Gooding, David: 8 - Discussion of Inheritance

And a very good morning to you. It is wonderful see- to see you so bright and breezy on this beautifully cool morning. And as you are aware from the program, this first session, while people are still bright and breezy, is devoted to open discussion. The The topic topic. for discussion this morning is the concept of inheritance. That very term is used throughout Old Testament and in many places in the New. And what I would very much like to hear this morning is your co- your understanding, what you understand by the term inheritance when you meet it, both in Old Testament, but particularly in the New Testament. Now, I suggested on Monday evening several areas of interest that arise in this concept of inheritance, and I think you took a list of those suggested places. But this morning, it is my hope that I shall do very little talking, because what I am interested in, these being seminars, do you see, and not preaching occasions, interested to hear what you feel the term means and what it means to you. I hope, I'm sure, within the course of the discussion, someone will expound for us passages like Ephesians chapter five and verse five. Ephesians five and verse five says this: For this you know of assurity, that no fornicator, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, which is an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of God and Christ. I shall be all ears to hear what you feel that term means, that such people have no inheritance in the kingdom of God, Christ and God. But with that expression of hope, uh, over to you, my dear good brethren, it is you that I wish to hear from this morning, if you are so kind and generous with your thoughts, anything you have to say about the concept of inheritance as we meet it in scripture? Well, obviously the word inheritance means something. Speak up, please go ahead. I'm saying obviously, uh, the word inheritance means something that we will, we will derive from a source outside of ourselves, be it a relative or some other person. You mentioned this, this, this scripture in, in Ephesians chapter five and verse five. It speaks of inheritance. It also speaks of the kingdom of Christ and of God. We do believe that God owns this universe. Well, I believe there's a particular sense in which this word kingdom is is made reference to the kingdom of Christ, and I perhaps I'm thinking more in terms of the thousand, the millennial reign of Christ when it refers here to the kingdom. And the, and the Lord's prayer says, Thy kingdom come, O Lord, thy will be done on earth as it is done in heaven. In a general sense, he owns the entire universe. I believe in a particular sense, after the tribulation, he will enter into his millennial kingdom. Now, obviously, anyone who has, by faith, trusted in the Lord Jesus Christ, I do believe that they will, as a Gentile and even as a Jew, would reign with Christ in his kingdom. I do not know all the details, but this is what I'm led to believe by scripture. But it says, no fornicator, no unclean person, nor covetous man who is an idolater have any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ. I'm taking it to mean that if a person, uh, persists and continues in these areas, they do not belong to the Lord Jesus Christ. I mean, if they fall into it occasionally, maybe, but if they continue without abating, without remorse, and they still keep on continuing to do this, then they are not saved. They have not been reached by the Lord Jesus Christ, and therefore they will not be a partaker of, and they, they will, they will, they don't have eternal life, and therefore they will not be a partaker of the Kingdom of Christ. This is how I'm trying to Mm-hmm. understand. Thank you very, very much indeed. So that if I might, uh, come back at you, uh, and to all, to all the others, I gather you are saying that the phrase means he shall not have any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God means he'll have no place in it. In fact, he will not be in it. He will be excluded from it. That's, I think, what you mean. Let me put it to all the others. Anybody here feels that it means that people who behave persistently and consistently in these evil ways may not have an inheritance in the kingdom, but will be in it, but won't have an inheritance in it. Anybody holds that view? Someone back there wants to talk. I hold that view. You hold that view? Yeah, if you look at the seven servant parables that our Lord taught us, in all of them there is an un- unjust servant or a servant who is not prepared, who is punished. I think it would be wrong to, uh, extend the context of those parables to salvation itself. Those are parables about precisely what we're talking about, reward in heaven. Mm-hmm. There will be those who suffer loss, but yet who fly, but will be present with the Lord as to fly. I see. So now we have two distinct views, uh, gentlemen, let's hear you discuss them, uh, uh, uh, uh, and guide us in which view we should hold or whether we should have some mixture of both views. Somebody over there, I can see with a hand up. Uh, well, I guess it depends on what our inheritance is. If our inheritance is something that Christ gives us, then it's possible that we could be in the kingdom and not have that inheritance. But if our inheritance is Christ himself, then we would not, then if we have inheritance, then we have Christ. Mm. And so that would tend to me to think that, uh, you