← Catholic Answers Live
Catholic Answers Live
#12459 What Is the Mark of the Beast in Revelation, Ephesians 4:29, and Catholic Bibles - Jimmy Akin
“What is the Mark of the Beast in Revelation?” In this episode, we explore this intriguing question alongside topics such as the implications of electrical implants as potential marks and the interpretation of Ephesians 4:29. Join us as we delve into these thought-provoking discussions and more. Join the Catholic Answers Live Club Newsletter Invite our apologists to speak at your parish! Visit Catholicanswersspeakers.com Questions Covered: 01:35 – What is the Mark of Beast in Revelation? 12:50 – Could electrical implants in the body be the mark? 24:30 – I don’t think the Catholic Jesus fulfills 1 John 1:9 and Hebrew 10:12-14. 44:45 – When the Old Testament says the Lord appears to different people, what would that look like? 49:06 – What Catholic Bible do you recommend? 52:20 – Could you explain what Ephesians 4:29 means?
Loading summary
Transcript110 lines
- [00:00]
Cy Kellett
Buying or selling your home. Real Estate for Life can connect you with a pro life real estate agent. When Real Estate for Life receives a referral fee, they donate 65% to Catholic Answers. Learn more at realestateforlife.org hello and welcome to Catholic Answers Live. Thanks to Edgar for covering for me yesterday while I was out. Glad to be back. Especially glad to be back because Jimmy Akin is here. And we've got two hours where you can ask your Bible questions for Jimmy Akin. That's always very popular. So a good time to dial would be. Oh, right now. 8883-1878-8488-8318-7884. Whatever your question about the Bible might be, Jimmy's a great guy to talk about it with you, and he'll be willing to talk about it with you. This is your opportunity. Jimmy is senior apologist here at Catholic Answers. The author of a bunch of books, including the Bible is a Catholic book. Jimmy Akin, thank you for being here.
- [01:11]
Jimmy Akin
Oh, my pleasure. Syllett, how are you doing?
- [01:14]
Cy Kellett
I'm good. I'm all prepared with a Bible question to get you started. I have a Bible question.
- [01:20]
Jimmy Akin
Hit me with your best shot.
- [01:21]
Cy Kellett
All right. Okay. And I was gonna read it. I was gonna do the what's the anchorman guy that reads whatever they put in front of him? And it was gonna be what is the mark of the beats? But I decided not to do that dumb joke. It seemed too dumb, so I'm not gonna do that dumb joke. But what is the mark of the beast in the book of Revelation? What is it?
- [01:41]
Jimmy Akin
Okay, well, it's referred to initially. It's introduced in chapter 13 of the book of Revelation, and it's introduced right at the end of the chapter. Now, up to this point in chapter 13, John has seen two beasts. The first beast comes from the sea, and it has seven heads and 10 horns. And if you study everything that the book of Revelation has to say about the beast, it seems to point rather strongly to the line of first century Roman emperors. And then there's a second beast that comes from the land, and it has two horns like a lamb. And what the second beast does is it gets people to worship the first beast. And so this looks like a reference to the Roman cult of emperor worship, which was a big deal in the first century. Julius Caesar had been declared a God after his death, or demigod. His successor, Augustus, during his lifetime was worshiped as a God in other parts of the empire besides Rome. And after his death, he and his wife Julia Were, sorry, Livia. Julia was his daughter. He and his wife Livia were both declared gods. Then you had the emperor Caligula, who demanded to be worshiped as the new Zeus in Rome itself during his own lifetime. And after he got killed by his own palace guard because he was such a terrible, crazy emperor. His successor, Claudius, was also declared a God after his reign. And then you had Nero, who wanted to be worshipped as an emperor during his reign. He declared himself kind of like the God Apollo. And there were other Roman emperors who similarly were promoting the cult of emperor worship. And they had allies elsewhere who also promoted this. So this was a big deal in the first century, worshiping the Roman emperor rather than Jesus Christ. And that seems to be a major theme in the Book of Revelation. So at the end of chapter 13, we get our two most informative verses about the mark of the beast. And John says this. He says that it, meaning the beast from the land, causes all, both small and great, both rich and poor, both slave and free, to be marked on the right hand or the forehead, so that no one can buy or sell unless he has the mark that is the name of the beast or the number of its name. This calls for wisdom. John says, let the one who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666. And scholars have pointed out that this is a reference to the practice of gematria. Gematria is based on the fact that in the ancient world, they didn't have separate numbers from letters. Their ABCs and their 1, 2, 3s were the same thing. The letters doubled as numbers. And in Greek and Hebrew, all of the letters of the Alphabet had numerical values. It's not all of them in Latin, though. In Latin, only, some of the letters had numerical values, like I and V and X. And if you know your Roman numerals, I is 1, V is 5, and X is 10. And there are a few others, too. But in Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic, every letter of the Alphabet had a number. And so you could take somebody's name and just add up all the letters in it and it would give you a number. And John says that if you do that, the number of the beast, you know, the number of a man that the beast represents, the beast from the sea, is 666, although there are a couple of early manuscripts that say 616. So there's a little ambiguity there, but that's what we're told. The number of the beast is that it's either it or the name of the beast is put either on the right hand of a person or on the forehead of a person. And there are other verses in Revelation that indicate if you do this, God's not going to be happy and things are not going to go well for you. But in terms of what the mark itself is, that's what we're told.
