 In this video I'm going to provide a public response to a comment left by a channel called Seeking the One Saved on the Repent of Your Sins documentary that I recently released concerning Isaiah 59-20. So I recently released the documentary Repent of Your Sins it's called and it's set out to show that the Bible or at least the King James translation anyhow, it never verbatim says the phrase Repent of Your Sins to be saved and the arguments were in summary that the exact word Repent is never coupled with the word of sins and obviously there are similar phrases such as Repent of This Thigh, Wickedness and so on and so forth and we did have a whole section that when turning from sin is the context of repentance it's addressed to God's people believe it's not telling unsaved people that unsaved sinners have to be saved on to eternal life. So turning from sin is a biblical concept which we did argue in the documentary I did point that out and it was addressed with a whole chapter in the documentary to deal with that issue but what I did was I decoupled it from salvation so I'm saying that it's not a step to be saved on to eternal life. Now modern Bibles rephrase certain verses and they substitute the word Repent with other words so in context where sin is not applicable such as God Repenting they'll substitute that word with a different word like God Relented and so the reader then starts to assume that Repent always means to turn from sin and I also showed in the documentary that some translations such as the New Living Translation artificially injects the words of your sins after repentance in several key verses and it's not just the NLT translation itself that does this a lot of people when they read the Bible inject those words as well so someone will take a statement like Repent you and believe the Gospel and they'll read it as Repent of your sins and believe the Gospel. So there's this guy whose channel is called Seeking the One Saved and he commented on the documentary citing Isaiah 59-20 now he didn't bother to actually provide the quote we just you know he just said where to go for it and this was his proof text that the entire documentary was wrong and I should therefore delete it so just above his comment I've shown you the King James rendering of the verse so it says and the Redeemer shall come to Zion and unto them that turned from transgression in Jacob saved the Lord so you know perfectly consistent with my documentary it doesn't say Repent it says turn and it doesn't say of your sins it says from transgression okay so he's applying but I guess he's taking that to mean that it's a salvation verse it is something that you have to do to be safe so I'll talk a little bit about that in this video to review what he's saying basically so let's just have a quick look at who this guy is so the name of his channel might at first trick people within the free grace community because when you see the words one saved you think of one saved always save that's what you normally think of so when I first saw this guy you know I thought it was one of those kind of channels I thought oh this guy is probably gonna be you know free grace and it does do several videos where he essentially contends for faith alone so he's having a lot a lot ago a lot of people that I would also have a go at like Keith at white city preachers and you see unapologetics because they're sort of like front-loading works on to the gospel if you like so he's ripping on them because you know as if he's advocating for faith alone and sometimes even includes clips by free grace people like Craig Jackson and sometimes arguably as if he's taking their side in a particular issue but then all you have to do is go on his about page and you see that he does actually believe that Christians can lose their salvation okay so it's kind of weird that he doesn't exactly fit in anywhere really because people you see people on on the sort of free grace side they'll look at all his faith alone oh great this guy believes in faith I don't know but he believes in conditional security so he's not really one of us but then people like a PUC unapologetics and white city preachers they all agree with him on conditional security but they wouldn't have anything to do with him because it seems as if he gives a lot of lip service to faith alone so it's kind of weird it's kind of a weird category that at first this guy sort of puts himself in but then well in one of his videos he's sort of commenting on here and about the whole faith and works issue see if I can find exactly what what you said we overcome sin by continuing to believe if we proceed in faith we proceed in in works and so on and so off so he's trying to equate that you must have works if the faith is valid and so when you follow that to his logical conclusion you really explore what he believes he's purely arguing with like these guys over semantics because yeah they do sometimes say that they believe in works to be safe but if you actually listen to their arguments it's still really the same arguments that this guy's proclaiming well it is by faith but you know you will have the works if it's really by faith and this comment I mean if he's arguing that we have to repent of our sins to be saved well he doesn't believe in faith alone then does it he believes in you have to have faith and you have to repent of your sins okay so his channel hasn't really been around for very long I mean I'm currently doing this video in about august 2022 so he only really started a year ago so he's not much younger than my channel really but well I recently overtook him in subscribers probably fairly recently despite the fact that he's got far more content than I have and a lot of his videos have got a lot more views than most of my videos on my repentance stuff will have probably sort of boosted my subscriber count by now but I would have expected that because he's got several hundred views on some of these videos whereas I've only got a few dozen on mine he would have more subscribers than that but the thing is he doesn't really fit in anyway so you know who's going to subscribe to him because he doesn't belong in free grace but he won't sandwich himself with these conditional security advocates either so you know a goodness knows what this guy's trying to pull but you know he never shows his face and we don't know his name so I'm always a little bit suspicious of people like that I don't mean he's wrong but I'm just naturally suspicious of them so that that's essentially who he is in a really short nutshell okay so he's quoting that verse essentially to say that the the documentary was was wrong and that I should just delete the whole documentary based on on that now there are a few things that I've overlooked and you know I'll have to come clean about those in this video but I'll just give you the full stories to what's going on just to clarify just to make sure nobody's trying to manipulate me or misunderstand me deliberately the documentary did not say that turning from sin is unbiblical or foreign to the bible the whole section on it okay what it what it did assert is that turning from sin should be decoupled from salvation so and when I say turn from sin I don't just mean recognizing oneself as a sinner that needs saving but but actually turning from it to stop doing it okay I argue that turning from sin and stop doing that sin should not be coupled with salvation that's what the documentary was saying okay so you know workspace gospels they couple it with salvation I repent of your sins to be saved it's not just acknowledging that you're a sinner and that you need a savior you actually have to turn walk in obedience be willing to give up things etc etc that's that's what that crowd essentially do now Isaiah 59 20 was alluded to in the documentary I just didn't actually provide the quote for it