cannot be in heaven and not have an inheritance. Mm. Yes, come on, theologians. I hold more to the first view that was, um, being mentioned by a brother. The reason is, it's because Romans seems to indicate that all believers are heirs of God and join hands with Christ. And also the parallel passage in First Corinthians six says, do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Mm-hmm. Speaking as, uh, not... it's worded differently, and in this passage, it seems to indicate that he will not even be able to enter in, if I can use the words of John three, enter into the kingdom of God or see the kingdom of God. Uh, so thank you, yes. And a hand up over here in the remote corner somewhere. I would parallel the passage in Ephesians five with Revelation twenty one. But the fearful and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and whoremongers, specific things mentioned in Ephesians five. sorcerers and idolaters and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death. I'd only like to add a comment on what a brother said here, which I thought was a good comment, that I would take at the basic level the inheritance to be twofold, at least twofold. In Ephesians chapter one and verse eleven, in whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will. There's a, there's an inheritance we have already received, and I would count that to be what Paul would say in Ephesians one three, spiritual blessings in Christ Jesus in heavenly places. That's the present aspect of our inheritance that we've already received that part. But then, as you mentioned, Peter brought up, brings out in First Peter, an inheritance incorruptible, undefiled, that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven. There's a future aspect of it as well. So as to the inheritance, those two things. As to the Ephesians five, as well as with the Galatians... passage in Galatians five, when he lists the works of the flesh and then says, they that do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. So no inheritance in the kingdom of God. I tie that again with the Revelation passage to sup- in support of the first view. Mm, good. There's a someone in a yellowish looking shirt from here. Excuse my eyes, gentlemen. Yes, sir. I, I think that with Israel, as we've been looking, you have them being in the land, and then being in the land in Christ Jesus, it's a blessed thing to be in Christ Jesus. Then you have the responsibility of appropriating as much as that inheritance as you possibly can. And so I think that, uh, in, uh, Ephesians, it is specifically contrasting those that have inheritance with those that have non-inheritance at all. But in the other aspect of being in the land, yet it is possible to be in the land, and as Peter says, you can have a very poor entrance into the kingdom of God. And so he says in second Peter that we are to give all diligence to add to our faith. Oh, thank God, the inheritance itself is by faith and faith alone and never dependent on our work, so that a man can be saved, so as by fire. But when it comes to reward, which has to do with work, he can suffer tremendous loss. First Corinthians chapter three. So Peter tells us to add to our faith, and that is in the context of what you quoted last night as to those who forget how and why they were brought up out of Egypt, end up disoriented in the wilderness. They forget, and forgetting that, what happens is that they fail to, in the end, experience what Peter's talking about in verse eleven, chapter one to Peter. For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Mm-hmm. Henry, are you saying you hold to the second view? No, sir. Oh, no. I, wait a minute, but I don't categorically reject what Brother Swain said, because I think that's where we come to cross purposes, as he was talking about. There is the absolute clear teaching of scripture of lot. And there was a man who was justified, and yet, when it came in that sense to the end, he suffered tremendous loss and was someone that came out of Sodom so as by fire. All was lost, but only he himself was saved, but he suffered the loss of all the works of his life, all the energy of his life because of how he did. So that's a different question than the Ephesians five. uh Lot wasn't a whole number. That's the point, so that I am saying that I am not totally rejecting what I believe Brother Swaim is trying to say, but I do think it's dangerous when it talks about no inheritance whatever in the kingdom of God, and and and and there it is told us over in contrast to the fornicator, the unbeliever, and so on and so forth, to say that the believer in the end can be exactly like an unbeliever. 1 Corinthians 6:9. Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived, neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God, and such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus by the Spirit of God. And yet they were practicing those, they were doing those things. Right, that seems to indicate that, that gives my, my writing seems that that seems to give credence to the first view that there is a stark contrast here. It isn't a situation of... it isn't, it isn't talking about what, in other words, a believer can commit these sins. That's right. But this seems to indicate, as verse eleven, and such were some of you, there was a transformation. Coming into the. Right. So if I, I may then sum up so far so we can keep the discussion orderly. There are two views that the phrase in Galatians shall have no inheritance in the kingdom, uh, uh, uh, on the one side taken to mean that the person concerned shall not even get into the kingdom. And with that would go, perhaps, the expression used in the sister epistle in Galatians, in Ephesians, where it doesn't say shall have no inheritance in the kingdom, it says shall not inherit the kingdom. In other words, such people are, uh, as the evidence shows, unbelievers, unregenerate, and therefore they don't get into the kingdom, let alone have inheritance in it. On the other hand, Scripture does teach plainly, doesn't it, the difference between salvation, which is never by works, and rewards that depend on works. So that it is said in one Corinthians three that a believer whose works abide the critical judgment of Christ at the judgment seat, then he shall not only see his works remain and abide for eternity, but will get a reward on top. The man whose works are completely substandard quality will have his works burned up. Then it says explicitly, he himself shall be saved, because work, uh, salvation never did depend on works, yes? Saved though as by fire. So, yes, we rightly distinguish between reward for work or no reward at all, where the work is substandard, indeed a sense of loss. We distinguish between that on the one hand and, uh, salvation on the other. We're coming back, therefore, to our phrase in Galatians five, has no inheritance in the kingdom. Would we all agree or not agree that that phrase means what the similar phrase means in Ephesians chapter five? shall not inherit the kingdom at all? Can you in- have an in- no inheritance in the kingdom, but nonetheless inherit the kingdom itself? Is that a possibility? Is that what you think scripture teaches? Well, the basic, the basic text I think we could apply in J- in John chapter three where it says, if you're not born again, you will not see the kingdom. If you're not born again, you'll not be able to enter the kingdom. Mm-hmm. How can there be an inheritance without being able to enter the kingdom or be able to even see the kingdom if you're not born again? I mean, that's what the text, it's a basic salvation text. Yes, sir, and we could add, couldn't we, what John says in his first epistle, chapter three, that those who practice these things are not of God, but are of the devil, says John. So, yes, with that clarification, that lots of hands going up, delighted to see the response. Yes, starting from the front to the rear. You, sir? I just was thinking of the one example that, uh, is given to us about the Levites who were actually in the land but had no inheritance in the land as, uh, also bearing the curse of the priesthood, or, or words to that effect, uh, Ah. actually a kingdom, land, inheritance. I'm not sure if Is, that's a very interesting suggestion, sir, that the priests and the Levites had no inheritance in the land of Canaan. And the reason for that, however, is given as this: not that they were undeserving people, but the Lord himself was their inheritance. They had the sacrifices offered to God, and where parts of the sacrifices were given back, they were given to the priests. And because they're they, the Lord was their inheritance in that sense, they didn't have any territorial inheritance apart from cities and a few acres around them. And the man behind you, yes. So. If I may say, the only reason why I'm having a difficulty of, or a difficult time embracing the question about inheritance is because the various texts that we're using has an, uh, opposition. There is, when we use the, when we're in, uh, uh, Corinthians, we're talking about those who are unrighteous versus those who are righteous, and then again using the object of the kingdom. And then, of course, we have in Galatians and Ephesians. Ephesians talks about the, the, uh, children of light versus the children of disobedience. And Galatians talks about the spirit, uh, versus the flesh, uh, lust, and it goes on. So contextually, it's always seems to be as if it is the unbeliever, period, versus the believer. And the believer receives this wonderful reward as being one to inherit. In addition, if I may say, that because we're joint heirs of Christ, it's always contingent on his work and us embracing that work and receiving the Lord Jesus. And finally, there is the idea that we have, of course, we can re- uh, we can receive an additional reward on top of our salvation, if I may say that, uh, of crowns. It speaks of these things, which a lot of us will not receive. Just think about the crown of righteousness. I mean, uh, that's very difficult to, to just procure a crown. It also talks about glories. I take the position, First Corinthians fifteen, that there'll be glories, uh, uh, uh, some example for all eternity, some representing as the, as the sun, very, very bright, others a little bit more, uh, distant, like the moon, and others very, very distant, like the stars. And some other interpreters, and I'm not, I'm not sure if whether I accept the interpretation where there'll be positions, but that's also possible, uh, assuming that, uh, the elders there in the Book of Revelation, uh, obviously there is a, a nearness to Christ, and I, I believe that if that indeed was the case, that's an excellent reward. Uh, but again, uh, uh, my mind is very limited. I'm just trying to Thank you very much. do what I can here. Thank you. And the one behind you there. I believe that if you have no work, you have no You believe that if you