Hey folks. Happy Valentine's Day and welcome back to another edition of the Daily Bible Podcast. Hello. We have a doozy to talk about on Valentine's Day in Leviticus 18 here. Speaking of Valentine's Day, some of the unlawful relationships there that we'll get into a little bit later. But pastor Rod, are you taking Kristin to, to Paris for Valentine's Day? Like you had said you were going to? No, I'm taking her to Italy. Italy. Okay. There is a Paris, Texas though. There is Italy, Texas. We're high class people. We don't go to just Paris, we go to Italy. Yeah. Well, the whole of it. There you go. The whole thing. The whole thing. It doesn't take long, man. I've been there before. It's like one or two stop stoplights and you're through. Okay, well then in that case, it's not as impressive as I thought it was gonna be. Yeah. You know? Yeah. We've got some some family friends in town, and in fact, some of you guys know them as well. The Allens pastor, Kellen and his wife Chelsea are in visiting. They've got family out here. They're stopping by. I think they're gonna be there at church on Sunday. So if you know them, look for them. Pastor Kellen's hard to miss, so you'll see. What do you mean by that? Bro, he's six, seven and bald and, well, and what else? He's six, seven and bald. Oh, okay. Yeah. Okay. But that sounds like that could be Jared. It could be Jared, but no, Jared's got hair. He's got Well, he close enough though. He keeps it pretty short. Yeah. Anyways, you'll see Pastor Kellen there. Pastor Kellen's a good friend. We've been, you'll see why I'm giving Pastor PJ Grief here. We did we did ministry together in at Compass in, in California for quite a while. So they're here, in fact, look for them. You have a podcast that's still out there that you and Pastor Kalan used to do? I think weekly. Weekly. Yeah. Weekly. Yeah. Is it called the reformed Man podcast, or No, it's Quality Manhood Qual. I was close. Yeah. Close Reformed felt like more, it felt closer to your personality. Except we didn't have beers and beards and pipes. He should have included all those things that would've made it better. Yeah. So if you wanna hear Pastor PJ from Yesteryear. Yep. That podcast did pretty well. If I. Not mistaken. It did. It's still out there. It's still out there. It's still out there. You can find it on Spotify. You still get fan mail, apple podcasts? It's been a while. It's been a while, but I think like last, as of last year, I got somebody write, wrote an email that was like, Hey, did you guys stop updating? It's like, yeah, we, a few years ago. No. Yeah, we stopped. No, I mean, but I can't remember how many episodes there were of that. I think there's I think there's over a hundred. I don't know. Wow. We did it for quite a while. And why'd you quit? Well, because the, they were doing so well. Yeah. There was 4.9 stars. We were getting ready to move on Apple Podcast out here and it made sense to transition. So could still do it. Just re just re-up. Just have him record from there and me from here. Well, yeah, yeah. Zoom and all the cool technology that we have now. I see the last one that you did was 10 or no. No. November 5th, 2021 on drunkenness. Yeah. Mm. Yep. So there you go guys. You can look it up. It looks like it's wood. It's wood quality Manhood podcast with a wood background. Yeah. Can't miss it. Yep. So there you go. If you're interested in that, jump on. Give it a listen. If you enjoy the googly that pastor around, I have, there's some googly in that one too. So it's not as quality though. It's probably not. No, this is highbrow, ironically googly on quality manhood. No, but why? Let's get into our text and talk through Leviticus 18, 19, Matthew 27. I've got a question in Matthew 27 to run by you that I was asked. A couple weeks ago, and so I'm curious to get your thoughts on it, pastor Rod Leviticus 18 and 19. So Leviticus 18 is talking about all of the bad relationships. If I can keep it PG and just talk about it that way. We're talking about the types of relationships that aren't supposed to be that way. But before we get there, God. Reminds the people and says, you shall not do as they do in the land of Egypt where you lived. Again, anytime you, we see Egypt and Israel really from here on out, it's not gonna be a good association. The people that have been tempted to go back to Egypt from the time that they left and later on in Israel's history, Egypt is gonna be a thorn in her side still. So God is saying don't be tempted to go back. Don't do as they used to do there. And also don't do as the people in Canaan do the land that you're going to. And a lot of these things that we're gonna read about from here on out in this chapter have to do with those practices that those people were doing. And so these are going to be relationships. A lot of them have to do with family, on family relationships. And God is saying, this is not