This person would send multiple letters without waiting for a response. I try to be patient, but in most instances, that's a sign of a person who can't be reasoned with because they are not really looking for conversation with an intent to discover the truth as much as they are looking to just convert you to their way of thinking. When you see multiple letters in a row without my response inbetween, that is him sending me rapid-fire emails.
CHRISTOPHER FROM LAS VEGAS
Mr. Johnson, I enjoy your videos and have been begging people to refute Anderson for a long time so, thank you. I had a couple quick questions for you. As far a repentance is concerned, it was my understanding that Godly grief and repentance go hand in hand. I want to have the biblical understanding and what you say sounds good but i'm getting conflicting information.
For example, the greek word for repentance is Metanoia which means, basically, a change of mind. Also, Paul says in 2 Cor 7:10 that Godly grief produces repentance. I believe there are no direct hebrew words that translate to repentance directly but a word used often is shub, which again, im told me a turning. Help me out please, I dont want to teach im error. Its not my intention to argue, I just want to understand. Thank you much
Mr. Johnson, I wanted to comment on your KjV only status (no Im not going to bash you). I think the KJV is an excellent translation but I don't hold your view that it's the only true version ( i use the esv and the kjv). While I don't think you do, I hope you don't demonize or condem though if us who use other versions. There are some KJV only folks out there who just get crazy over the issue and will anathamatize any one using a different version. Again, I dont think this applies to you but I wanted to put it out there. Your brother in Christ,
I enjoy your videos and have been begging people to refute Anderson for a long time so, thank you.
I had a couple quick questions for you. As far a repentance is concerned, it was my understanding that Godly grief and repentance go hand in hand. I want to have the biblical understanding and what you say sounds good but i'm getting conflicting information. Yeah, I know; there is a lot of conflicting information out there. It's not that "godly sorrow and repentance go hand-in-hand," rather, repentance IS godly sorrow. That might help clear some of that up. I'll give you a link to the Youtube playlist for the repentance teaching if you haven't heard it; I would very much recommend it because I think it's most important teaching I will ever give in my life:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NEI_H3QUb7Q&list=PLbY08k2vP8_nXQtC1izDN_p7lutKuX9OIFor example, the greek word for repentance is Metanoia which means, basically, a change of mind. Also, Paul says in 2 Cor 7:10 that Godly grief produces repentance. I believe there are no direct hebrew words that translate to repentance directly but a word used often is shub, which again, im told me a turning. Help me out please, I dont want to teach im error. Its not my intention to argue, I just want to understand. Thank you much You may not yet understand why I'm giving you this answer, but it doesn't matter what a Greek grammar dictionary says. There are a couple of teachings I've got that might help you understand that because it's one of the reasons you're going to find contradictions, not just on the topic of repentance, but on many subjects.
Dangers of Using Lexicons and ConcordancesThis will provide information about the many problems with Greek-English lexicons, and the hidden truth about the men who authored them. (i.e. They denied Christ in their writings.)
The 'Original Greek' ScamThis will explain the dangers and huge errors of the so-called "pastors" and "scholars" who try to interpret the Bible by "the original Greek." (i.e. Most of them don't even know any Greek or Hebrew.)
I know it's not what you may have been expecting, but to understand why there is a contradiction, it's important to understand the Biblical philosophy (i.e. way of thinking) versus the worldly philosophy of relying on concordances.
Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy [way of thinking] and vain deceit [lies], after the tradition of men, after the rudiments [first teachings] of the world, and not after Christ.
-Colossians 2:8I wanted to comment on your KjV only status (no Im not going to bash you). I think the KJV is an excellent translation but I don't hold your view that it's the only true version ( i use the esv and the kjv). While I don't think you do, I hope you don't demonize or condem though if us who use other versions. There are some KJV only folks out there who just get crazy over the issue and will anathamatize any one using a different version. Again, I dont think this applies to you but I wanted to put it out there.I think the above links are enough for now; I don't want to overload you and burden you with tons of stuff. Perhaps you'll have a different outlook on the main subject you wrote me about after you go through those, and then perhaps we can talk about bible versions and other such things afterwards. Let me know your thoughts about those teachings if you get a chance to go through them.
