God's word is? And how do you know that what I'm saying or what I'm preaching, or even at this, you know, at faith church where we, you know, are really thankful for how much we value God's word. How do you know that what you're hearing is what God's word actually says? And the answer to that is you have to be in God's word.

How do you know that what you're hearing lines up with God's truth or doesn't line up with God's truth? If you're not reading for yourselves, what's got, what God's truth actually says now you don't want to swing so far that you're like, well, okay, well, I'm going to just read the Bible. I'm going to interpret it on my own and not listen to any other voices because God has given me all that I need. In a sense, maybe that's partially true.

You have the Holy Spirit. Part of the Holy Spirit's job is to illuminate scripture so that we can see and read and understand and apply it. But God's truth is best studied and understood, not just on our own, but in the context of community.

But at the same time, recognizing that we have to have filters, no matter who we're listening to, no matter what books we're reading, podcasts we're listening to, no matter what we're doing, we should interact with God's word with ears to hear his truth and to discern is this really lining up with what I know to be true of God and his word and salvation and all those things. So we should, we should genuinely test and discern what we listen to and what we permit to influence how we think. All right.

So next text in question, some false teachers are more obvious than others, right? Some have that disguise and are sneaking in or some are really obvious. But how do you know when to speak up? When might it just be a minor theological difference in which we might just say, let's agree to disagree? Or when is it really nice pastor's house versus greater excess? Yeah. How do we know whether it's a minor theological difference or what we might call heresy? I think some of those heresies are kind of obvious and we would call them cults or sects where we were saying, we're saying they are not part of Orthodox Christianity.

So I think two good examples that are fairly common, you might even run into a lot of these people would be Jehovah's witnesses and Mormons that they have taken some of the essentials of Christianity, but then have twisted them, have added to it. And so anything like a great litmus test is to look at the creeds, right? The whole last year in our grow classes, we've been studying this idea of we believe, what do we believe and why do we believe it? How do we know the majors are the majors and the minors are the minors? And how do we know what we believe? Well, what we believe is rooted in the early church. It's in scripture and it's in the tradition of the early church.

And so any quote unquote new gospel that comes out or new understanding that comes out after the first century or after the second century, it's like, okay, so Christians believed the wrong thing for hundreds or thousands of years, and now all of a sudden we have this new gospel that's been given. That's an immediate red flag. So whether it's the Mormons or Jehovah's Witnesses, they are adding to or taking away from what we believe to be true about God and the saving work of Christ and what scripture says.

So that's kind of the obvious. Look at the creed, whether it's the Apostles' Creed or the Nicene Creed. Orthodoxy, that's Christianity.

Someone's taking away or adding to that in some major way, then that's probably some version of a false gospel. But I think it's harder when it's not so obvious. I gave the examples of the false gospel of expressive individualism.

Right. How do you know that what if a pastor is telling you that you just got to be true to yourself? Well, that doesn't really sound like it goes against the creed. So that litmus test doesn't necessarily work.

But what else do I know to be true of scripture? And does that align with this message of be true to yourself and your identity is whatever you want it to be? Well, what we know in scripture is you were created by God, you were created for your creator, and you have been bought at a price by Jesus. And so you aren't just free to be whoever you want to be. If you're a Christian, you are to love and serve Jesus because he is your master.

Now, he is a great master. He is a kind master. He's not the master like what we had of sin or other false masters.

And so those gospels, those false gospels are harder to figure out. And that's why we have to test and assert. That's why you have to be rooted in scripture so that you can hear and then say, does that align with what I know to be true of God's word? And asking ourselves, and then when we find those false gospels, to make sure we call them out for other believers to reject them openly and honestly and say that is not aligned with God's plan or God's word.

All right. So what about the last part of that question about just addressing how do you know when a pastor is exercising like greed or living in excess versus just like living within their means? Yeah, that's a good question. And it's probably a little weird asking a pastor about that.

But I think in general, we should all be concerned with how we are living in godliness and holiness on an individual level, right? How are we putting off the old self, putting on the new self, and from one degree of glory to the next, being changed into the image of Christ? It's also easy for us to look at people's externals with judgment and be like, well, they're not living the way God wants them to. But we are not the judge. God is.

But also when it comes to pastors, they are often judged both worldly with more scrutiny and by God with more scrutiny. James, the book of James, he actually says in James 3, not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness. Actually saying that, hey, we're actually held to a higher standard before God in how we teach and how we live.

And that's not super encouraging, you know, for a pastor to be like, oh, we're actually going to be judged with greater strictness for how we handle God's people, God's resources, God's time, right? But at the same way, on the other hand, Paul writes to Timothy that for the elders who teach, they should be given a double portion. That for essentially vocational elders slash pastors, we should be generous in how we support them financially and how we come alongside them in other ways. So yes, there is a tendency, especially in the United States, but it's not limited to the United States of pastors who drive really nice cars, who have really nice houses.

And it's easy for us to look at them and be like, well, they're living in excess, but we don't know their heart. And it's ultimately not our job to judge. And, you know, maybe there's a word of caution in there to say, yeah, if your pastor's driving a Ferrari, maybe find another church.

If that makes you uncomfortable, if you, if it feels like they're not preaching the gospel in the same way, or if it just seems like they're asking, they just want your money, then yeah, don't be a part of that church. But we also have to make sure that while we reject false gospels and in time at times call out false teachers, we're not leaving our hearts to dive into bitterness or our own self judgment of other people and not recognizing the ways in our own lives where we also fall short. Yeah.

You've been saying throughout your sermon and throughout today's podcast, like what are those tests and checks and procedures that you could do to test and discern? Right. And you're saying not one of those is what kind of car does your pastor drive or how much square footage is their home? You're saying, Hey, it could be an indicator, but that's not really where the test lies. The test is what's, what's being preached.

What's the care, what's the character there. Right. Yeah.

So just, I guess one thing on that, when I recognized in Peter, that there were no imperatives, I kind of just did a brief look around. How does the rest of the new Testament and the Bible talk about false teachers? Here's just a list of imperatives we are to do. And this is kind of to reiterate the point you just made, that it's not just one thing.

There's not just one indicator, but we're told in the new Testament to be alert and watchful, to test and discern, to avoid, to turn away, to separate, to reject, do not receive, rebuke, silence them, to contend for the truth, hold fast to sound doctrine, do not be led astray and expose their works. So that's not just one thing. That's a lot of things.

And that's, even though Peter doesn't say it, that's what we see in the rest of the new Testament, how we're to interact with these false gospels and false teachers. All right. All right.

So before we wrap up, is there anything else that you would like to chat about from this text of chapter two? Well, I feel like we have already gone as deep as we could in some places. I think the end of chapter two, where Peter is talking about these false teachers, once again, he's talking about how they have, in a sense, fallen away, they've gone astray. And he says that their current state is worse than their previous state.

Right? I think verse 20, for if after they have escaped the defilements of the world, through the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. I mentioned in the sermon, I'll just mention again, that while it sounds out of context, like Peter is talking about believers who have a genuine relationship with Jesus, and then they get tangled up in sin again and fall away. And it gives this picture of believers being able to lose their salvation.

We have to remember the context and what the rest of Scripture says in that we are kept in heaven by Christ. Even Jude says that, that we are kept.

(This file is longer than 30 minutes. Go Unlimited at https://turboscribe.ai/ to transcribe files up to 10 hours long.)