allowed. This is not okay. Now, there was a time. When it was okay, there was a time when God permitted this early on in creation. This was allowable in part because the world needed to be populated and that was gonna be the way that God went about seeing to the repopulation of the earth. But at this point in time, with the giving of the law, the advent progressive revelation, this is gonna be forbidden by God. This is not something that's okay. It's going to be even so far as an abomination. In fact, in this same chapter, he goes on to talk about the importance of marriage being, if I can put it that way, between a man and a woman. And that's it. Period. End of story. And so, grownups, adults listening to this you know what we're alluding to here, what we're talking about here. But God forbids the perversion of marriage and the perversion of the marriage acts. He says, this is not to be so, it is in fact an abomination. And so this is God making it clear, laying it out, saying This is what my law is as it pertains to the relationship between male and female. Alright? Really important question because we get, and we Christians get charged with. Double mindedness and hypocrisy all the time, especially when we start to refer to ethics that are related to a husband and wife and beyond. Why do you look at chapter 18 and say, these are binding. These still apply to the church today when you just looked at chapter 17 and said, well, of course we eat raw meat, or we can anyway, of course we can get blood transfusions because that was for. Th that was for religious Israel. That was their cultic expectations, and I cultic not in the negative sense, but cultic as in related to the life of their religious experience. Why is chapter 18 different? Because in the new Covenant, in the New Testament, we get these laws either repeated or we get instructions that reinforce what these laws were about. For example, the relationships between family members. We find that that's the problem. One Corinthians chapter six, when Paul. Confronts the church there and says, you've got a situation there that not even the Gentiles tolerate, which tells us that even the gentiles outside of the church understood that those relationships were off limits. They were taboo. And so Paul's confronting the church there in one Corinthians six saying, you need to do what this, this is sin. Put the person out of the church who's doing this. So there we get that. And then in other chapters, like Romans chapter one, we get the laws about. A husband and wife being reiterated there when Paul says that there are unnatural relations that have been perpetuated by those that are living in his day, and that is part of the, his indictment against them as fallen and deserving of the wrath of God is the fact that these unnatural relations. If I can put it that way, and you know what I'm tracking with there have been perpetuated. So these laws back here in Leviticus 18, we see them show up again in the New Testament. They're confirmed with us for in the church age versus the laws about blood aren't necessarily confirmed for us in the same way in the church age. Except for Acts chapter 15, which acts is unique because again, we deal with the question of prescriptive versus descriptive. So with the Book of Acts, because it's the launch of the early church, because the early church is coming on the scene, we're just figuring things out there. There's a lot of things we see in the book of Acts that we say, we have to ask ourselves a question, is this prescriptive or is this descriptive? And that requires some interpretation. We've talked about. Interpretation quite a bit recently in the podcast, and we have to be honest about that. This is how we understand the passage to be referring and what we understand it to be referring to. We look at the context they're trying to figure out in Acts 15, how does the church relate to now as Jews and. Gentiles, and this was something that seemed to be the best way to pursue unity as Jews and Gentiles at the time. And I think our interpretation allows us to understand that. So you're right, it is there. But again, we have to ask in Acts, prescriptive versus descriptive versus, for example, Romans. Romans is the systematic theology. This is Paul laying out. His understanding of God and Christianity in the gospel. And we see that very explicitly and plainly taught there. This is why pastors typically go to seminary for years to learn how to do this well. We're not trying to discourage you from doing this, obviously we're trying to help you understand how we work through things like this, but that's really helpful. Some of the things that don't get carried over into the New Testament, though we would still say are binding help explain some of that. So, for instance, there's things about animals here that hasn't been repeated. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. But we would still say that's a no-no. Right. We don't believe in that right now. There's other things in here about okay here's another one. There's things in here about a time of month for a lady. Mm-hmm. And whether or not things are permitted about the nature of your relationship with other related family members. There's things in here that we would say we still don't do that. Mm-hmm. But if you press us for a chapter in verse, we can't say, well, Paul said, and third Thessalonians Right. These things, right? So how do you tee some of these things out when they're not explicitly either forbidden or reaffirmed? Yeah. Some of it is you look by and large at the law of God written on the hearts of man. And you look at the fact that these acts, some of these acts are still today looked at even by those that are outside the church, those that are unbelievers as something that is grotesque and taboo and wrong and shouldn't be perpetuated. And we can look at that and say, yeah we get that. We agree with that. I don't think it needs to be reiterated. The other things as far as familial relationships outside that part of it is we owe some of this to the progression of our understanding of things and the teaching that has passed down through the ages, through church history. And as we look at the tradition of the church and what the church taught and how the church guided us, which influenced a lot of our morals and laws in society. If you look, especially in the United States, a lot of the laws, a lot of the ways that we operate as a culture are influenced heavily by scripture and by the church and by Christian teachings because that was. The background of the founders of our nation. And so a lot of that comes through and seeps through there. So we still have those things in place that we say, okay, yeah that's something that we shouldn't do because it's how we've always interpreted that. But even the animal thing that's I believe illegal. I think that's against the law. I don't know. Probably, maybe. I hope so. It should be, it should be on the law. And that's a law I can affirm. Yeah. And so I think even there, there's a, an ability to look to the laws of the land. And that's part of what I meant by even the culture. Even the world looks at these things and says this is off limits. And so we can, we don't need that necessarily repeated in the New Testament to be able to see the moral issue that's at stake there. That's helpful. And let me just give you guys a rule of thumb too. Scripture doesn't have to forbid everything. Right to say, yes, this is carried over. For instance when God normalizes a man and a woman, one husband, one wife, and he says, this is in relation to the church that excludes everything else. Yes. So he didn't have to say, don't do this, don't do that. Don't do. Good point. All he has to say is, this is what's normative. This is what I want the church to look like, and therefore everything else by definition is excluded. Now, some of the questions you might have about relations between, you know, what about a second cousin? Mm-hmm. Or a third cousin. Mm-hmm. What about, those kinds of questions that scripture doesn't speak loudly to except for places like this, those are harder to handle and say, well, what level is this no longer sin? I don't know. I don't know the answer to that. Right? That is a matter of wisdom and judgment with that, the people and hopefully with their pastors. But we can say, by and large this. The sexual ethics, the New Testament give us, really make a lot of this clear because they. It's gone by exclusion. That's a helpful rule of thumb for you to take with you. The other thing too I think those situations with external family members are gonna be fewer and farther between. As a rule of thumb, hopefully don't show up at family reunions looking for a date. That's probably just a good thing just to keep in the back of your mind. I, this is not that, this is not. I'm always, it's not my pond of fishing. Well, what if, what if? It's not like on purpose though. That's what those crazy situations. There's your second cousin and I, you're on the same website I was on. I don't know. It is weird, man. I don't know. Amanda and I knew a couple that were born in the same African village and then they moved away from each other, and then they met each other again in college in the United States, and they had to do some familial research to make sure that they were not related before they ended up getting married. Kinda cool that they still got, they got married, they were same African village, moved away, met each other again. They were like, oh wait, we need to make sure we're not like related. Yeah. Not my brother. They figured that out. My brother and sister in another way. Hey, Leviticus 19. Some more laws about offerings and different things like this but one of the things that I think is really cool in Leviticus 