have no works, you have no salvation? Works that follow your faith. Okay, yes. Yes. Go ahead. I, I know that you are saved by works. In other words, he's not saying that we are saved by works, he's saying that the saved have works. Yes. Yes, like James says, you show me your faith by your works, and if you have no works to show it. If you have no works to show it, then you have no salvation. Good. Well, now I wonder, could I draw this bit of the discussion, uh, to a temporary close, because there are other aspects of the inheritance that are important. But if I could sum up what seems to me to be your agreements, and then your disagreements. Let's start with the agreements. We all believe that salvation is by grace through faith and is not a works. Yes, that's amen to every- that, you see. Then we agree that all believers shall be in not only the millennial kingdom, but the eternal kingdom of our Lord, and shall be there on condition of their salvation. Blessed are they that have washed their robes, that is, uh, in the blood of the Lamb, that they might have right to the tree of life and enter the gates of the city. So we're all agreed on that. Now, when it comes to the millennial kingdom and even indeed the eternal kingdom, we all seem to be agreed, as far as I can gather from this, uh, uh, uh, from you, that there will be rewards for work done. And the possibility is raised in one Corinthians three that some will get no reward, but that there will be salvation, because salvation was never dependent on works. Are we all agreed on that? Good. No. Somebody. Everyone's going to receive some reward. Pardon? Everyone's going to receive some reward. We'll all have at least the crown of salvation. We'll all receive some praise the Lord has promised. Oh, but you think the crown of salvation is an extra reward for something done? I think it's something that we'll be able to cast at the Lord's feet to give him the praise and the glory. Oh, ah, yes. Eh, it says, doesn't it, then shall every, every man have a reward from God. Yes, it will be a very odd believer that turns up at the judgment seat of Christ and has done nothing, ever done anything for God. It'd be a very odd believer. But in the, uh, case represented in one Corinthians three, if a man's work is burned up, uh, he shall suffer loss, but he himself shall be saved. Granted the extreme position that if a work is burned up, that does not affect the salvation because he himself shall be saved, although so as through fire, like Lot himself, you'll see. So if we are all agreed in that sense, then does it come down, uh, to the language of these two verses that we have quoted? Uh, Ephesians says that they who practice these things shall not inherit the kingdom. They, they don't inherit the kingdom at all. Galatians says that specifically. But, well, no, Galatians says, uh, it's Ephesians five five that says shall not inherit the kingdom. Galatians five, uh uh, uh, uh, says, uh, Pardon? The other way around. It's the other way around. Well, yes, righto. Good if in that's in your language. Eh, um, the other phrase is shall not have an inheritance in the kingdom. And that springs from that, it seems to me, I'm not quite sure, perhaps you'll tell me, that this difference seems to you to be significant. The one says shall not have inheritance in the kingdom, which suggests that they can get into the kingdom itself but have no inheritance inside it. The other phrase, shall not inherit the kingdom, said of similar people who practice these evil things consistently, they shall not inherit the kingdom itself. Is there a real difference between inheriting the kingdom on the one hand, to use the one phrase, and inher- and having no inheritance in the kingdom on the other? Is there a difference? There's a good man here who started this, and let's... I think as an uh, as an the, to me the answer is no, but if you look at, again, at the kingdom parables, particularly the one of the needed. Of the, sorry? These, the minas, the mina coin, where there were ten coins, and the Lord, the Lord, his Lord gave them ten uh, one coin each, and they went out and they traded, they trafficked. The reward that was given in one case was ten cities, and in another case it was five cities. Yes. I take that, whether you want to call that a reward or an inheritance, I see that as the same thing, and I see that as the king giving out property, just or giving out, uh, social right, or whatever you want to call it, whatever the Europeans would call it when the king or queen gives out the land. I see that as the kingdom and the Lord re- rewarding or we his servants inheriting or not inheriting. That's how I see it. Yes, thank you very much indeed. I will just make two comments, if I may. Oh, there's a man. Two comments, if I may, on that. In those parables, there is a wicked servant who hid his lord's money in the ground or something. So when he was called to account, he had nothing to show for it. Just said, here's your talent back. You'll see. What worries me about that good man is what the reply he ga- gives when his master asks why didn't he use his talent. Why did you not use it? And his reply is, if I may paraphrase him, it's your fault, master. It's your fault. You're always wanting something for nothing. That's the trouble with you. You want to reap where you've not sown, and to gather up where you've never invested anything. And you're a hard man. And that's why I didn't attempt to use my talent. It's