okay I didn't do any work on it I didn't do any interpretation of it so at the point about an hour and 47 minutes in sorry I seem to have lost my mouse here for a minute so about an hour and 47 minutes in and a half this is where I was going through some of the Protestant reformers who were using this terminology or very similar terminology where repentance is being equated with of their sin and so I provided a quote from John Calvin which I found in this book you see their Institute for Christian Religion Volume 3 and this is John Calvin's quote so Calvin said a redeemer will come to Zion and to those in Jacob who repent of their sins and so what I said in the documentary was that he's paraphrasing Isaiah 59 20 this is not a direct quote because as you saw from the previous screen well the King James anyway says turn from transgression doesn't say repent of their sins okay similar wording but it's not the same words though so that that's a paraphrase it's not a direct quote now I'm not sure like you know as the as we know today Bible translation I'm not sure what Calvin would have used but as far as I understand he did understand Hebrew and Greek I think so he could have gone to original source it is possible maybe he read a Bible that perhaps reads a bit more like that but that's not really you know it's not entirely accurate quote because it says transgression and it says turn so that's how a lot of Bibles will translate that verse okay now I think some French Bibles might be a bit different and I know he was French but I don't really know enough about that to comment to be honest maybe that maybe that specific point wasn't as researched as I could have done just because that I wasn't really focusing a lot on that bit really but I was just showing that how that that catchphrase is sort of creeping its way in here and there but it said basically the claim is that that's that's a paraphrase that that's not actually what what the verse says exactly okay now there is a small confession I have to make I did actually overlook covering Isaiah 59-20 directly or strongly just for several reasons first of all I did not claim in the documentary that the Bible never says to turn from sins or that it's a completely unbiblical concept what it did claim is that the specific word repent is never coupled with the specific word sin or of sin rather which in the King James Bible that that is true and I made a distinction between repentance for salvation so turn to God believe and repenting of sins quote unquote for somebody who is already a believer that was the point of the documentary I didn't cover most of the turn versus because I was dealing primarily with repentance as is translated in the in the King James Bible so you know we usually accept that turning is a general word we can turn from all kinds of things you can turn from this you can turn from that sometimes sin is the context of turning but not always and we all accept that but it's the fact that when people see the word repentance they automatically assume it's obvious in they won't acknowledge that repentance can mean other things to turn from just like the word turn okay I did think that dedicating an entire chapter in the documentary to turning from sin as the context of repentance would provide enough clarity on my position about those verses but apparently not hence is common now this this one I wasn't aware of I was not aware that the new international version does actually translate Isaiah 5920 as repent of their sins and I didn't realize that making the documentary so I'll give you the reasons why that is so if you look at Isaiah 5920 on on Bible hub obviously this gives you a bunch of different translations and you'll see that most of what we tend to regard as the accurate translation so like King James ESV the the NASB and so on they mostly most of them anyway say turn from transgression that's how they translate the you know it's the Hebrew word for turn and it's the Hebrew word for for transgression and that's in the singular form as well you can go down and see that it's in the um sorry it's not scrolled in here you can go down and see that it's in the singular form if you if you find that down there in the concordance now in the NIV that's where it translates it as repent of their sins and that's actually that's a minority translation that that's not how other Bibles translate it now before the King James only is to throw their hands up you know in outrage because the NIV is translated turn as repent just be aware that the King James Bible does sometimes translate the Hebrew word for turn as repent in some some verses and I can tell you why that that is in a moment but I didn't realize that the NIV translates this verse in that way now I'll show you why I missed it okay so for people who who read the King James Bible we've got this brilliant tool here and on the kingsbible.com there's a concordance section okay and I can essentially search for any word in here and it will it will search in the concordance by the English word not the Hebrew or Greek word right so if I type in if I can spell it correctly I can type in repent there we go I can do a search and it will just show me all the verses that that say repent now I would have to search for repented or repenteth or whatever it is you know separately but it would give me all the verses that say repent in the English King James Bible irrespective of what the underlying Hebrew or Greek is so in this column this tells me what the underlying Hebrew references so I know that in these two verses for for instance that Hebrew word there is not the same as that Hebrew word there so if you were searching in a concordance by the Hebrew word you wouldn't get both of these results you'd get one or the other whereas in English you know it's given me the search for any Hebrew or Greek whatever the underlying word is if it's translated as repent in the King James Bible it will give me that that verse so it's really easy to search by the King James to look for verses that have the appropriate keyword in it okay now as I mentioned just like the NIV does in Isaiah 59-20 the King James does occasionally translate the Hebrew word for turn as repent instead I think it's turn or return but you can understand when you translate it into English it does make sense why they've done that because if it said return and turn or turn and turn it would kind of read a bit silly in English so it tends to use the word repent when it's kind of a standalone word but then it'll translate turn you know when there is some context to the word so the King James does it as well it's not not just the NIV that's doing it there so you can't entirely say that the NIV is wrong to use the word repent but here's the problem when you try and use when you don't use the King James or you just want any Bible translation it becomes a lot hard to search what you're looking for so if I go on Bible hub and type in repent it gives me a few suggestion words versus sorry but it doesn't actually list all of them and really it's giving me a few articles about the Hebrew word but it's not listing all of the verses in a concordance and it won't give me all of the verses across all translations where they happen to use the English word repent and the search is really more to do with the Hebrew than it is to do with the English as I just said the King James has got a really good concordance so I can go on a search engine type in kjv concordance and the chances are this website is going to be the first thing that comes up so straight there search a word find the verses it's as easy as that I find that when you're trying to search for an NIV online concordance or an ESV online concordance or just any other translation there's almost nothing because a lot of these concordances they're not really a concordance in the same way that this is