- [06:38]
Cy Kellett
Okay, so I realize this all seems to be in the past. So what? We are concerned about the mark of the beast today, and is it possible that it has two meanings? Because if you're talking about emperor worship, you're talking about something that ended a long time ago.
- [06:59]
Jimmy Akin
Yeah, well, true, but prophecy often works on more than one level. Like, for example, in the book of Isaiah, King Ahaz at one point is given a prophecy that he's not going to be defeated by his enemies, and that there's a prophecy about a young woman is going to bear a child. And before the child grows up and knows right from wrong, the two enemies are gonna not be a threat anymore. Now, Ahaz lived in Isaiah's time, you know, like 800 BC. And so for this to be a sign for him, it had to have fulfillment in Ahaz's day hundreds of years before Christ. But that didn't stop it from having a later fulfillment in Jesus Christ, a later, greater fulfillment in Jesus Christ, who was indeed born of a virgin. So prophecy can have more than one fulfillment. There may be an initial primary fulfillment, and here the mark of the beast would seem to be something fulfilled in the first century. But that doesn't stop it from having a later fulfillment. And a bunch of people have interpreted it in a bunch of different ways that apply it to our future.
- [08:14]
Cy Kellett
Okay, so we certainly saw recently that the vaccine might be the mark of the beast that you took these vaccines. You don't look. You look skeptical. Am I reading too much into your face?
- [08:29]
Jimmy Akin
I thought I looked pleasant. Oh, okay.
- [08:31]
Cy Kellett
I read it as skeptical. I apologize for that.
- [08:35]
Jimmy Akin
Sort of a pleasant skepticism.
- [08:37]
Cy Kellett
Okay, so you did look pleasantly skeptical. What do you make of something like that?
- [08:43]
Jimmy Akin
Well, that's actually not a new claim. When vaccines were first introduced, like back in the 1800s over in Russia, there were people who thought that getting vaccinated, not for Covid, but for other things, was the mark of the beast. Because sometimes the vaccination, you know, the mark of the needle can be left on your skin. And they said, oh, it's the mark of the beast. Well, it had nothing to do with the number 666. And neither did the COVID vaccine. So neither of those is a plausible interpretation.
- [09:15]
Cy Kellett
Okay, how about a number one, then? Social Security number.
- [09:21]
Jimmy Akin
Yeah. When Social Security cards were introduced, this also was something that got a lot of people excited about. Maybe this is the mark of the beast, because you got this card that you might carry around in your right hand, and you might keep your Social Security number in your memory. And so that's got to be be the mark of the beast. And there were people here in America who interpreted it as Social Security numbers, as the mark of the beast. The problem is the mark of the Beast's number is 666. And if you look on people's Social Security cards, It doesn't say 666. In fact, the whole point of a Social Security number is it is unique to you. Not everybody has the same number. And so. But that is what is depicted in Revelation, is everybody gets either the name of the beast or the same number. And consequently, Social Security cards are not a good candidate.
- [10:23]
Cy Kellett
So if my Social Security number is 666, is that a bad sign about me if I have a three digit Social Security number? Just asking for a friend, Jimmy.
- [10:30]
Jimmy Akin
Not unless you're an emperor who shares your Social Security number with everyone in the world.
- [10:36]
Cy Kellett
All right, well, how about this one? Because we've actually had these proposals where it's like, well, you know how you carry your credit card around? Why carry the credit card around? Why don't we just put a chip in? You just put a chip in the hand or something. Or I don't even know where they would put it, but let's say they were gonna put it in the hand. You wave it over the thing at the grocery store, you beep and out you go. Is that the mark of the beast? Cause it.
- [10:57]
Jimmy Akin
Well, there are a couple problems there. One problem is, why would you need a chip? Because you're already carrying around something on your hand that identifies you uniquely. Namely, fingerprints. Oh, yeah. So why couldn't you just have a palm scanner that determines your identity from the dermal ridges, the prints on your hand? And you can pay that way. You wouldn't need a chip. But second problem is, again, if it's going to access funds from your bank account, it's going to need a number that's unique to you.
- [11:30]
Cy Kellett
Yeah.
- [11:31]
Jimmy Akin
And so everybody is not going to. Even if people have identification chips put in their hands or elsewhere, they're going to identify you uniquely. Everybody is not going to have the same number. And it's certainly not going to be 666, which is a ridiculously small number anyway. I mean, the whole point of having numbers like bank account numbers or Social Security numbers or credit card numbers is that they are long enough that you can't just guess them. And so that's a security protection to prevent other people from getting your data or stealing your money or things like that. And so the number 666, it's only three digits. And so brute force attempts would reveal that as a number pretty quickly. And if it's publicly known, everyone has the number 666. It's. It. You're. You're not protecting any data or any money. So this is just a lousy interpretation as well. It's just paranoid.
- [12:41]
Cy Kellett
All right, I'm going to give you one more. I'm not feeling confident about this one. Although I thought it was the strongest possibility. It doesn't. I. Well, you'll see why I'm feeling less enthusiastic about it now, given what you've just said. But they are talking about implanting things in us, in our brains, like body implants, you know, these kind of things. So I could see something like that involving the head and the hand. What about just some electronics in general, Some uninvented technology? Yeah, yeah.