Fulfil ye my joy, that ye be likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind.
-Philippians 2:2
Im going to watch those videos you suggested but i wanted to say one thing. I hope you will see the sincerity behind my words and not cut me off after. I have heard you say in your videos, to listen carefully and question where the info is coming from. My concern is, I'm not sure you are doing that yourself. I used to be a KJV only person who would like what Gipp and Ripplinger would say, problem was, i didnt realize their biases and do the research myself. After years of research and folliwing many many Godly men, I realized the KJV thing is way over blown. There are in fact bad versions but there are other good ones as well (including the KJV, among the best, no doubt). point is, i never assume I or anybody else has the truth. I am always examining myself to make sure i am still in line with Scripture and I try to be aware of my traditions and biases that could impact my understanding of scripture. There is a saying, the man who has no tradition is a slave to his tradition. I like you Chris, I believe you have a sincere heart for Jesus and I believe we can help eachother grow.
Okay. You can hit the reply button on your mail if you want, you don't have to go back to the website and send new letters. That will save you some time and hassle.
Mr. Johnson,
I appreciate your timely response, please allow me a moment to clarify a few things. I'm trying to discern truth, I want to be biblical period. I don't put my faith in lexicons or concordances, I just use the tools that are available to me and try hard to practice discernment.
I'm not a scholar and so I won't try to play one. I understand that the versions have issues but, that's not a hill worth dying on to me. I know many Godly men who use the NIV, NASB and have a theology just as sound as a KJV only person. I also know many fine Christians who use a KJV, point is, I don't define some ones Christianity by the bible they use, I think that's a proverbs 6 issue.
Again, I'm here to discern the true meaning of repentance, I don't care about peoples pet theories, I want scripture. Now unfortunately, I don't see the word repentance in the bible very much although I do see a lot of synonyms for it. Now, I believe that repentance means Godly grief and sorrow but here is my issue, Paul says that Godly grief produces repentance so, either Paul is wrong, the translators screwed up or the term is more nuanced then we think. This is the issue I'm having because it appears to me, repentance means both, depending on the context it's used in. this is killing me and I just want to get to the bottom of it.
I wanted to add, that I used to like Kent Hovind too, until I realized who he really was. Also, you are correct in your assessment on the cleverness of Steven Anderson but any true believer can tell, that nan is not of Christ just by his attitude behind the pulpit. It's immediately clear.
I hope I didn't offend you, I appreciate your time.
Oh...and yes, I will listen to them. thank you
That's great, and I appreciate your patience so much in your willingness to listen. Based on what you said in your letter, I now definitely believe it would be a good idea to listen to the repentance teaching. All I will say for the time being is that the grief and sorrow of repentance is mentioned a lot of places in the Bible where the word 'repent' is never used. That teaching may help to understand more about that, and the lexicon issue is deeper than you might think; as well as the "original Greek" or "original Hebrew" matter, in which context is not used for the definition of words. Perhaps we can discuss it more after you look those over; I'll wait to hear back from you, and please take your time, I'm not in any hurry.
Mr. Johnston, i've wacthed your videos and like i said before, i believe you. I believe repentance means Godly grief and sorrow over sin. Now maybe i missed it in your videos but there are a couple instances in scripture ( im thinking 2 Cor 7:10) where scripture seems to use repentance in a different context. Does that make sense? Could you please adress this particular verse?
Also, I regret bringing up KJV, I don't care what versions people use ( provided its a literal and not dynamic translation). I don't want to give you the impression i'm against you, I am certainly not. You don't know me but I have heard enough from you to consider you a brother. I apologize if I offended you or painted your view unfairly.
Thank you,
I've addressed those particular points in the teaching. Have you seen it yet?
I must have missed it, I listen while working. do you remember which video out of the 6 it is in?
Okay, so you want to discuss 2Co 7:10. What exactly was the problem you had; or rather, what specifically was the conflict you perceived in what it says?
well...I believe repentance means, Godly grief and sorrow however, Paul seems to use it in a different way. Paul says "For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death." So is he saying, Godly sorrow worketh Godly grief? I believe your what you are saying but this passage is causing me difficulty.