a concordance you can't just type in a word and get all the verses that you want and a lot of the time it's just book sales like it's trying to sell me a book that I can buy on Amazon well I don't want a book that I can buy I just want an online concordance where I can search a word and you will show me in your bible every verse where you've translated that word maybe other people know that something that I don't I just I always find it really difficult to search in non-King James Bibles for that same facility I don't know why so that's another reason why I kind of end up missing the fact that the NIV translates it differently. Now one of them I think this bible study tools does have an NIV concordance but first of all going there straight from a search engine doesn't take me to what I need for a start so you know I'm already lost on this website already. I eventually when I do find the page I didn't even realize it had a concordance because when I search for the word there and find it I get all of this big long explanation that I didn't ask for and I have to scroll all the way down for the concordance and so there is the Isiah 5920 where you know it shows that the NIV has translated this as repent there and so there are kind of the reasons why I missed it and I wasn't aware that the NIV translates it that way so obviously if you're reading an NIV bible and you saw the documentary well you're going to open Isiah 5920 and think well it does say repent of sins. I mean there is this this guy's you know talking completely rubbish you know if you happen to use the NIV but it's not just the fact that it says repent of sins though it's because the the guy who commented seeking the one saved he's making it a salvation verse essentially but let's take a look here what's the controversy well the document the documentary decoupled turning from sin as a salvation requirement asserted that to be saved the requirement is to believe on him not turn over a new that's why I meant to put leave not alive there and you know starting to fix one's life so he's essentially using this verse to argue that it is actually a salvation requirement he says that redeeming shall come to Zion and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob says the Lord okay now my reply to this not realizing that the NIV translates it differently is that in a word count it doesn't say repent of your sins and I didn't go on to say but it doesn't even say to be saved okay you know he's making it a salvation verse when I wouldn't necessarily but my argument was that those who turn from transgression according to Isaiah 59-20 are God's own people because it said people in Jacob okay God's people so I'm making the assertion that God's people are the ones who need to turn from their sins not the unsaved publicans and harlors okay now in his reply I think he misunderstood when I said God's people I think he seemed to misunderstand that for sort of fleshly Jews or you know Jews by the bloodline that you are saying that Jews need to repent of their sins to be saved right well no and so I clarified my position on that Jews need to repent of rejecting Jesus they need to repent of their false religion of Judaism putting down the alcohol and you know not calling their leaders rabbi anymore that's not going to get them saved okay so I really clarified what the documentary already points out is that turning from sin is a command to God's people not the unsaved person he needs to repent of his unbelief he needs to repent from what he's trusting in and I gave a verse to show that you know that the chastisement of the Lord and so on and so and so he says then that makes no sense you are saying that the Jews can fail to turn from transgression and still be saved that's not what Isaiah 59-20 says now he goes on to quote it and notice how he quotes it here so he says it says the Savior comes to them that turns from their transgressions and so he says it's a very poor documentary etc etc that you know I'm wrong I'm making stuff up with a very high word count apparently of course you know they never mind the fact that the documentary had dozens and dozens and dozens and dozens of bible verses he's got one so then you know he wins the debate apparently that's that's that's how it works but there you go and so in my next reply you know I basically well in a nutshell I said that the bible's full of examples where it told people to believe on him John's gospel is deliberately written to tell people out of eternal life and it doesn't tell them to turn from their sin so it's not a very good book if it doesn't mention that step that he says is essential and so I accuse them of essentially blaspheming Jesus by accusing Jesus of preaching a false gospel to all of those different people and I pointed out that when Jesus said go and sin no more he didn't mention eternal life or believing on him so it's not the context of that statement now I didn't get a further reply which you know I don't believe in for that I mean you know the bible doesn't command us to just debate people to death and quarrel and argue with people so you know I'm not I'm not sort of calling him out for not replying to that but I don't really know how you can reply to that to be honest but I didn't hear back from him after that point but I thought well in none of my replies I've not really given a breakdown of Isaiah 59 20 and you know why I assert that it's referring to God's people exactly so I thought I'd kind of do this video to sort of go go through it okay now I want to show you something that is doing here this is the elephant in the room I mentioned just a few slides ago that the documentary showed that that people read the bible and they artificially inject their own words into it so the bible says repent and believe the gospel and they read repent of your sins and believe the gospel or turn from your sins and believe the gospel but those two think that's not what that verse says verse says repent and believe the gospel that's what it says and so he's doing something very similar here so let me show you his comment again so he says it says so Isaiah 59 20 says the saviour comes to them that turn from their transgressions so first of all it doesn't say the saviour it says the redeemer seeking the one saved that's what it actually says doesn't say saviour okay and in fact all major translations that I know of saviour redeemer because that's what it says okay it says transgression in the singular not the plural okay now the the niv as we when we looked at it in the niv the niv makes it plural okay the nlt makes it plural now someone could probably find me a verse somewhere in the bible where the king james quotes that you know makes a verse plural in other bibles make it singular based on the underlying hebrewary I don't speak hebrew or greek I can't comment on what's the more accurate translation but seen as the bibles that we regard as the most accurate translations such as the king james or the esv or etc they say transgression singular okay so i'm just going to assume that the expert committee of bible translators in the king james bible know how to translate that word and remember that the niv is not as formally equivalent as other translations there are parts where they deliberately rephrase it to quote one quote make it easier for the people for their readers so it's not sins it's transgression okay no plural and that's what it says see he's quoting as the plural but it's not in the plural it says transgression singular okay next thing to draw your attention to is see where it says the not the saviour but the redeemer comes to them that turn from their transgression see he's equating that with salvation well see saviour comes to them who turn from their transgression if you haven't turned from your transgression the saviour is not going to come to you and you're not