- [13:13]
Jimmy Akin
Well, the whole point of using numbers for these things, even if we invent some new neuralink thing or something like that, the whole point of using numbers in these is to serve as a form of privacy protection to distinguish individuals and keep their information and their money and such separate. The whole point of these numbers is as privacy protections, and that's utterly defeated if everyone has the same number, Especially if it's ridiculously short, like just three digits, and all three digits are the same. It's like making your password 1, 1, 1, you know? Well, wait, how did you.
- [13:55]
Cy Kellett
Oh my gosh, that's amazing. Jimmy.
- [13:58]
Jimmy Akin
Need to change your passwords. Oh, yeah. Whereas the whole point of the mark of the Beast, the way it's presented is it's something everybody gets. It's something everybody is on the same page about. And so instead of thinking about things that distinguish individuals, like credit cards and Social Security cards and chips and stuff like that, we need to think in the other direction. What would this mean is going to have to do with something that unites people rather than divides people.
- [14:33]
Cy Kellett
So if I go with, look, there was the original mark of the Beast, and this had to do with first century things. But this prophecy may have a future fulfillment as well. What should I be on the lookout for?
- [14:48]
Jimmy Akin
Well, before we get to that, I think it's helpful to understand in greater clarity exactly what this mark represented in the first century. Okay. Now, people assume it's a literal physical mark, but. But Revelation has lots of stuff in it that is not literal, physical stuff. Yeah, I mean, for example, the beast from the sea in the first place is not a literal seven headed, ten horned dragon that comes up from the Mediterranean Sea. That's a symbol of something different. Same thing with the beast from the land and loads of other symbols in Revelation. So we need to ask, is this a specific concrete physical mark to begin with? And the key to that, other than just general prophetic principles, is found in the very next verse. And people tend to miss this because I read the last two verses of chapter 13 in Revelation, but there are no chapter divisions in the original Greek of Revelation. Those were added centuries later. And so if you just keep reading, immediately after we read about the number 666, John says, then I looked, and behold, on Mount Zion stood the Lamb, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his father's name written on their foreheads. And so have we just heard about something being written on people's foreheads or right hands? Yeah, just two verses earlier. Yeah, but because people tend to stop reading at the end of chapter 13, they miss the interpretive key. The beginning of Revelation 14 starts talking about the name of God and his Christ being written on people's foreheads in contrast to the mark of the beast. So can we figure out anything about the mark of Christ that's described just two verses later? Well, this passage in Revelation seems to be based on a passage in the book of Ezekiel. In Ezekiel, there's a point at which God is going to pass through Jerusalem and administer judgment. But first, before he does that, he has angels go through Jerusalem and mark everybody who's righteous on their foreheads. And they're marked with. The word for mark is in Hebrew is Tao. That's used in this passage. And tao is the last letter of the Hebrew Alphabet. It corresponds to our letter T. But it didn't look like a T in ancient Hebrew script. It looked like a cross. And so early Christians were quick to notice that before God administers judgment, he marks the righteous in Ezekiel with a cross on their foreheads to protect them from the coming wrath. That's what's going on with the 144,000. Now, you and I talked in a previous episode about what they are. And even though there's a number 144,000, when you read in context, they seem Strongly to represent the entire community of the faithful. And they're being marked with the name of God and the name of Christ to protect them from the coming wrath. Just like in, in Ezekiel, in Revelation, the angels who are gonna administer judgment are told, don't do anything yet until we mark the servants of our God. And that's when they get marked with the name of God and the name of Christ on their foreheads. So, question for you, Sykellan. Alright. In Ezekiel's time, did angels literally burn a cross on a physical mark of a cross onto the foreheads of the righteous? Were all the righteous people walking around with a visible cross on their foreheads?
- [19:04]
Cy Kellett
No. That did.
- [19:06]
Jimmy Akin
And in the book of Revelation's imagery, do we expect all of the righteous followers of Christ to literally have God's name or Christ's name literally written on their foreheads?
- [19:19]
Cy Kellett
No. I think. No. This seems symbolic. Yeah. Yeah.
- [19:22]
Jimmy Akin
So this is a symbol. And if the mark in Ezekiel and if the mark of the righteous in Revelation 14 is a spiritual mark, if it's a symbol, then the same thing is going to be true of the mark of the beast. It is not a physical mark on the person at all. Instead, it is a sign of who you're allied with, who you owe your allegiance to. Do you owe your allegiance and your worship to God and his Christ, or do you use your head and your hands in the service of the cult of Emperor worship? That's what the mark of the beast symbolizes in the book of Revelation. And there's confirmation because I mentioned, you know, the number. I mentioned Gematria, and how you can add up the letters of a person's name and it comes out to a numerical value. Well, you do that, as scholars have pointed out for Nero Caesar. And in Hebrew and Aramaic, Nero Caesar spelled one way adds up to 666. Although there's an alternate spelling of Nero Caesar where you leave out an extra N. You could spell it Neron Casar, or you could spell it just Nero Casar without a second N. And if you spell it that way, it adds up to 616. The other number that's in some manuscript. So this is early evidence that early Christians recognized that Nero is connected with the beast. So in the first. So what the mark represents in its initial literal fulfillment is putting your head and your hands in service of the cult of emperor worship. What would a future version of the mark of the beast be, if there is one? Well, we can't say with precision, but we would expect it to be the same kind of thing. Not a literal mark any more than the future Christians are gonna have angels literally burn markings on their forehead for God's name and Christ's name, but instead a sign that the mark of the beast in the future, if there is a future version of this, would be a sign of allegiance to an emperor like figure who demands worship from people all over the world just like the Roman emperors did. And so sykellate, as long as you're not worshiping an emperor, you haven't taken the mark of the beast. So you can take some comfort in that.