It just troubles me that Paul seems to seperate the 2. When i read the Old Testament, it appears to me that repentance means Godly grief and sorrow. Yet when i read the New Testament, the definition appears to change depending on the context. I believe you may have hinted at this in your video. Am i making any sense?
This is why I encourage Christians to read the context, rather than trying to apply Greek grammar dictionaries to the passages, because the explanation of that verse is explained in the surrounded verses.
For though I made you sorry with a letter, I do not repent, though I did repent: for I perceive that the same epistle hath made you sorry, though it were but for a season.Here, Paul is saying that he is not grieved that he brought them to grief, but that they are his brethren, he does grieve at their grief, although he does not have sorrow for bringing them to that grief because it was good for them.
Now I rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, but that ye sorrowed to repentance: for ye were made sorry after a godly manner, that ye might receive damage by us in nothing.Repentance can be used in two ways; one way is simply by grief and sorrow, but the other way is by GODLY sorrow specifically. So here, he explains what he means by sorrowing to repentance; after that is a colon punctuation, which means the explanation follows, that it means they had godly sorrow, or (vertical) repentance towards God.
For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death.Godly sorrow works to an effect, or you could say that it produces an effect, which is repentance to salvation; meaning that godly sorrow is producing a grief and sorrow that is unto salvation, that salvation being God's grace granted to a humble heart that is aimed towards Christ. This means that there are a lot of people who have been "sorry" to others, but that sorrow of wrongdoing towards one another is not towards God, which is why he continues to point out that sorrow of the world has no merit towards eternal life. Therefore, one should not be sorrowful of the sorrow itself. One of the men in our church, Steve, who does prison ministry, has seen instances in which a man is in godly grief and sorrow, but some preacher or churchgoer comes up to him and puts his arm around him, and tries to comfort him. That's bad. If he falls on his knees in tears of repentance towards God, he needs to be let alone to bask in that grief that God has given him because it's good for him. Therefore, it is not a matter in which a man should grieve of his grieve, which is the normal reaction to someone's grief, but should rejoice that this man has grieved in godly sorrow, and therefore, as Paul said, "I do not repent, though I did repent," in that he felt his own grief at seeing others grief, just as I do, but we are not sorry that they are sorry because that godly sorrow is good for his soul.
Then he goes on to describe the change in a man when he has that godly grief and godly sorrow in his heart:
For behold this selfsame thing, that ye sorrowed after a godly sort, what carefulness it wrought in you, yea, what clearing of yourselves, yea, what indignation, yea, what fear, yea, what vehement desire, yea, what zeal, yea, what revenge! In all things ye have approved yourselves to be clear in this matter.Revenge in this passage is not referring to take revenge upon one's self, as vengeance belongs to God, but that when we see the poor and needy suffer unjust oppression, we desire to see justice done, looking for righteous judgment, like how a government will revenge for a victim by punishing the criminal. After a foundation of godly sorrow is laid in a man's heart, and he trusts God to impute righteousness to him through Christ, he is changed in such a way to reflect that attitude towards unrighteousness.
Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,
-Heb 6:1The problem is when people go to a lexicon or concordance, they are not just "using tools" to "practice discernment;" that's a lie that many churchgoers have believed because they've been taught that by pastors. When someone claims they "avoid interpretation" in their lexicon or dictionary, they're either completely ignorant of what they're doing, or they're lying because it's impossible to avoid contextual interpretation in the process of defining words in written verses for anything, not just the Bible. That's why I suggested the teachings I had told you about on lexicons and the 'original Greek' scam; I was hoping you might be willing to take a look at those to consider the matter a little deeper, which is not to say that you have not studied it out, but rather, your words are a reflection of your understanding on the matter, and in order for us to discuss that further, those basic principles need to be understood.
I hope that helps; assuming I'm able to be of any help.
I just made this, please take 10min and watch it.
There's nothing here.