going to get saved so you know we need to break down what that actually means saviour comes to them and is that even equivalent to salvation is that even what that means okay and so you know essentially he's misquoting the verse now we've all been guilty of this i've had to apologize on my channel various times for misquoting a few verses in there and sometimes it was actually very embarrassing because i once quoted john ten my sheep here and obey my voice well it doesn't say and obey and i was trying to refute somebody who's always trying to put works in the gospel so you know we've all been guilty of that but but he is misquoting it it doesn't say the saviour comes to them that turn from their transgressions it says the redeemer shall come on to Zion and on to them that turn from transgression okay so you know it's very important that you quote it correctly if you're going to argue a strong case for something so let's have a quick look through as i see what what's really going on okay so the first thing to as i've just mentioned is that he misquotes the first it doesn't say saviour it says redeemer okay now a saviour is one who saves a redeemer he's one who redeems the difference is that to be saved is to be rescued or preserved from an undesirable outcome i saved from the condemnation of hell on to eternal life redeeming though is a different word and it actually means to claim back what is either rightfully yours or was originally yours to begin with such as to buy back or win back or it can also mean to change for the better or return or make amends for now if i'm arguing that the context is god's own people well that makes perfect sense god is just getting back what's already his to begin with okay now the problem that you have with prophecy books like isiah is that sometimes that there's not really a lot of context as to who he was preaching to where he was preaching how he preached you know was it in a pulpit was it in the street whatever it was and what was when with the subject or the situation changed so we have a lot of prophecies in isiah we don't always have a lot of background as to what exactly he was addressing okay so sometimes you know is it is it targeting god's people spiritually is it talking targeting the nation of israel physically or you know is it trying to address both points of view is it pointing to jesus first coming or is it pointing to his second coming or you know is it not pointing to neither of those events we don't always know okay so rather than just quote mining 59 20s if that dismantles the documentary containing dozens and dozens and dozens of verses we're going to just look at the chapter before the chapter in and the chapter afterwards to get some context okay so starting in 58 one who is isiah addressing well it says cry aloud spare not lift up thy voice like trumpet and show my people their transgression so i'm just going to highlight that for our dear friend seeking the one saved okay because that's kind of my position when the bible says to turn from transgression it's addressed to god's own people okay it's not telling unsaved public and how to be saved okay so that's the context who is addressing right here all right now this this is an all negative folks now when you read that there that's negative okay there's the sin amongst my people that's a negative but then look here we kind of have a positive here now he's saying it kind of as a criticism but it's positive in itself they seek me daily so despite the fact that my people they have their sins yet they seek me daily and delight to know my ways as a nation that did righteousness and so on and so on and so he actually starts to use positive language about them and that's a bit like when you read Jesus letters to revelation the church is in revelation it wasn't always negative he told them the things that they were doing right and he told them the things that we were doing wrong okay both of them okay it's not all negative all right the next few verses it's kind of about the people they're doing a fast and it's not really the specific type of the fast that the Lord would like don't really think he can make any salvation points out of that to be honest so but then you'll notice that once we get to verse nine we have more of this positive language you shall call and the Lord shall answer you shall cry and he shall say here i am and so on and so on and we've got we've got more positive language you've got the Lord will guide you continually and satisfy your soul so we've got a lot of good things here it's not you know it's not all negative about all these wicked sins of these terrible wicked unsaved sinners okay there's there's bits of positive there's bits of negative okay and that that carries on for a few more verses okay so that's that's kind of you know setting the premise of chapter 59 chapter 58 is addressing God's own people and we've got some positives as well as negatives okay now in verse one it says behold the land that the Lord's hand is not shortened that it cannot save okay now you know someone will take that we'll see you know cannot save you know this is about eternal life but the thing is though folks there are other things he can be saved from okay and there are examples in the Old Testament of how God judged his people by taking them out of their land and sending a drought and all this kind of stuff and so that save can literally apply to anything okay eternal hellfire is not being spoken about here great condemnation is not being spoken about here so there's no eternal damnation context behind the word save there okay you see false prophets they love vague scripture like this where it's not always clear what the salvation is you know because he believes in conditional security right you know it's like how they always quote he who enjoys to the end shall be saved we'll see right there you know to be saved on to eternal life you need to enjoy to the end yeah go back and read the verse it has nothing to do with eternal life because it's talking about end time stuff and tribulation it's not talking about eternal life but you know they just they just quote mine all the time with absolutely no context whatsoever now you know in the last chapter we saw some positive language now we're starting to see some negative language so you know your iniquities have separated between you and your God in your sins of his faith from you now they again they often make that as like hellfire thing because it's separated between you and your God and that's this misunderstanding that hell is eternal separation from God okay now let me tell you those atheists like Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins they love to be eternally separated from God okay problem is that the Bible actually says that hell is in the presence of the lamp in the presence of his holy angels so no hell is not separation from God in that manner of speaking it's the very opposite of that okay people in hell wish they were separated from God so we've we've got more negative language here you know this is this is negative stuff now non-calls for justice non-pleads the truth they all trust in vanity they speak lies conceive mischief and bring forth iniquity so there's a few things going on here but this justice thing is something that that's going to keep cropping up as we progress through this chapter now this bit here in verse five they hatch a coctress eggs and weave the spider's webs either eats or their eggs dies and that which is crutch breaks out into a viper now this is quite a poetic statement isn't it it's not really very clear what that means it's kind of a metaphor if you like you know not not really very clear on what that means it's quite poetic and again false prophets love verses like that because anything that's poetic they can use it however they want okay so again our dear friend seeking