19 that we see. Some of the development of scripture in, in the background of another book is in verse nine. When you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap right up to its edge. Neither shall you gather the gleanings after your harvest. And the reason why he says you shall leave them for the poor and for the sojourner, I am the Lord your God. This is the background of the Book of Ruth. God is giving this law, and in his mind, he's giving this law knowing that this is going to lead to Ruth, going to the field of Boaz and beginning to glean on the edges of the field of Boaz, because this was part of the law. Boaz was not to reap up to the edges so that Ruth could go as somebody who was poor. And somebody who is needy. And that was gonna lead to Boaz, noticing Ruth and their union was ultimately gonna lead to David, which meant that Ruth is gonna be part of the line of Jesus. And so even here, we see this law has something to do with the line of Jesus, which is pretty cool to see that here in Leviticus chapter 19. There's a lot here in chapter 19. I know we've had some really tough cha chapters before this, but there's so many good things here. Chapter 19 is one of my favorites because it, it's some of the practicalities are evident, I think. Yeah. For instance, one of the things that you're gonna read at the very beginning in verse two is that you shall be holy for I the Lord your God. Him Holy Peter's gonna pick up this language. We saw this not too long ago. One Peter chapter one, verses 15 and 16. You see how God wants us to treat to those who are in need. As you just mentioned, God sets us up with Ruth in mind. I trust. But beyond that, this tells us how we're to treat those who are less fortunate than we are. He doesn't tell us give, he doesn't tell us to give a handout, although that is appropriate indication here. He says, look, let them work on the edges of your field. Let them earn their wages. There's a dignifying response to that. There's a way to serve them by saying, I'm gonna give you an opportunity to, to. To labor for yourself. And then you see the heart of God protecting the weak and the vulnerable. We should care about those things. Our job is to as you, as we're gonna see here in chapter 19, we're gonna, we're gonna love our neighbor as ourselves. So Litic Leviticus 19, Jesus is gonna pick up this same language when this, when he's asked, what's the greatest commandment? And he says, love the Lord your God. We get that one. But here, love your neighbor as yourself, the foreigner too. In verse 34, he says, you shall love you shall love. The stranger who sojourns among you as the native, you love him as yourself. So don't just love your neighbor, love your stranger. That takes it even a step further for us because it helps us to see the heart of God is not just for a tribal, like the guy next door. It's for everybody. And that really helps reframe my understanding of loving your neighbor as yourself. 'cause people ask as a Lord did. Who's my neighbor? Right? Right. And he's like, I got you Checkmate. And Jesus is like, well actually everybody's that's, and that was the whole idea of the parable. Of the prodigal son. No, no. Not the prodigal son. No. The good Samaritan. Good. Thank you. Good Samaritan. Yes. I always get those two confused. Same here. I was gonna, I was saying the first one, but in my, yeah. Okay. Leviticus 19, rich don't go fast. Yeah. In fact, Leviticus 1918, you shall not take vengeance or bear grudge against the sons of your own people, but you should love your neighbor as yourself. That's what we talked about last Sunday is what we're talking about a little bit more tomorrow in first Peter as well. Some good background here to that. Alright, let's get over to our New Testament reading. Matthew 27 32 through 66. This is going to be the scene of the death of Jesus. And so the crucifixion which I'm always struck and I believe all of the gospel writers do this. They don't go into a whole lot of detail about the actual act of the crucifixion. They simply summarize it with there they crucified him and this is what Matthew does here as well. When they had crucified him, they divided his garments among them by casting lots. And so Jesus is on the cross in the rest of our reading here in chapter 27. And there's a scene here in verse 45. It says, now, from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land until the ninth hour. And about the ninth hour, Jesus cried out with a loud vo voice saying, Eli, Eli lema, akani. That is my God. My God. Why have you forsaken me? Now this is the question that I ran into. My wife and I were out somewhere and I was. Talking with somebody that, that was there and he was a man that was dressed in Muslim guard. And he came out and he sat down. And we were together out kind of in a waiting area. And so I looked at him and I was like, man, you know what I need to go