I know, the file was too large, i have to put it on youtube. its just me talking to you. its only 19minutes, ill send you the link and i hope youll watch it. i really like your teaching and your videos but a lot gets lost in email. once u watch it, ill pull the video. I want to stay on good terms, i really do
At around 55min into your "False Converts pt1" you quote, "for Godly sorrow worketh repentance unto salvation," how are you not seeing the glaring contradiction in your teaching? If Paul gives a contrary definition of repentance in 2 Cor 7:10 how can you seriously uphold your teaching. I believed you sir but after carefull study, it's clear you are highlighting a token verse and abandoning the rest of scripture that CLEARLY gives an alternate definition of repentance.
Mr. Johnson, I have heard you mention peoples blindness and unwillingness to accept correction over and over in your videos. I ask you Sir, please refute my assertion with sound biblical exegisis or retract your teachings and abandon your position.
I will send a list of verses that back up what I'm saying.
Would it not be prudent to at least wait until I answer your other letters first before writing me these very borderline accusations of hypocrisy? I have just finished answering your other letter, but perhaps you should read over that first.
He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.
-Pro 18:13You said "
IF Paul gives a contrary definition," but the rest of your letter here shows me that you pretty much already made up your mind that you believe there are conflicting definitions, which is a result of your adherence to concordances, before you've even received my response to your first inquiry. If that's the case, just tell me, and I won't waste my time writing out these explanations because I've got other work I need to get done today (including other emails I need to answer). You can say "
respectfully" if you want, but that's not respectful at all; a little patience goes a long way, especially after you've written me the following things in your first letter:
Help me out please, I dont want to teach im error. Its not my intention to argue, I just want to understand.
I hope you don't demonize or condem
i dont know why you just got it but this was sent before the last email you sent last night. im not sure why they arrived out of order. Im sorry, it just came out wrong. Please, just watch when i send the link, it will clear things up.
please watch, please, and let me know after so i can pull it down.
https://youtu.be/4-_fMBRxWTQ
I'm two minutes in, and I'll keep listening, but hopefully, you'll address the response I gave you this afternoon to your inquiry, but you've already begun by stating that "
grief and godly sorrow" goes "
hand-in-hand with repentance", not repentance itself, which already shows that you have rejected the explanation I wrote to you today, without directly telling me that, which is what I requested that you do. It would have been as simple as saying "
No, I reject that explanation," and then you can explain why, but perhaps the problem was some confusion in email correspondence, and this video could be your attempt to remedy that.
At 2:20 - That was wrong. Again, if you were listening to my teaching while you were working, then I think you missed a lot. I used Noah Webster as a baseline, but I did not pull the definition of repentance from Noah Webster. I got it from Scripture because God Himself defined it in Genesis. In fact, in the teaching I did on Anderson, I explained how I believe Webster was wrong in part on his definitions, and I used the Scripture to show why. I'm not going to explain all that to you right now unless you ask me about it, and the reason is because I'm trying to show you that you have a belief that you are correct on certain matters, but I can tell by what you say that you lack understanding of a lot of things that you may not have noticed. I want you to see how you miss things before continuing; I tried not to say anything about it at first, to see what you would say and do, but now it needs to be pointed.
Stopping at 4:30 - I need to lookup what nuance means. Subtle differences... okay, so you are pointing out that there are subtle differences in the word 'repent' because of... I guess some expertise you have in Hebrew? So you read, write and speak it? I doubt that. I'm not saying everything you said about Hebrew is wrong because that understanding of language applies to all languages to some extent, but I think you're going to your lexicons and concordances again, instead of looking at context, and that's one of the major problems; as soon as I mentioned that problem to you, you pretty much wrote it off. You also end up saying that you "
know very well my position on the matter," but I can't tell if you know it because you looked at what my position is, or if you "know" it because you
ASSUMED my position based on what other people teach. (I'm suspecting it's the latter is true.) I'll see if I can find the quote to bring it up again here:
I don't put my faith in lexicons or concordances, I just use the tools that are available to me and try hard to practice discernment.Look, the reason the teachings are long is because I'm teaching the philosophy (i.e. way of thinking) of Christ. The Bible is not a children's bedtime story book; it's long for a reason. Paul would oftentimes teach from morning 'til night. I'm not going to write you a novel for an email; I've got other things to do, and that's why I've made articles, so I can refer back to them, and you've already told me not to refer back to them in my response at the beginning of your video; so I guess we're at a crossroads because I'm not writing you a personal novel and you don't want to read what I've already taught on the matter.