the one save believes in conditional security well what's one of the key passages that they like to go to john 15 about the the branch has been cutting off if they don't abide funnily enough that that passage doesn't mention eternal life directly you show them john six and john ten which does mention eternal life that jesus will lose nothing and non-jobby plucked out of my hand they reject that because of john 15 which doesn't mention eternal life and it's quite poetic you know is it we're not literal wooden branches attached to a big wooden tree that's christ you know it's quite you know it's a bit of an analogy there but they love that stuff because it's so easy for them to abuse it and then throw away all the clear scripture that's not being poetic at all when jesus says i give them on to eternal life no man shall ever pluck them out of my hand i should lose nothing he ain't being poetic folks okay you know not really any other way he can interpret that statement so in the next verses we start he starts to list everything that's going wrong they won't cover themselves with their works because their works are are works of iniquity so you know a bit of background so you know there is a lot of sin going on there is a lot of wickedness but we're not really dealing with a saved person versus an unsaved person this is god's own nation that's that's gone astray essentially and so here's this justice theme reoccurring again there's the justice sorry judgment far from us neither does justice overtake so all this wicked stuff is happening in the land and the justice system is not doing anything about it okay it's not punishing evildoers okay and this is quite a key theme that that's going that that's going wrong here okay and so because they won't punish this iniquity because they won't you know punish these transgressions transgressions are just being multiplied and that and that's essentially uh what what's happening there okay and then you start to get to uh verse 15 and notice yeah truth fails and he that departs from evil makes himself a prey okay so this is not saying something good about the person who departs from evil this is something negative okay what does it mean he becomes a prey well someone who is prey if there's prey there's a predator okay and that makes perfect sense because if there's all this iniquity and it's not being punished the justice system is not doing it then he that departs from evil he's prey to all the wicked people because he has departed from evil but the justice system is not punishing the people that are against him okay now this is quite key here so the lord sees this as it says there the lord saw it and it displeased the lord that there was no justice okay he saw that there was no man he wondered that there was no intercessor okay so it says then that his arm brought salvation on to him and his righteousness sustained him well who's him we presume it means that this man who um who has fallen prey to uh this judgment that that's gone wrong okay that's that's what's going on here and so then it goes on to say for he puts on righteousness as a breastplay the helmet of salvation uh now we're all quite familiar with this because um paul quotes this in uh Ephesians i've got it in my notes here somewhere uh Ephesians 6 paul quotes this okay this you know breastplate of righteousness the helmet of salvation and so on and so forth when paul quoted that he's writing to the Ephesian church to the saints okay that the the churches at Ephesus that's who he's writing to he's writing to his fellow brethren he's not writing the letter to the pagans tell them hey they better you know do this stuff you know put on the helmet of salvation or they're not going to be saved this is stuff that paul addresses to saved christians people who already believe us okay and well we so far see that this passage is addressed to gods people it's not addressed to the foreign nations and the even it's addressed to gods or people right now when paul uh mentions this in Ephesians 6 um he's giving it as an encouragement and he says to quench the fiery darts of the wicked so paul is using this as an encouragement not as an instruction how to be saved but as an encouragement because of the fact to quench the fiery darts of the wicked okay now in a way Isaiah is pretty much saying this in a very similar way here because we've got this guy who has departed from evil he's made himself pray because there's all this wickedness and it's not being punished so you know they can just abuse this guy but the Lord has seen that and so what this is this is a comfort to this righteous person who has departed from iniquity but he's been taken advantage of by all the people okay that's that's an encouragement to that kind of a person it's not instructions to tell unsaved joe out there how to be saved okay no mention of eternal life here you know or anything like that and uh according to their deeds he will repay any you know there's another one they want to make it about works in heaven versus you know the works that send you to hell but we're only dealing with God's people here we haven't got a paradigm of dealing with the the pagans and you know all the people outside of God's nation we just haven't got that in this passage okay now watch how verse 19 kind of completes verse 18 so in verse 18 according to their d t we'll repay and recompense uh to his enemies okay i'm just going to highlight that there for a second so it says so why is the Lord going to do all this what's the point of all this that he said in these previous verses okay well so so shall they fear the name of the Lord from the west okay now i don't know sort of what geography he was targeting there but israel is obviously in the west of the middle east there you know because it's got some seat to the west so a lot of nations would perhaps be east i guess i don't know that for sure and his glory from the rising of the sun and watch this when the enemy shall come in like a flood the spirit of the Lord shall lift up his standard against him and so that lifting up a standard like a banner that's like warfare language right there okay so the enemy is going to come into this nation is going to come towards israel or come towards the house of jacob and the spirit of the Lord will resist the enemy so he's actually arguably taking the side of jacob in that verse okay again context is everything folks so if you turn from your iniquity it's not that you're going to be saved on to eternal life but when your enemy comes in like a flood the Lord shall push back against the enemy okay that's what's really going on there and so then we have this first that that he was pointing out that the redeemer shall come to Zion and on to them that turn from transgression in jacob so we're still in jacob house of jacob god's people is being addressed here not unsaved publican and harlot you know that's that's outside okay this is the people inside that god is dealing with okay he's judging his own people all right now then the last verse in this chapter as for me this is my covenant with them says the Lord now issues with the covenant i've not really done a lot of um personal study on covenant agreements in the bible so i don't want the risk of making claims that aren't true um i don't want to say something that might be false but somebody correct me if i'm wrong but normally when god makes a covenant like covenant with moses or the covenant with you know Abraham or the covenant with you know the nation of israel his covenants are typically agreed you know targeted towards his own people aren't they he doesn't i'm not aware if somebody is aware of where god makes covenants with his enemies and the people outside of israel and you know the pagans and the heathen please pop it in the chat because you know that i can do some speed up my homework a little bit but you know