- [22:05]
Cy Kellett
I will do that and I will change my passwords during the break. Right back with more Jimmy Akin Bible Questions on Catholic Answers Live.
- [22:12]
Jimmy Akin
Catch Catholic Answers live anytime@catholic.com Are you a coffee drinker?
- [22:18]
Mystic Monk Coffee Announcer
If so, you can now enjoy a coffee roasted to perfection by the Carmelite monks of Wyoming. Delicious Mystic Monk Coffee is roasted and prepared by monks in a hidden cloistered monastery and is available in over 25 varieties. All Mystic Monk Coffees are works of perfection and labors of love. For more information on how to purchase Mystic Monk Coffee, visit mysticmonk coffee.com that's mysticmonkcoffee.com proclaiming the faith, changing lives the year was 2000.
- [22:50]
EWTN Announcer
EWTN's coverage of the Jubilee year includes Pope John Paul II opening the Jubilee door, his trip to the Holy Land, the canonization of Saint Faustina in Rome, and the beatification of Jacinta and Francisco Marto in Fatima, Portugal.
- [23:06]
Jimmy Akin
To learn more about Mother Angelica's life and the history of EWTN, visit ewtn.com motherangelica.
- [23:26]
Cy Kellett
Welcome back. Catholic Answers Live. Jimmy Akin is our guest. I want to get right to our next caller because we haven't got to any callers yet. It's Bible Questions with Jimmy Akin today. Mike is in Rapid City, South Dakota, listening on 94.7 FM. Mike, welcome. Go ahead with your question for Jimmy.
- [23:42]
Mike (Caller)
Hi, thank you. Yeah, I was raised Catholic. I left in the late 1970s. I became a Christian in 1986.
- [23:51]
Jimmy Akin
Oh, you already were a Christian. You became a different kind of Christian.
- [23:55]
Mike (Caller)
No, the Catholic Church teaches a different Jesus. The Catholic doesn't fulfill First John 1:9 or He 12:14.
- [24:06]
Jimmy Akin
Okay, Mike, we're gonna just. Mike, hang on just a sec. Mike, hang on. Mike, hang on. Mike, Mike, Mike, hang on just a second. You and I are not gonna agree in this short phone call about the breadth of the term Christian from a Catholic perspective. We're the OG Christians. We started it all. And I understand you may not agree to that. But the term Christian was being applied to Catholics for 1500 years before Martin Luther and other Protestants showed up. So even if you don't think we're saved, you should have the historical awareness to recognize that the term Christian has been understood throughout history to apply to Catholics. Now, you may have a different definition that you use, but I'm using the commonly accepted one that has been accepted for centuries and centuries, including long before Protestantism arose. Having said that, you called in with a disagreement with the Catholic Church and you mentioned a couple Bible verses. So why don't you go ahead and explain that and then I can react to it.
- [25:22]
Ryan (Caller)
Okay?
- [25:22]
Mike (Caller)
All right. So first, John 1:9 says that when we confess our sins to Jesus.
- [25:29]
Jimmy Akin
He claims it didn't say to Jesus, but go ahead.
- [25:32]
Mike (Caller)
All unrighteousness cleanses us from all unrighteousness. Hebrews 10:12 through 14 says, by this man Jesus, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins, forever sat down at the right hand of God. From that time waiting until his enemies are made a footstool for by one offering he has perfected forever those who are being sanctified. Born again Christians are seen as perfect in God's eyes.
- [26:07]
Cy Kellett
You gotta hang on a sec. We're gonna get you an answer, but I cannot turn this break off. This is one we gotta take. Hang on, we'll get an answer. We hope that one of the things that we communicate here at Catholic Answers Live is that our Catholic faith allows us to be fully serious about all the problems we encounter in the church and in the world. But it also lets us have light hearts and maybe even mix in a bit of fun. And that is exactly what our good friend Joe Heschmeyer does in his popular podcast, Shameless Potpourri. You should check it out@shelessjoe.com Joe's got a deep grasp of the faith, morals, the teachings of the Church, all that. But he's also got a witty conversational style. He entertains and he informs, but you will leave equipped to better answer the most common challenges, misconceptions, and questions about the Catholic faith. He's got insightful guests he does on air, debates, and he takes a close look into all the things that you want to know about as a Catholic living today. You'll walk away knowledgeable and filled. Look for Joe on his YouTube channel. Check him out@shelessjoe.com or wherever you get your podcasts. And if you like what you hear, become a patron.