talk to the guy. And he had his phone out and I was wondering, what are you doing? Are you reading sports scores? What are you? So I go over there. And he had his Quran on his phone, and so he was just religiously, literally reading over his Quran over and over and over again. So I introduced myself and started talking with him, and we got into a gospel conversation and he pointed to this verse, and he said, when Jesus said, my God, my God, why are you forsaken me? He said, is that not complaining? Was that not Jesus complaining? While he was on the cross to God. In other words, implying that this may have been Jesus sinning as he's on the cross crying out, my God, my God, why have you forsaken me? Pastor I'd love to get how you would respond to that question. That's such a good question. I like it. I love hard questions. I think that's a hard one because. You you, okay. So the correct answer we're gonna say is no, no, of course not. Jesus wasn't sending right. But how is that the correct answer? Right? And how you get there is really important. So I was gonna say I think one of the things that Jesus is self-aware of is that he is fulfilling scripture. Yeah. His job as he understands it, was sent to seek and to say the loss. And he does that by fulfilling the will of the father. And he does so in self-awareness that he is fulfilling scripture. In fact, we just read that a couple days ago in Matthew chapter 26, verse 56, all this has taken place at the scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled. So Jesus is doing this with intention. Also, Jesus is not just making this up himself. Jesus is quoting a psalm that is also a Psalm of lament. The Psalm of lament is, I guess you could say, a holy complaint. Now, Psalms of lament are one of the ways that you are allowed to approach God with your sorrows and your worries, and so it's not technically complaining. Complaining says, I'm dissatisfied at the way you're doing things. I could do it better. Holy complaining, on the other hand, is a posture of humble surrender saying, this is what I feel. Yeah. And that's, it was true. It might feel from the human perspective that Jesus felt abandoned by God, such that the words find their ultimate super fulfillment in Jesus. Mm-hmm. These words repented by David, but their fulfilled in Jesus, where Jesus says, he says and means them. So it's a true statement. Yeah. But it's not a complaining statement in the way that you and I would think about it. It's a psalm of lament that communicates the humanity of Jesus. Mm-hmm. Feeling the abandonment of his father. This, the wrath of God being poured out upon him. What would you say? Yeah. And that's what my answer was as well. I think this is the humanity, the same thing. Humanity of Jesus. Same thing, word for word. Crazy. No, I think this is the humanity of Jesus and I think just like when David would say my how long, oh Lord. I don't know that David was in sin. In those moments, I think he was expressing his anguish in asking the question. Now the difference is here, this is the omniscient God son of God who is, who's on the cross. Now, is this part of his kenosis? Is this part of his veiled humanity? Is this similar to when he said no one knows the day or hour? And so is he asking this in his humanity as an expression of his veiled humanity, his veiled deity here saying, my God, my God, why have you forsaken me? Just feeling the full weight of his sin? Maybe. But I agree with you. I think this is him stepping into the fulfillment of the prophecies, and I think this is him intentionally quoting from that psalm saying this is what David was talking about. David was really looking forward to this moment right here. Do you agree with him that it's a complaint? No. No. It's not a complaint. No. What would you call him? What would you call this? I think he's. He's asking a legitimate question. I think in his humanity, he's asking the question of the father, my God, my God, why? Why have you forsaken me? But he knows that's not true though. Right? But it's expressing the feeling of the weight of the sin that he's bearing. I think it's him and his, he's acknowledging the heaviness of this. And that's why I think it's helpful that this is a quotation. If this wasn't a quotation, I think we got problems because I think it is more of a, Jesus is questioning this, but I think because it is the quotation back from the Psalm, I think he's looking back at that, fulfilling that, but also just saying, man, this is the moment of the greatest sense of anguish that the Sun is gonna have while he is on the cross. Let me give you some language to work with this guys. This is not literally true. As I just told Pastor PJ and affirmed, we would affirm the father never abandoned Jesus, right? He's not forsaken him. He's not rejected him. That's never happened. So it's not literally true, but it is emotionally true. When Jesus