i'm not aware that god goes around making covenants with a bunch of people that are saved okay now saved people unsaved people the only covenant they need to worry of he that believeth on him have left the lasting life and he that believeth not is not condemned but again the covenant effect covenant agreements only apply if you then believe and get saved okay so again covenant targeting god's own people that's the target audience not unsaved joe who needs to hear the gospel okay now then we start to get into uh right the next chapter so chapter 60 i'll be fairly quick with this but a rise shine the light is come and the glory of the lord is risen upon you okay so we've you know got a lot of things pointing to jesus here now the next few verses are somewhat poetic okay so you know we can't really make a lot of doctrine out of this in regards to eternal life really um but if you start to look through chapter 60 which comes immediately out because remember the chapter numbers weren't there in the original so here you know we're only a few verses after Isaiah 59 20 okay we just keep on reading and you'll start to notice that a lot of the stuff in this chapter is very end time stuff okay stuff that doesn't really apply to his first coming a lot of this is second coming type stuff that he's talking about here okay in fact just to give you some cases in point for the nation and kingdom that will not serve you shall perish those nations shall be utterly wasted okay well i don't know about most christians i'm not feeling that one yet folks i think it's a little bit too early to say that that's being fulfilled now when you start to study end times makes perfect sense when that's going to be fulfilled okay when jesus is ruling and reigning on the earth and so on and so forth okay so and we've also got this the city of the lord the Zion the holy one of israel this city and what do we read in revelation we read you know about that the new heaven and the new earth and so on and you know the glorious city towards the end of revelation okay and here's another one you shall suck the milk of the Gentiles and shall suck the breast of kings well i wonder if seeking the one save thinks he's sucking the breast of kings for salvation okay you know this stuff this isn't salvation language here folks you know a lot of this is to do with a lot of end time stuff okay and this is really i mean this kind of solidifies the whole end times thing you get to verse 18 violent shall no more be heard in your land wasting within your borders well that clearly didn't happen when jesus came the first time because if you look at history after jesus departed there was all kinds of violence in jerusalem and you know the jews getting kicked out and all kinds of things okay here's another key one the sun shall be no more your light by day neither for brightness shall the moon give light onto you but the lord shall be an everlasting light and if you get if you study revelation this is end time stuff that we're talking about here okay first of all when the lord even comes the second time it's you know the sun and the moon were darkened okay and you know everything that happens then and then you know in the new city it's the glory of the lord that lights up that city okay so i'm not gonna you know i'm not gonna study this in more great detail than i have done but you know we're just skimming through the surrounding context around isai 59 20 instead of just quoting it and being all big headed like we're right about everything okay so thus far then folks if we just look at what we've seen in the verse so far the target audience is god's own people it's not telling publicans and harlots how to be saved okay now you could interpret this as being the physical nation of israel if you want to which if that's the case then it's not a salvation verse okay you could interpret it as referring to god's own people which the documentary already argued the case for that turning from sin is a directive to god's own people okay not for salvation you could interpret it as being the bloodline jews which you know some perhaps is perhaps how he was interpreting my my comment we'll look at that in a moment but the goal was intended to redeem people that were already regular worshipers in a previously obedient nation we saw that sort of you know earlier in 58 some issues had deteriorated so we had positive themes we had negative themes and the later context when you start getting to chapter 50 suggests that it's end times related and related to the second coming of Jesus not his first coming which will tie in with you know if you want to tie that in with bloodline jews rather than god's own people okay so he misunderstood me when i said god's people he's perhaps thinking about bloodline jews there you know the physical israel not not the um spiritual israel okay now the thing is the there was kind of a what i would call the jewish juxtaposition if you like in terms of how jesus addressed the jews in the gospels because what what what the documentary argued repentance for salvation turn away from idols unbelief etc to god believe on christ repentance of the believer so not not salvation turn from your wickedness whatever happens that happens to be so jesus did talk about those above two things interchangeably with jews and Pharisees in various conversations so some conversations he would talk with the jews and he's saying hey you guys need to believe on me for everlasting life all the conversations he would you know say that you know you need to turn from wickedness or you know this this what he said about adultery and this what he said about that subject and so on and so forth okay so he did tell jewish audiences to do both of those camps of things okay in a way many jews weren't saved and so jesus needed to get them saved so being a redeemer he needed to redeem his people back and get them saved but you know we know a lot of jewish people didn't believe on him but also normally speaking the jewish people were god's people nominally okay so you know salvation is of the jews so in principle they should have been saved believers because salvation is of the jews but obviously many of them weren't so jesus spoke to jews with both perspectives in mind and this is sort of like when i've gone all gone out solwining with my friend james he usually does most of the talking because he's just better at it than me but often when we're dealing with christians he will still deal with the eternal life stuff if you know if he's a little bit doubtful about those christian salvation you know it's by believing it's free gift etc etc just like we would do with the atheist or the hindu or anybody else but then when he's dealing with christians he often does scratch at some of the sins as well like hey what's that you know you're a christian what's that buddha doing in the window hey you know what's with the idol up there or whatever it might be you know it could be any number of things so he does deal with some sins of christians because yes that person might not be safe so they need to understand the gospel but calling themselves a christian in principle they should be god's people and so we will hold them to a higher standard than we will the person that doesn't claim to be a christian we speak to them from the perspective of both audiences okay and that's really essentially what jesus is doing with the jews here now if you look through john's gospel eternal life is a common theme throughout the book it was deliberately written with eternal life in mind and eternal life is frequently coupled with believing on it okay the passages about sin no more and obey my commandments they're never directly coupled with eternal life now there's a few verses people read to make them about eternal life it's never directly coupled with eternal life though okay believing on him is uh