- [27:15]
EWTN Announcer
Throughout history, some Catholics have been among the worst kind of Villains, right? Or were they? In Cancelled, historian Steve Weidenkopf digs into the lives and controversies of some of these Catholics whose reputations have been blackened, often unfairly. He takes on the anti Catholic versions of history and defends not only these figures, but the faith they represent. Order your copy of cancelled today@shop.catholic.com or ask for it at a good Catholic bookstore near you.
- [27:45]
Cy Kellett
When the resurrected Jesus appeared to disciples on the road to Emmaus, they didn't recognize him until the breaking of the bread. The same is true today in the Holy Eucharist, we really meet Jesus in the Eucharist is really Jesus. Author Joe Heschmeyer explains how knowing Jesus in the Eucharist is the key to understanding all of Christian faith. Order your copy of the Eucharist is Really Jesus today@shop.catholic.com or get it at a good Catholic bookstore. Welcome back Catholic Answers Live. It just happens. You get a great question and then the break comes and you got to take that break. That's not one I had a choice in. Mike, I'm very sorry that we had to interrupt you with that break, but did you want to finish what you were saying to Jimmy? No problem. Thank you.
- [28:44]
Mike (Caller)
No, thank you. I just say and it's different Jesus this the Jesus of Catholic church has you work in the penitent Thief is the best refutation of the Catholic doctrine that there is. It's either all God or it's me. And I know as a Catholic I failed constantly. And as a born again Christian, I still do. It has to be all God.
- [29:11]
Jimmy Akin
Okay.
- [29:13]
Mike (Caller)
Something other than.
- [29:15]
Cy Kellett
Oh, sorry. Go ahead, Jimmy.
- [29:17]
Jimmy Akin
Well, I, I, I'm not sure if Mike is approaching the end of his question or, or how we want to proceed.
- [29:25]
Cy Kellett
Mike, was there more that you wanted to say? I apologize. It sounded like, well, no, dropped off to me.
- [29:30]
Mike (Caller)
We can stop. You've let me speak, so I'll, I'll be quiet and let you answer for thank you.
- [29:35]
Jimmy Akin
Okay. Okay. So first let's deal with the verses that you mentioned, and then we'll deal with the broader issue that you've raised. You ment John 1:9. And in first John 1:9, you didn't actually quote what it says, so I'll read it. This is actually from a Protestant translation, but it says if we confess our sins, he, meaning Jesus, is faithful and just and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. Now, you added the words to Jesus. You said if we confess our sins to Jesus, and it doesn't actually say that the verse doesn't specify who you're confessing your sins to. What it says is if we confess, then he's faithful and just and will forgive us and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. And that's absolutely true. It would be a mistake to either interpret, and you'll notice how balanced I'm being here, it would be a mistake to use this verse either as a proof or a disproof of the sacrament of confession. It would be a mistake to say, well, this means if we confess our sins to Jesus and Jesus only, this will happen, thus excluding the idea of the sacrament. But it would also be a mistake, you know, like some Protestants might say. But it would also be a mistake for a Catholic to use the verse as a proof text for confession and say, hey, it mentions confession, it must be talking about the sacrament of confession. So if we. It's saying if we confess our sins in confession, then he's faithful and just to do these things. And since the verse doesn't specify the circumstances of the confession and who's being confessed to, it would be wrong exegetically either for a Protestant to use it as a disproof of the sacrament of confession, and it would be wrong for a Catholic to use it as a proof for the Sacrament of confession. All we know is if we confess somehow, then this will happen. And the verse itself doesn't tell us any more about how that happens. So this verse doesn't support one side over the other. And so I'm not going to seize it as a proof text for a Catholic understanding. And I would encourage you to recognize that it's also not a proof text for a Protestant understanding. It's one that can be understood in more than one way. The second passage that you cited was from Hebrews, and in Hebrews. Let me pull that one up real quick. In Hebrews, you're right. It says that Christ, after he had sacrificed once for sins for all times, he sat down at the right hand of God from now on, waiting until his enemies are made a footstool for his feet. For by one offering he is perfected for all times, those who are made holy. Yeah, Catholics agree to that too. That's in our Bibles too. This doesn't you know, we acknowledge Christ was sacrificed in a unique once for all sense on the cross. And he does not die again, he does not bleed again. His sacrifice on the cross was a once for all sacrifice. And all of the grace that's necessary for us to be perfected is provided by that, that sacrifice. But if you read this very book of Hebrews, it makes it clear that grace is not applied to us in such a way that it makes us perfect in all respects all at once. Now it is applied to us in a way that we are forgiven for all of our previous sins all at once. So wham you come to Christ, you get justified. All of your previous sins, they're done away with, you are completely forgiven of them. But the book of Hebrews itself has a prominent theme of growth in holiness. And you know, Hebrews says, for example, God scourges every son that he receives or disciplines every son he receives. And no discipline seems pleasant at the time, but painful. Yet it causes us to grow in holiness that ultimately results in us having peace. So we have some growing to do and the grace to pursue that growth. The grace to have that growth also comes from Jesus sacrifice on the cross. But it's not applied to us in a once for all fashion. We grow in the Christian life as we cooperate with God's grace. We have stumbles, we get back on the horse, we trust God again and he helps us keep growing. So it's a mistake to look at the he has perfected for all time those who are being made holy as if it implied that nothing needs to happen in the Christian life to help us grow. The question is what empowers the growth that we have. And Catholics agree with Protestants that that is the cross of Christ. It's just that he chooses to apply the grace to us in such a way that we, that it's not that we're not instantly made perfect in every respect. Justification, to use Protestant language, justification is different from sanctification. Justification can be understood as something that you get in a complete package so all of your previous sins are forgiven, but sanctification is something that comes in pieces and we need to cooperate with God's grace to receive it. So that's what I'd say, in brief, about the Bible passages you cited. But I also want to address the larger issue that you raised because you contrasted your understanding as a Catholic with your present understanding. And, and you said you left the Catholic Church in the late 70s. I'm not sure how old you are, but my suspicion is you were rather young, at least 45 years younger than you are now. And young people frequently are not world class theologians. I mean, maybe if you're Thomas Aquinas, you'll be a world class theologian as a young person, but most young people aren't. They're not super educated about their Faith, no matter what church they're a part of. And I hate to say it, but.