So you basically blew off a major philosophical problem in your understanding concerning concordances, and I could probably even tell you why you did it, but I think that's going to get us off-topic; the fact is that you brushed it off instead of trying to understand. As of now, I don't believe you understand my position on anti-Biblical philosophy and foundational corruption of lexicons and concordances because, if you really did, then I would have to say it's likely you don't care about God's Word as much as you claim with your mouth. I don't care about all your name-dropping of Riplinger or Gipp or whatever because I don't support or endorse them due to numerous false doctrines they've taught. I don't know if they're of Christ or not; I might want to believe it, but I don't know about them. I make arguments, and I address the opposition to
MY arguments, not someone else's; so what you need to do is throw out what you believe you understand, look at what I teach if you want to argue against what I teach, and then go straight to the context of God's Word, not leaning upon your concordance because I can tell that you have more faith in those concordances that you may want to confess.
Stopping at 6:18 - I'm done with your video, and it's not because I'm unwilling to hear your argument. I already addressed your concerns on that matter in my other letter earlier this afternoon. You were repeating almost verbatim what you said in the hypocrisy-accusation email, and I addressed that concern in a response letter where I went through 2Co 7 and explained it from the context; whereas you are only cherry-picking focus on verse 10, which is exactly the standard methods of those who put their faith in lexicons. As far as I could tell, you did not respond to my letter. Maybe you did somewhere later throughout your 20 min video, but if you were addressing what I said, there was no need for you to argue what you said in the letter because I already explained it; rather, you should have been addressing the answer I already gave to your "redundancy" argument.
You just accused me of hypocrisy in your video, without saying the word, and I don't like you not being direct; I really wish you would cease with all the fluffy words and not beat around the bush. The bottom line is that you didn't address my answer to you, and then accused me of hypocrisy; so it makes all the fluffy words at the beginning of your video just for show; they were completely meaningless to me, and that lowers my trust of you even further. The difference between you and me is that you'll claim that you've spent hours going over my teachings, but you've already proven that you've missed huge sections of what I've taught because, in reality, you were distracted doing something else while listening to them, meaning that you missed a bunch of stuff I was pointing out. It's okay to miss stuff, and there's other peoples' teachings I've had to listen to 10 times before I understood them completely, but then to claim you have all the understanding of what I teach after one day when you're missing huge portions, that's a man who assumes a lot of things, and I don't have much trust for men like that. I've been sitting here at my desk, for hours, going over your emails, concentrating on what you're saying without doing anything else to distract me, and then proof-reading what I'm writing to you three times over. I know you're busy and can't necessarily do the same, but the difference is that I'll be able to catch things you aren't seeing in what you're saying, whereas you're going to miss things that I'm saying to you, which doesn't make for clear conversation, and your assumptions just make it worse. (Not to mention the fact that if you say you'll continue to listen to the teachings of a man you are accusing of hypocrisy shows that you don't sanctify yourself, which also means you don't have much discernment from the Holy Spirit; that's not good.)
If you addressed my response to your inquiry in that video, then give me the time in the video where you start to do that, and I'll look it over later and address it. If you didn't, and you want to address that in a letter or another video or Skype or whatever, then you're welcome to do so. However, if you don't want to do that, then I can't communicate with someone like that and I'll have to let it go and get back to work. One way or another, have a great day.
can you resend that response, i didnt see it
okay, i found your response and I believe you make a good point. I can see what you mean and I agree mostly with what you say but I'm not completely sold on it. I will do some more reading with your thoughts in mind.
also..I will watch your video on lexicons and concordances. Im not really familiar with where you are coming from on that point but i want to be fair and hear you out.
Im sorry if I rubbed you wrong, I appreciate what you do and I think you are a good rescource. I thank you for your patience and graciousness with me
I'm thankful that you're willing to listen; I'm trying to exercise patience as best I can, as Christ's doctrine has taught me, though I tend to be relatively straight-forward with everything I say.