is communicating this, he is citing a psalm, which is poetry. It's not meant to be strictly understood as a literal device, right? As we talked about earlier, when Jesus utilizes different literary devices, he does so with awareness that you're going to understand him. And so here, he's not complaining. He is lamenting, which is different. It's a godly complaint, a godly sorrow, and he's doing so with awareness that is not literally true. He knows it's not true, but it's emotionally true. We have you not felt that. You feel something emotionally and you're like, man. It feels like God is far or God is not there, or God has abandoned me. Mm-hmm. But I know it's not true. It's not true. It feels true. And you do no disservice to God when you communicate that to him with humility. Mm-hmm. And utter dependence. Right. I love when my kids tell me what they feel. If they, even if it's not true, it's like, oh, I feel like you don't listen to me. I feel like you're not paying attention. And I want to hear that. It's not true, but I want to hear that. And so, in a similar sense, Jesus is citing something that is not literally true, but emotionally true. How do you feel about that? Is that okay? I saw it in your face, which is why I give you the chance to respond to that yes, as long as we're not saying that he is knowingly. Perpetuating a falsehood or a lie? No. No. Right. Every psalm not every Psalm, many psalms communicate things that are not literally true, but that's not their intention. They're not saying from a wooden, right? Literal. And when I say literal, I mean, a wooden approach to the text, right? When David said this, he knew that that was not literally true. Psalm 22 does not meant to, does not mean to communicate God, you literally abandoned me or rejected me. He's saying emotionally, this is what I feel like. Right. Be And we know that because if we read the whole, the totality of Psalm 22 I'm pretty sure this is one of the Psalms where David ends with hold on, let me get there. Psalm 22. I'm looking for it, but I can't find it right now. Okay. My point is you can say something that is not meant to be literally interpreted. But it's still true. It's just not true from a literal sense. It's true. An emotional sense, and I'm tracking with you. I guess I'm just uncomfortable with saying it's not literally true, and I understand what you're saying. I just to say that Jesus says something that's not true in any capacity gives me, is what gives me power. Jesus says, cut off your right hand, not literally. True. Right. But even that, I don't know if I would describe it that way because I just think that opens the door to Jesus is saying something untrue? I think it's a metaphorical statement. Right. So it's not literally true. You would not say, Jesus intended for you to say, chop off your actual right hand. Yes. And we're dealing with semantics, but I don't think I would say he said something that is not true. I don't think I would say anything literally true. Right. And I hear the qualifier. I still, I wouldn't say it that way. All right. Because I think it. It could create an opportunity for stumbling. Yeah. It's like when David said, will you forget me forever? How long? Oh Lord, will you forget me forever? Yeah. He knew he wasn't gonna forget him forever. Yeah. He had the promise that he's gonna be anointed as the king. So he did not intend for anyone to take that literally. Right. He was expressing poetically. Right. He was expressing, to your point, how he felt in that moment. It's emotionally true. It feels like this. Yeah. This is how it feels right now, and I think that's what we see from Jesus on the cross as he cries, that I feel so comfortable saying, not literally true, but emotionally true, and it still communicates the same thing. Jesus speaks authoritatively and absolutely. But that does not mean everything he says is meant to be understood. But the literal precision that you and I might use today if we're writing a term paper. Yeah. He, Jesus uses literary devices and we're to follow the rules of those literary devices to understand him for what he means. Yes. Yes, I was talking to them, not you. Sorry. I would only say, I think everything he said is true and that's where I would say not everything he said was meant to be taken literally, but everything that he said is true. Same thing different emphasis on the different S level. Anyways, this chapter is massively significant to say that is an understatement. This is the chapter where Jesus dies. He yields up his spirit in verse 50. At that moment, the temple curtain is torn two. Giving us access. You've got more Lazarus here in Matthew, which is one of the crazy things. 