- [36:34]
Ryan (Caller)
But.
- [36:37]
Jimmy Akin
I guess the good news is you've misunderstood what the Catholic Church claims. The Catholic Church does not claim that we are able to do anything to justify ourselves before God. In fact, the Council of Trent explicitly says that nothing that precedes justification, whether faith or works, merits the grace of justification. Justification is entirely a product of God's grace in our lives and the only good works that we do, and we do do good works because, you know, Paul in Ephesians says God created us in Christ to do good works. So, yeah, we do good works, but they flow from the state of justification. They don't get us in to the state of justification. And as Pope Benedict XVI himself said, Luther's phrase faith alone is true. I mean, he said it, it's true as long as it's understood correctly to refer to, as Paul says in Galatians 5, as long as it's understood to refer to faith working through love, that kind of faith is something that justifies and that faith is itself a gift from God. It doesn't come from us. So actually, I think that you have not fully understood the Catholic position. And the Catholic position on these matters is actually in harmony with at least what you've articulated here on the show today. I've written about this before. I wrote a whole big book on it, but that's probably too much. But I also wrote it 20 answers, faith and Works booklet and a Words of Eternal Life booklet. And I would suggest Sy Kellett. Why don't we send those to Mike so that he can check it out and have a chance to reflect on it at more length.
- [38:40]
Cy Kellett
Mike, what you have to do, if you'd like those, is just give us an address and we'll be happy to send them off there to South Dakota. Very grateful for the opportunity. I'm sorry that for the occasional interruptions, I don't think I was a very good host in that regard. But I very much appreciate your call and we would love to send you those two books. 20 Answers. Faith in Works and the Words of Eternal Life, True Happiness and Where to Find it, both by Jimmy Akin. I have to take the break right back with more Bible questions for Jimmy on Catholic Answers live. This is Archbishop Paul Coakley of the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City. And and you're listening to Catholic Answers Live.
- [39:20]
St. Paul Street Evangelization Announcer
Who was the first Catholic in your family? Were they evangelized by a friend, a co worker, a stranger? Did you ever think that you could be that person that God uses to save a soul. And that soul could save their family, their grandchildren and generations to come. At St. Paul Street Evangelization, a Catholic nonprofit, we train, equip and mobilize Catholic disciples to do the urgent work of evangelization. Catholic Answers is supported in part by St. Paul Street Evangelization. Streetevangelization.com.
- [39:52]
Jimmy Akin
The most original Catholic content is on EWTN Radio. Apparently our Christianity demands humility. It demands compassion, demands that you love and pray for your enemy. And we don't like that too much either.
- [40:12]
EWTN Announcer
Mother Angelica Live Classics every morning, 2 Eastern on EWTN radio.
- [40:32]
Cy Kellett
Welcome back. Catholic Answers Live. If you've got a question about the Bible, we'd love to take that question. Whether you know a lot about the Bible or you know nothing about the Bible, if you know nothing and you just got a curious question about the Bible, maybe you've heard something about it. We would be happy to take your call. If you've got a more in depth question, you're welcome as well. 888-31-87884. Jimmy Akin is our guest. He's senior apologist here at Catholic Answers. And I had so much fun talking with him. The first segment I forgot to ask him about what dropped today on Jimmy Akin's Mysterious World.
- [41:05]
Jimmy Akin
Well, it's November and next week is the anniversary of the John F. Kennedy assassination. So we're taking a two part look at one theory of who may have been responsible for the Kennedy assassination. In particular this week we're looking at a theory that members of the CIA were involved and in particular a man named E. Howard Hunt. And unlike a lot of theories that have never been tested in court, this one has. There was a trial back in the 1980s in which E. Howard Hunt sued his accusers of having been involved. And so this one's actually been tested in court. We go through the court transcripts. We have actors reading the relevant passages of the court transcripts for you. And in part one, which focused on the prosecution's case in this court trial that was advocating for E. Howard Hunt, we show you what his argument was and then we watch the opposing counsel rip his credibility to shreds. He absolutely falls apart on the standard. But that doesn't show that he was involved. It just shows he's lying about something, but it doesn't show he was involved in the Kennedy assassination. So next week we're going to bring on another witness and let her testify about what she knew about E. Howard hunt and the CIA's involvement. According to her in the Kennedy assassination.