your fault. I find it difficult to think that any believer, however far gone and however fallen, would ever turn round and tell the Lord, you're always wanting something for nothing. The second point I'd like to make, we have talked about reward, but I think someone earlier hinted at least at the other side, uh, other problem, and that is not the question of work done for the Lord, but the development of Christian character. If we wish for an abundant entrance into the eternal kingdom, as distinct from an entrance, then the necessity for that is that we shall, in the power of our faith, add virtue, knowledge, perseverance, self-control, love of the brothers, love. This is not work done. This is development of Christian character. And if you do these things, you shall not fall. For in that way, the entrance into the kingdom, the eternal kingdom, not just the millennial kingdom, will be ministered to you richly. Not a question merely then of the work we have done, but whether as believers we have developed Christian character. There's someone there in a pink. Yeah, pink. Brother, just are we really saying something different, Ephesians five, Galatians five? If somebody died and left an inheritance, and I say to that person, they say, do I get any of the money? I say, I'm sorry, you have no, uh, you're not in the inheritance. That answer. Or I could say, you don't get any of the inheritance. The results is exactly the same, two ways of saying the same thing. Yes, I think it is so. Yes. Well, perhaps now we ought to move on because this is an important topic, but, uh, the time runs away, and there are other questions, uh, about inheritance, aren't they? Let's start with the one that is raised by Ephesians chapter one and verse eleven. Now my translation reads, Ephesians one verse eleven: in whom also we were made a heritage, having been foreordained according to the purpose of him who works all things after the counsel of his will. What do you understand by that phrase? Your translation may be different from mine at that point. So let's hear, if you will, what you think verse eleven means. What does it mean when it says we were made an inheritance or a heritage? Uh, someone over here? Yes, the, uh, I believe it's similar to the statement in verse 18, where we are, he prays that the eyes of our understanding be enlightened, that we may know what is the hope of his calling and what is the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints. Mm. That's an exalted position that he gives us. He brings many sons to glory, says Hebrews two. Um. Yes. We are brought into his, into the kingdom of his, of life, of his dear son. Um, we are co-heirs, joint heirs with him, Romans eight. Yes. And I think it's a remarkable thing that we could be, that he considers us his inheritance. How? Exalted position for the bride of Christ, the bride that completes him, that he considers himself incomplete without us. And even at the end of chapter one, when he speaks of the church, which is his body, the fullness of him that filleth all in all, how could possibly we be brought into such an exalted place where we are considered the fullness of him? In other words, my good, uh, brother, you're saying that, as you understand it, that verse 11 is not what we get out of salvation, but what God gets out of salvation. Yes, the verb is in the passive, uh, voice. What, what does that mean, sir? That means it's an action upon us, not... Yeah, we were made. We received that something we is done to us. We are made. Yes. We become God's inheritance. Yes, right. There's other views somewhere in the white shirt. I only want to say that we've got a textual difficulty here that most of our translations we're using here would read, in whom also we have obtained an inheritance. Oh yes. Whereas the ASV and others that follow that would say we were made a heritage. I see, yes. That's preventing in our minds, if we're reading it this way. But it's not a textual variation of manuscripts, it's just a translational difference. That's what I'm saying, it's a translational difference that in most of our minds it doesn't read. Right. I see. Most of the translate modern translations today do not translate the passive, they translate it in the active. Yes. What, if I may ask, sir, uh, seeing that it is such a translational difficulty, a a difference, to say, um, but as in all things, one has to bow to experts, as in a court of law, you listen to the experts. But at least in my country, I don't know how it is in yours, when the experts have all given their opinion, the decision is put in the hands of the layman. So I will ask you, what do you, sir, what do you, which translation do you approve of? The one I have. I do have. Yeah, probably. It's my view. I see. And so- I would, I would only say that the argument for that is, is supported in the translation of verse eighteen, because there it obviously is, in the King James, the glory of his inheritance in the saints. Yes. So the principle is still found, whether you use eleven or eighteen, that same principle is found. Yes, in other words, it's God's inheritance, what God's get- gets out of the saints. Absolutely. Yes. And both are true. And both are true. About our inheritance. That's right, and that's what I was going to bring up, that that we also have that in verse fourteen, the earnest of our inheritance. Yes. So they're both taught in that passage. Mm-hmm. There is an Old Te- uh, Old Testament, uh, verse somewhere