many of jesus conversations in john's gospel were probably first time encounters or at least jesus had to re solidify faith to people who weren't grasping some basic teaching whereas a lot of his preaching against sin in other gospels was directed to people who were already listeners and were already aware of him to some degree and that's that I mean that's a gross overgeneralization but that that is often what happened okay just to summarize really really quickly you know in john's gospel nicodemus already had an idea about jesus but it's not evident that they ever met okay so jesus was much more graceful with nicodemus than other Pharisees the woman at the well in the next chapter never met him before uh the jews who questioned the layman probably didn't know who jesus was until after the healing uh we again don't know that for sure but uh jews in chapter six came to jesus for the wrong reasons they came to eat bread okay so he had to bring it back to basics essentially no it's about believing on him because they were coming to him for the wrong reasons jews in chapter seven were disputing whether or not he was actually the christ okay so you know some of them probably knew about him some of them didn't the man who healed was healed his blindness in john nine never met jesus before and again jews were divided about the christ and jesus solidified the faith of mary and martha by raising Lazarus from the dead so that's what happened in john's gospel and over and over again it's believed being equated with eternal life now in the synoptic gospels the centurion approached jesus but probably hadn't met jesus before his faith was commended okay not his works his faith the man healed of the palsy in matthew chapter nine was told your sins be forgiven after jesus seeing their faith not their turning from sins it's after jesus seeing their faith said your sins be forgiven okay so this is the gospel repentance salvation believing on him that's what jesus is drilling to all of these different people all right now in jesus did preach against sin and the sin was the issue well he he told that to the woman at the well and the lame man in Bethesda to sin no more in john's gospel never mentioned believing on him never mentioned eternal life it's not the context of that statement sin no more otherwise he should have coupled it with eternal life and he didn't okay now in the synoptic gospels where jesus dealt with sin well in the sermon on the mount where jesus preached against sin multitudes came to listen to him including his own disciples okay that's the target audience for his teaching not unsaved publican and harlot out there it's his disciples and the multitudes that came to listen to his teaching they were the target audience for the sermon on the mount and so jesus preached on all kinds of things in that chapter and a wide variety of subjects okay uh jesus rebuked various cities in matthew 11 for not repenting so it's not that while the cities didn't know who jesus was and he needed to tell him how to repent they had already rejected john and rejected jesus after seeing miracles so jesus did all those miracles they still rejected him okay so now we move on to ripping on those those cities okay it's not dealing with a first time visitor telling them how to be saved the Pharisees in matthew 12 saw his miracles and still accused him of casting out devils by the power of satan and yet the the Pharisees later in that same chapter are still seeking a sign so of course jesus is going to rip on them for their sins and all kinds of things because they already knew who he was okay again not telling unsaved public and a whole little doesn't know jesus how to be saved it's rebuking a lot of people that have seen his miracles and still reject him anyway okay once we get to the Pharisees in matthew 15 they were teaching doctrines of men already knew about jesus' disciples because they're asking them about them not washing their hands well they must have known that they don't do that so they must have had some idea who they were and must have seen them before okay so again not dealing with first time visitors now the Pharisees and the Sadducees in matthew 16 they came to jesus purely to tempt him they weren't interested in eternal life they just wanted to tempt him okay and really you know i could go on and on with other examples when jesus preached in matthew 18 against him the teaching was directed at his disciples okay the Pharisees came again to jesus in matthew 9 to tempt him not because they were inquiring about salvation now the rich young ruler he's an unusual case because he was given works to inherit eternal life but even after jesus said there is none good but god still claim to have obeyed them all since his youth okay the lawyer in luke 10 also he was given works to inherit eternal life not faith but he came to jesus to tempt him not because he genuinely wanted an answer okay when jesus cleans the temple the temple should have already been a clean space to begin with so you know it's got nothing to do with telling unsaved people how to be saved this is cleaning up the house of god okay and then when jesus separates the sheep and the ghost this is already at the judgment it's too late for people to be saved anyway so it's not really a very good chapter to tell people how to be saved is it so you start to see a pattern here okay when people were genuinely interested in seeking eternal life or when people were unfamiliar with jesus you told them believe have eternal life okay now when jesus preached his disciples or the multitudes and then he would say you know do this don't do that turn from sin because why because it's directed in principle at least to god's own people okay it doesn't matter if unsaved publican and harlot you know does all the things that jesus warned about because he's already unsaved anyway makes no difference to his salvation whether he does or doesn't do them okay it's directed to his disciples when faris season jews saw his works and still rejected him anyway and when they purely tried to tempt him having no interest in seeing any reason at all and they taught doctrines not found in the bible then jesus said woe on to you okay didn't say woe on to you because you say you want to be saved and you won't repent of all your sins that's not what happened folks okay and so you know if you want to insist that turning from sin and his essential component of the gospel you have to accuse jesus and the apostles of preaching a false gospel or an incomplete gospel to multiple people multiple times and that's what my last comment said to seeking the one saved like he has to accuse jesus of preaching a false gospel for telling all those people to believe on him without telling them hey you need to turn from your transgression as well while you're at it okay you know or if he did tell them well it's not documented and the bible ought to tell us if john's gospel is written to tell us how to have eternal life and he keeps missing that crucial step out okay Isaiah 59 20 is never quoted as a go-to verse to preach the gospel to anybody in the new testament jesus or the apostles could have quoted it when talking about eternal life it was really that important but they didn't they did quote plenty of verses about believing lord who has believed our report you know Abraham believed God and it was counted on to righteousness we have plenty of verses like that in the new testament we don't have eyes i have 59 20 being quoted to tell people how to be saved though do we and uh if you if you take it to mean the jewish people as i'd address the jewish bloodline well you know let's say okay they need to turn from transgression for the redeemer to come to them well if you look at the pattern of the jewish people throughout the old testament they did repeatedly fall back into transgression they repeatedly