- [42:53]
Cy Kellett
Are you solving this thing? I guess I gotta tune in to find out, huh?
- [42:57]
Jimmy Akin
Well, I'll say this. I believe in considering I believe there that the evidence in the Kennedy assassination is muddled enough. There are different possible theories and it's a mistake to conclude the first theory you hear is correct. So I want over the course of multiple episodes, over the history of the show to look at multiple different theories. So my goal in this pair of episodes is not concluding this the correct answer. We need to look at other theories before we draw that conclusion. My goal in this pair of episodes is to. Is to say, does this explanation pass a smell test? Is it credible? Not is it the answer, but is it a credible answer? And the answer to that question is yeah, this is credible.
- [43:45]
Cy Kellett
Oh, check it out. Jimmy Akins, Mysterious World, Mysterious fm. You can find it wherever you get your podcasts or get it on his channel over at YouTube. The Jimmy Akin channel on YouTube. All right, our friend Ryan on the line calling from Glen Rose, Texas, listening on the Catholic Answers app. Welcome back, Ryan.
- [44:06]
Ryan (Caller)
Thanks for taking my call, guys. Now Jimmy, I'm actually looking forward to that two part Mysterious World episode. I live about an hour and a half from Daily Plaza.
- [44:15]
Cy Kellett
If you were involved, Ryan, I don't want to hear about it, man. Don't say anything on the air.
- [44:19]
Jimmy Akin
You can without advice of counsel.
- [44:21]
Cy Kellett
Yeah, get a lawyer if you're. If this is a confession.
- [44:26]
Ryan (Caller)
Wasn't me. I was watching Murder She Wrote last night.
- [44:29]
Cy Kellett
Oh.
- [44:31]
Jimmy Akin
Last night, Ryan, that's, that's a. That's a non alibi alibi.
- [44:36]
Cy Kellett
Now I'm starting to have my suspicions, Ryan.
- [44:39]
Jimmy Akin
Last night was not when the Kennedy assassination occurred.
- [44:43]
Cy Kellett
All right, we will stop incriminating you. Go ahead with your, with your question for general.
- [44:48]
Ryan (Caller)
I was kidding anyway. But I was wondering, Jimmy, any Old Testament. When the Bible talks about, or I mean in. When the Bible talks about the Lord appearing to certain people in the Old Testament, how is that to be understood? Is the recipient seeing God the Father, the pre incarnate Jesus, or the Holy Spirit?
- [45:12]
Jimmy Akin
Well, we're not told because the. The Trinity is not clearly revealed. In the old testamen, there are some passages that hint at aspects of the Trinity. Like in the book of Daniel we have Daniel receive a vision of God who is referred to in this passage as the ancient of days. And he describes what the ancient of days looks like. And then writing on a cloud. And writing a cloud is a sign of divinity. But up to the ancient of days riding on a cloud comes A figure that is is like a son of man. And in this passage, it's clear that in Christian terms, we would understand the Ancient of days as the Father, and the one, like a son of man, as God the Son. But most passages don't make this distinction. There are some that do, like the one in Daniel, but most of them don't. However, in both the Old Testament and the New Testament, the general identification of the term God is for the Father. That's why the Ancient of Days, that's clearly God, but it's also clearly God the Father. And that's the case in the large majority of passages, not in all of them. But usually when the New Testament is quoting the Old Testament about God, it's understanding God as the Father. And this is also indicated in the Gospel of John, where Jesus tells the disciples, you believe in God, believe also in Me. And what he means is, you believe in the Father, believe also in Me, the Son. So usually the term God in the Old Testament and in the New Testament is understood as a reference to the Father. Not in all cases, but usually. It's also possible that in some cases, when God appears to someone, it might be a trinitophany. It might be an appearance of all three persons in the form of a single individual, but that's even harder to identify. If push comes to shove and you have to make a choice, then the probable choice would be in any given passage, unless there's contrary indications that in a particular passage, it's the Father who is appearing.
- [47:49]
Cy Kellett
Okay.
- [47:52]
Ryan (Caller)
I appreciate that. Also say prayer for me, because I'm helping a friend of mine go through ocia, and that's gone through some tough times herself with mental health and what have you.
- [48:04]
Cy Kellett
Oh, well, Ryan, maybe we could send her a book. Is there one of our books? Books that. I'll tell you what. I'll let you talk about that with God. Bless you, first of all, for helping someone through rcia. You talk to Edgar. I'll put you on hold.
- [48:15]
Jimmy Akin
And we'll encourage the listeners to pray for her and for all in similar situations.
- [48:20]
Cy Kellett
Very much so, Ryan. Thank you. Thank you very much. We're going to head to Oklahoma now. Bill is in Oklahoma. It's your Bible. Questions for Jimmy Akin. Go ahead, Bill.
- [48:31]
Ryan (Caller)
Hey.
- [48:32]
Bill (Caller)
Oh, I thought Edgar was hosting.
- [48:35]
Cy Kellett
Oh, are you disappointed?