that says the Lord's portion Mm-hmm. is his people. Anybody know where that verse is? Pardon? Would that be in the Leviticus? Well, it would be somewhere, sir, yes. Exodus 19:5. Read it aloud, if you would, sir, strong voice. The exact reference is Deuteronomy thirty two nine. Deuteronomy m thirty two nine. The Lord's portion is his people, Jacob is the lot of his inheritance. Ah. And it is worth noticing, gentlemen, hence the question, notice the coming together in that verse of three words that have to do with this matter of inheritance. Read it again, would you? Deuteronomy thirty two nine, for the Lord's portion is his people, Jacob is the lot of his inheritance. Yeah, portion, lot, and inheritance. These are the terms, uh, that the Old Testament uses of the original dishing out of the land among the people, and then in a metaphorical sense. The Lord is the portion of my cup, says Psalm sixteen. Then he uses another word, the lines are fallen unto me in pleasant places. Again, presumably going back to the surveyors who surveyed the land and marked out the different portions. And as the Israelites stood there watching, hoping for, uh, against hope that the surveyor would mark them out a very nice bit, you'll see, and some were a little bit grumpy, like the tribe of Joseph, that they got a not such a good bit, you'll see. Uh, the Psalmist is now saying, metaphorically, isn't he, that, uh, uh, the lines have fallen unto me in pleasant places. I have a goodly heritage. Gentlemen, if I ask you what is your inheritance, what is your lot, would you agree with the psalmist? The lines have fallen to you in pleasant places. You all agree? Oh, I say. You are. I think you're thinking of your spiritual inheritance, yes? In Israel, the inheritance was so many acres of land. You might nes- not necessarily think of that as spiritual. You believe that that was their inheritance from the Lord, yes? Do your material circumstances come under this? Are they part of your lot in life? Not a lot, my life. Yeah, you're part of your lot. Brother, I apply this, it might be wrong. I was raised in a Christian home with godly parents, handed the truth of the New Testament to me, and sometimes I simply say the lines have fallen to me in pleasant places. I'm looking at my Christian family heritage. I don't know if it's the right application, but it makes me feel good. Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. There's a good man over here. I think we have to, to remember Romans eight thirty two, He despaired not his own son, but delivered him up for us all. How shall he not with him also freely give us all things? Yes. If we have his son, everything else is secondary and lesser, but we still, he doesn't withhold any good thing. Good. And there's a question I have on here over here somewhere. Yes, I, I don't disagree that in the physical sense we, our lines have been drawn in pleasant places, but is that the, is that the inheritance for which Paul is talking about in Ephesians one Hm. when he, in the fullness of time, he may gather together, as Joshua does in the Old Testament, and verse eleven, he appoints by lot the inheritance, which verse thirteen and fourteen tell us it is the seal of the Holy Spirit, which is the guarantee of our redemption, of our inheritance, until that time when the redemption of the purchased possession will occur. So I guess it's a clarification on what is inheritance in the sense of how Paul is presenting it to us in these epistles. Yes, that is perfectly true. Yes, I'm trying to ask now, if I may, and ask about not merely our spiritual inheritance. That is a magnificent thing for those of us who've had it, isn't it? As our good brother over here was saying, brought up in a Christian home and early taught the scriptures. What a marvelous inheritance, call it what you will, or lot. And I think our brother would not say it was by accident, and he thanks the Lord for it. What I'm getting at now is if you start with the Old Testament, the inheritance for them originally was so many acres of land. And the evidence is that some of them thought that that was a sacred trust. Naomi, for instance, they were, uh, left because of famine. Their farm couldn't produce enough to feed them. They went down to Moab. Her husband died, her two sons died. She eventually came back, there was the farm, but as a woman with her, a daughter-in-law who was also a widow, couldn't work it. And what she was afraid of was that the name of her husband would die out on his inheritance. And that she would have felt was a desperate shame. This farm, known as a limolex farm, this was a limolex lot coming down through the family, you see, and to be the generation that lost it, so that the name was lost on the inheritance, and turned out to be Mr. Smith's inheritance. That was felt as a serious failure. Naboth was approached by the king of the time, Ahab, who wanted to extend his royal gardens, and Naboth's vineyard was in the way, so he offered to buy him out. Well, of course, in Israel, it was perfectly possible, if you wanted to, you could sell your inheritance. Many people did, but Naboth wouldn't. It was his God-given inheritance, he felt, passed down to him through the generations. When the king said, but I give you a lot of money for it, he said, money wouldn't buy it, sir. Not interested in it. This is my God-given inheritance. Are we right to look at our physical circumstances, our heredity, with all that that has brought us, as