kill resisted warnings they repeatedly killed prophets and so if you look at god's punishment not on individual persons but as as the nation or as the people when jesus came many jews excuse me rejected him they were hard hearted they couldn't receive him and so since then the apostles went to reach many gentiles and a lot of evangelists would tell you that today jews are some of the hardest people to reach with the gospel okay so even if you wanted to say well you know jews need to turn from transgression well in a way they didn't turn from transgression and now they can't even follow the basics of believe the lord jesus christ and so jews today they're in a complete blindness with false gospel and false religion and so that's the effect that not turning from transgression has had on the jewish people it has nothing to do with how an individual gets saved so not turning from transgression has resulted in them not even turning from unbelief so it's not because they it's not that they can't be saved because they have too much sin in the life it's because of the transgression of israel and unbelief that the kingdom was taken from them and given to the nation bearing the fruits thereof and so now you know they as people they are in in spiritual darkness okay now the next point then to address is this come to me because that's what he's equating with salvation so the saviour comes to them the turn from their transgression obviously he's misquoting redeemer saviour but if they don't turn from their transgression the saviour or the redeemer won't come to them and so they they can't be saved okay that's his argument he's equating comes to then as giving eternal life as if that's what that means well i'm going to show you that that's not what that means at all okay so have a look at these next verses so if we look at john six verses 35 to 37 he that believe on me okay uh and uh you know this is in the context of everlasting life that's what he's talking about in this chapter jesus said he that comes to me okay and again him that cometh to me didn't say i will go on to them he comes to me that's how he phrased it further in the same chapter 40 40 45 no man can come to me except the father which i sent me drawing now the father does need to draw them yes but who's coming to who they are coming to jesus jesus coming to them he is coming to jesus okay and again cometh on to me who is coming to who is jesus going to him or is he going to jesus he is going to jesus that's how this is working here okay here's another one john three talking about everlasting life and believing on him that's the context here it's an eternal life passage for everyone that does evil hates the light neither comes to the light but then he that does truth comes to the light so so who is coming to is the light coming to him or is he coming to the light or should the light be coming to him or should he be coming to the light he should be coming to the light not the light coming to him okay you see this stuff matters folks john five you will not come on to me that you might have life eternal life so again eternal life is the subject who comes to who you are supposed to come to jesus it's not jesus coming to you that's what it says okay you can you know stand on your calvinist pulpit about old father draws it yes the father does draw but he still says he that cometh to me that's what it says john seven if any man thirst lets him come on to me he that believes on me so we're still talking about believing on him for eternal life and it's he comes to me who is coming to who he is coming to jesus jesus is not coming to him okay and so we quite clearly see then that the transaction that takes place when somebody believes on to eternal life is that he comes to jesus not jesus coming to him as this verse opposes so notwithstanding all the time that we've just spent going through Isaiah in its proper context that that right there alone just that two minutes of looking through those john verses proves right there that this is not an eternal life passage verse because the transaction that's taking place here is in the wrong direction okay this says jesus comes to them but we quite clearly saw from those john verses that are talking about believing and are talking about eternal life that he comes to jesus not jesus coming to him this is the complete wrong way around for the eternal life transaction so this is not an eternal life verse but but he's making that incorrect association there okay and then the last point i won't make a big thing of this because you might say that this is word games but but he said their transgressions plural well there's no there okay there's there's no uh you know adjective for the the people there and there's it's not transgressions plural it's transgression singular now people might say i'm playing word games but if it's transgression singular it's not necessarily well put down the drink put down the pornography and put down there's put down that it's the transgression or encompassing the stuff that Isaiah was talking about specifically okay very specific things i won't go too much into that because you know you might disagree with them about that fine but you know we've given more than enough evidence that this is not a salvation verse it's directed to god's people and the transaction here is the wrong way around and that's why it doesn't even say save it it says redeemer in that verse okay so you know in summary Isaiah 59 20 doesn't use the word repent in most translations so it can't really define repentance for salvation it's addressed to god's people it's not addressed to tell unsaved people how to be saved it's never quoted in the new testament to preach the gospel redeeming is what is recovering what already belongs to god in the first place anyway it says the redeemer shall come to them but we saw that eternal life is coming to Jesus so it's not equatable and and even if you disagree with everything else i said i mean that right there is an escapable i don't know how you can talk your way around that the next chapter has a lot of end times themes so it's not even evident that the surrounding context then in Isaiah 59 20 is even referring to his first coming it might actually be referring to his second coming when he shall appear a second time to look for them without sin on to salvation quoting the hebrew's way of saying things there and Isaiah contains a lot of poetic statements so should we really go with something that's poetic that's not even evidently talking about how to gain eternal life at the expense of all these clear statements from jesus about the subject in john's gospel and so on or should we just go with the clear statements and then let's sit around at a round table and try and actually you know re-understand Isaiah 59 i mean you know goes without saying doesn't it folks and so no seeking the one saved this doesn't contradict my documentary as far as i'm concerned it's perfectly consistent with everything i said in the documentary now did i overlook that the fact that the niv does say repent of their sins and that verse yes i overlooked it for the reasons that i explained and i'm sorry i missed it but you know at the end of the day it's not a salvation verse and you even quoted it wrong when you were quoting it as well that is not eternal life compatible that that bit there okay it's the wrong way around so it's perfectly consistent with everything that i said in the documentary that is addressed to god's own people and so that's i hope that this video i'm sorry it's not very professionally done and i've kind of stuttered a little bit but i hope that that's clarified my answer to isai 59 20 uh you know in case anybody's going to look at his comment on the documentary and they're going to be wondering about that and perhaps they think that i didn't give a substantial answer okay