Mr. Johnson,
After further study of this issue, I have concluded that you are plainly in error. Nobody sir, almost nobody teaches the meaning of repentance as you do. You have convinced yourself that you can't trust greek, lexicons, dictionaries, bible versions and concordances just so you can avoid the obvious. The fact that a man, with little to no formal seminary training, can thumb his nose at over 500 years of biblical scholarship and then teach a subject in error ( that almost no one else teaches) is outlandishly arrogant. You are bound as a servant of Christ to examine your teachings and we will all answer for what we teach. May the Lord rebuke you sir, if you do not correct your abhorrent teaching of repentance. I do not expect i'll hear from you again but i'll pray for you.
After further study of this issue, I have concluded that you are plainly in error. Nobody sir, almost nobody teaches the meaning of repentance as you do.I know they don't. In fact, I mentioned that in the teaching I did. I'm puzzled as to why you speak as if I don't know that already; perhaps that's something else you missed in the teaching? Because I did mention that too. It was only before the 20th century that preachers much more commonly used to teach what I'm teaching, and I know many, like yourself, will reject that understanding. The Lord Jesus Christ did not teach us that tons and tons of people were all going to heaven, as many churchgoers believe:
Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
-Mat 7:13-14You have convinced yourself that you can't trust greek, lexicons, dictionaries, bible versions and concordances just so you can avoid the obvious.I know, and you've put so much of your faith in them that you won't see clearly. I cannot make the blind see; only God can do that, and I'm not one of those that tries to force the matter.
The fact that a man, with little to no formal seminary training, can thumb his nose at over 500 years of biblical scholarship and then teach a subject in error ( that almost no one else teaches) is outlandishly arrogant.I've received such accusations many times; you're not first. Based on your first letter, I figured that's what you would do eventually. Thanks to the Lord God, He addressed your accusation for me:
For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: That no flesh should glory in his presence.
-1Co 1:26-29I cannot stop you from putting your faith in degrees and scribes. All I can do is put my faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and His Holy Spirit, who takes simple men, like ignorant fisherman for example, without degrees or education, and turns them into men of understanding in His Word.
The entrance of thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple.
-Psalm 119:130God even told us that men like you would come and tell us how foolish we are, but they're natural men, who have no godly grief and sorrow in their hearts because they've not been humbled, and therefore, they cannot discern by the Spirit of God.
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
-1Co 2:14You go ahead on your way and reject the poor, the needy, the foolish, the base, the despised, and all those who don't have lofty seminary degrees and fancy titles you respect so highly, but please let those simple people know that they are welcome among our church, as you would be also if you come to grief and godly sorrow of your wrongdoing.
But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.
-James 2:9Respecting Persons Is SinYou are bound as a servant of Christ to examine your teachings and we will all answer for what we teach. May the Lord rebuke you sir, if you do not correct your abhorrent teaching of repentance. I do not expect i'll hear from you again but i'll pray for you. If you are a servant of Christ, you are bound to examine your teachings, and we will all answer for what we teach. May the Lord rebuke you sir, if you do not correct your abhorrent respect of persons in your sin. I do not expect I'll hear from you again, but I pray the Lord Jesus Christ would bless you and your family with all your needs throughout the coming week.
Mr. johnson,
Just cause I think you are in error on this particular issue, doesnt mean I don't support you or your ministry. I sincerely hope you will correct this but i support your other work none the less. Take care
Again, he turns back to his fluff instead of speaking plainly, something he was taught to do, I'm sure, by scribes with prestigious titles. I never once called him brethren because I've never once saw him testify of Christ. He called me a "brother," but I did not call him one because I don't yoke together with me who respect persons, put their foundation into rudiments of the world, and love the preeminence of men. My brethren are those of you who love the Word of God, not feign to do so on the outside, and that you've all been humbled to the godly sorrow of repentance unto salvation in the blood of Christ. Again, Jesus doesn't save the high and lofty who have "formal seminary training," and "over 500 years of biblical scholarship," but rather, he saves that hated man in the back who is humbled before God.And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others: Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess. And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.
-Luke 18:9-14