in any way controlled by God, or is that all by chance? There's a good man here wants to say something. Yeah. Go ahead. All right. Well, brother, if we can go back to, just diverge back to the Levites, and we mentioned how the Levites didn't have, and I'm, I'm, I'm probably, you know, going a long way around here. The Levites didn't have an inheritance, they didn't have a portion of the land, as it were. And I know in first Peter that we are told that we are a royal priesthood. Mm-hmm. Okay, that, that we are a chosen people, and we are a royal priesthood. So, uh, if, as the Levites were the priests of the nation, and they received, you know, that that God was their, their possession, or God was their inheritance, wouldn't that, as it were, transfer to the believer today, and the, and and knowing that the earth is the Lord's and the inhabitants thereof that relate to the possession that we have. Yes, my question, yes, yes, yes, the earth is the Lord's, uh, do you see? The, uh, and our, our portion as believers is surely the supremely important thing is the Lord is the portion of our cup. Yes. But I'm thinking of some Old Testament scriptures, when, for instance, in Deuteronomy it says that, uh, God gave Israel their inheritance. Then it says, uh, in Deuteronomy thirty two eight, when the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance. Do you believe that God gives the Gentile nations their inheritance? You do, yes. And furthermore, these things are what we would call unchangeables. What God gives us, we just can't change. The family in which we're born, we did not select our mother, our No. We did not select the gender. We did not select our personality, so to speak. We can develop it. These are unchangeable characteristics, which would seem to be designed by God. So you, you'd like to be able to say it's a, it's an inheritance. It's directly given to us from God. Mm-hmm. There's lots of hands going up. Keith? Just to amplify Deuteronomy, Acts seventeen, going back to Areopagus, Paul talking about God says, and he made of one every nation of men to dwell on the face of all the earth, having determined their appointed seasons and the bounds of their habitation. Amen. So that would seem to support the, uh, giving the bounds of the nations. Righto. Good. Keith, uh, Deuteronomy thirty two eight goes with that, the Most High divided the nations their inheritance. Mm-hmm. Thirty two eight Deuteronomy. Righto. That's her. Is there a hand up here somewhere? I want to go back to a different aspect of the, back to the Psalm sixteen. While we were believers, have in Christ all things, obviously. Psalm sixteen where it says that the lines are fallen unto me in pleasant places, as you said, the surveyor's lines, uh, even reminding us of what happened in the book of Joshua. Um, that was a providential thing. How they determined that lot, and who got what when they had to be portioned out, and what part fell to you, whether it was good ground, rocky ground, pasture ground, et cetera. I want to say beyond the scope of the national s- uh, part of it, does it not apply to us even physically? Does it not apply to abilities? Uh, does it not apply to what Randy even brought up? He was raised in a Christian home, had it handed to him on a plate. Some of us didn't, didn't appreciate it. So that in the whole scope of inheritance, and how we deal with what, as we've come to use the term in common language, our lot in life is. Whether we have, you know, the lines fall in pleasant places only because David could say that the Lord was the portion of his inheritance. David didn't have an easy road. And in that sense, there are many who don't have an easy, pleasant road, and the only thing that makes it such is that the Lord is recognized as standing sovereignly behind David. But what some people have to deal with, and I really believe this comes into the whole reward of the inheritance, what they have to overcome in life. Amen. Yes, sir, that's a, that's a very important thing. I come at it, uh, uh, uh, as you see, from, at this juncture, from a very practical point of view. Uh, people like Randy there, with a great Christian background, marvelous. Others from drunken parents with AIDS, born with sickle cell anemia or something, and we say, well, that's the result of the fall. Wait a minute. Is it then just luck? That you were born of healthy parents and have had, have got a healthy constitution and a good brain? Or can I believe that somewhere behind it, it isn't just luck? What do you hold, brothers? In your pastoral work, what do you say to the people who are born with such tremendous apparent disadvantage? It's enough to say just, well, that's the r- unfortunately the result of the fall, and it's pot luck who gets what. Or can I believe that ultimately there are no secondary causes, lots of actual secondary causes, but behind it all stands the God whose providence has controlled it. It's a hard thing for some people to say, isn't it? It's wonderful that we know God as our inheritance. The Lord is the portion of my cup. On the practical side, the question of inheritance and whether it is where I can count on this, that behind it all stands God, whose providence has ordered my ways. It's a difficult thing for some people to grasp and believe, isn't it? But it's a very important matter. Well, the time is ten o'clock, and I mustn't abuse my privilege. Thank you very much for your cooperation and, uh, uh, all your helpful remarks.