- [48:39]
Jimmy Akin
No, Bill. You must just be unstuck in time. Edgar hosted yesterday.
- [48:44]
Bill (Caller)
Well, I know that. And I thought he was hosting today. Well, that's okay. I'll go with the second.
- [48:49]
Cy Kellett
Bill's just being mean to me. Bill's, just being mean to me.
- [48:54]
Bill (Caller)
No, it's good to have you back.
- [48:56]
Jimmy Akin
Side.
- [48:56]
Bill (Caller)
I'm just teasing.
- [48:57]
Cy Kellett
All right. Thank you, Bill.
- [49:00]
Bill (Caller)
But Edgar did do a great job.
- [49:01]
Ryan (Caller)
While you were gone.
- [49:02]
Cy Kellett
Well, thank.
- [49:03]
Jimmy Akin
Good. Well, enough teasing and complimenting. What's your question, Bill?
- [49:07]
Bill (Caller)
Well, my question is what would you recommend Jimmy as the as a good Catholic study Bible with commentary?
- [49:20]
Jimmy Akin
Well, so I'm a little out of my battle wick because I don't, I don't really use study Bibles. I go straight to biblical commentaries. But I have, and I have some familiarity. But it depends on what you're looking for. One study Bible is the Navarre Study Bible and it has commentary that is very spiritual. And if you're looking for spiritual commentary, that's the one I would recommend. But I'm not as interested in spiritual commentary as what does this passage mean. I'm more interested in exegetical commentary and one that I can recommend. I haven't read it in detail, but one that I can recommend would be the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible. It has more exegetically oriented commentary rather than spiritually oriented commentary. But there are, you know, lots of others. Those are two that are Catholic, and if you insist on a Catholic one, well, I'd recommend one of those depending on what your interests are. But there are loads of study Bibles. Like there's, you know, for example, there's a life application Study Bible that has tries to make texts practically useful to people today, and that's kind of in the spiritual direction, but it's not quite the same thing. It's also a Protestant study Bible Bible, and there are lots of others. Frankly, if you have a good knowledge of the Catholic faith and can spot things that are inconsistent with the Catholic faith, I think it's beneficial to read a range of different viewpoints and not restrict oneself to only reading, you know, things that are published by a Catholic publisher. That's why I go to commentaries. And I don't really care what the religious perspective is of the person writing the commentary. If he says something or she says something that inconsistent with the Catholic faith, my spider sense is going to go off. And I'll be alert to that point. But I want to learn from what else the person says, no matter what their personal beliefs are. So if you have a good grasp on your Catholic faith, I would say don't limit yourself to just Catholic publications. But if you choose to limit yourself to Catholic publications, I would recommend either the Navarre Study Bible or the Ignatius Study Bible. In particular, I'd recommend the latter. If you're like me and you're interested in more what does this passage mean?
- [52:04]
Cy Kellett
Type stuff, Bill, I hope it was helpful to you. I'm going to try to get one more person on before we have to go for the hour. Let's go to Gil in Long Island, New York. Hi, Gil. You got a question for Jimmy?
- [52:16]
Gil (Caller)
Yes, and I enjoyed the book the Words of Eternal Life by Jimmy Akin.
- [52:20]
Mike (Caller)
Oh, great.
- [52:21]
Gil (Caller)
I thank you. In Ephesians 4:29, it says, Let no corrupt communication proceed forth from your mouth, but that which is good of youth to edify, that it may minister grace unto the hearers. I was wondering if jeep me Akin could try to expound on that verse.
- [52:41]
Jimmy Akin
Well, I think it's fairly straightforward. Now, you read from a different translation than. Than that I'm not familiar with. I'll read it in another translation. Okay, I'll read it in another translation that's more modern, that reflects more modern scholarship. But it says in the English Standard Version, let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up as fits the occasion that it may give grace to those who hear. And so I would interpret this to mean, well, don't say anything that's going to corrupt other people, but orient your speech so that based on the particular occasion you find yourself in, it will give them grace. Now, that doesn't mean always saying stuff that they're going to find pleasant. If you look at St. Paul's own letters, he regularly says stuff that some of his listeners are not going to find pleasure, like when he calls the Galatians foolish, for example, or when he basically throws a tantrum at the end of 2 Corinthians. But he is trying to give grace to people. So sometimes giving grace doesn't mean being pleasant. But you shouldn't, according to St. Paul, say things that are gonna corrupt other people, like tempt them to sin or tempt them to be uncharitable towards others for reason and stuff like that. So that's a. That's a basic application of the verse. I'd say it means do good and avoid evil in your speech.
- [54:24]
Cy Kellett (returning)
Gil, thank you so much for your question. Appreciate that, Jimmy. Looks like the first hour is over and Cy will be back in just one second, so. And I had to make my appearance because Bill complimented me so much, you know.
- [54:37]
Jimmy Akin
Yeah. All right. Nice to switch things up unexpectedly.
- [54:41]
Cy Kellett (returning)
Absolutely. That's right. All right, when we come back, it's going to be another hour with Jimmy on Bible questions. So if you have your Bible question. Go ahead and give us a call. 888-318-7884. I'll do it one more time, nice and slow. 888-318-7884.
- [55:05]
Jimmy Akin
Sam.