'cause Matthew's the only one that records this is they come out of the tombs and they're gonna walk around for a while. This is a testimony to that leads to that man that the soldier standing there saying that truly this was the son of God that the death of Jesus was literally earth shaking. And it was something that transformed the people that were there. It transformed history and it set the stage for the even greater miracle, which is gonna be his resurrection, which we'll read about next time that we are together. The question that everyone has, everyone, and maybe we don't have time to, to run through it, is how could this possibly take place and not. Make the news all over the world. You got people jumping outta tombs. Yeah. Well, part of this is the news. We didn't have Twitter this day. We didn't have Facebook, we didn't have Instagram. We didn't have 24 7 news networks. People weren't releasing the Daily j Jerusalem bugle at this time. And so news didn't spread nearly as fast and as wide and as in the same ways as it does today. If this happened today, yeah, it would be all over the place. People would have their phones out recording it, everything else. So just because we don't have it recorded in a. Broad variety of places doesn't mean that it wasn't something that actually took place. We've mentioned before that the, for example the death of the children two years and under that Herod ordered Yeah. That was a generally small geographic region. This, likewise was a generally small geographic region in. In the world history on the world stage. And so these, that came outta their tombs, Matthew was aware of it, but it doesn't mean that worldwide it would've been something that everybody was aware of, or even Jerusalem wide. It would've been something that everybody was aware of. So, I think that accounts for why. And you didn't have people walking around with their pen and paper out going, oh, I need to write this down, submit it as an article. But what we do know is when Paul's gonna give witness later on in the book of Acts and stand before the governor, he's gonna say, you guys know these things took place. They didn't happen in a corner. You're aware of them. And so Paul's gonna appeal to eyewitnesses and he's gonna say, you wanna go talk to people? There's still people alive that saw the same things that I'm talking about right now. So if you wanna talk to people, you can go interview people. So the Bible's not hiding what took place or saying, we've got the corner on this. Don't talk to anybody else. Just trust us blindly. They're saying, Hey, you can go verify these things. But I think it was a different time, different culture. That's why we don't have a lot of. Evidence of it. Verse 53 also says here that they came outta their tombs after his resurrection, which is an important feature because this is not chronological. Jesus is dying. He's just placing it to him. But he's Peter not Peter. Matthew is noting what's gonna happen at his resurrection. I find it curious why he put it here. I'm not sure exactly what he's trying to do, but this is meant to be understood as when he resurrects after he resurrects. He's, 'cause he's the first root. Yeah. Those came with him. And that's a good point. Another question I have that I don't have an answer to is what happened to them? Yeah. Did they die again? Did they ascend with Christ at some point? Did. I don't know. Right. I just don't know. Yeah. Anyways, well, hey, let's pray and then we'll be done with this episode. Lord, we have so many questions and we will be able to ask a lot of them when we are with you in eternity. We'll be able to talk to some of these I trust when we are in eternity, who may have been some of those that were resurrected and maybe they did go to be with you and we'll get to ask those questions. But Lord, we are grateful for what we just read about. We're grateful that Jesus, that you died for us in our place that you suffered so much to, to cry out. My God, my God, why have you forsaken me for us, because of our sin laid upon you and so that we can be forgiven, that we can have. A hope of being with you in the future someday to ask these questions. Even it all comes back to what we just read about, and that is your death on our place. And so we're so thankful for that. We glorify you, we praise you for that, and we ask that you would help us to walk in faithful obedience to you until you come back and call us home to be with you and we pray this all your name and name of Jesus. Amen. Hey, keep bringing those bibles. Tune in again tomorrow for another edition of the Daily Bible Podcast. See you then. Bye.

Thank you for listening to another episode of the Daily Bible Podcast. We’re grateful you chose to spend time with us today. This podcast is a ministry of Compass Bible Church in North Texas. You can learn more about our church at compassntx.org. If this podcast has been helpful, we’d appreciate it if you’d consider leaving a review, rating the show, or sharing it with someone else. We hope you’ll join us again tomorrow for another episode of the Daily Bible Podcast.