Restitutio

In this episode we tackle the next chunk of Michael Brown’s opening statement in the recent Trinity debate. We address his argument that since God’s words remain forever and Christ’s words remain forever, they must be the same (cf. Mat 24.35 vs. Isaiah 40.7-8). Next we briefly explain the grammatical issues related to Titus 2.13 and the alleged Granville Sharp Rule. Then we discuss Brown’s case for Jesus as the eternal, uncreator, creator of the cosmos (John 1, 1 Cor 8.6, and Col 1). To help you follow along, here is the relevant portion of the manuscript Brown used for his opening statement: That’s why in the Old Testament, Yahweh’s words remain forever (Isa 40:7-8) but in the New Testament it is Jesus’ words that will remain forever (Matt 24:35). The Lord declared in Isaiah 43:11, “I, I am the LORD, and besides me there is no savior,” yet throughout the New Testament, Jesus is hailed as our Savior. Either He is one with God, or there is more than one true savior. Paul leaves us no doubt, referring to “our great God and Savior Jesus Christ” in Titus 2:13. That’s the most obvious and clear sense of the Greek. Jesus is our great God and Savior. We also learn from this same section in Isaiah that when Yahweh created the universe, He did it alone. As written in Isaiah 44:24, “I am the LORD, who made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself.” Yet the New Testament tells us explicitly that the Son was involved in creation. In John 1:1, John uses the language of Genesis 1:1 in the Septuagint, saying that the Word was in the beginning (en arche), and explaining that what God was, the Word was. And, he continues, “All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men” (John 1:3-4). And, John tells us, it is this preexistent Word, this Word through which all things were created, which became flesh and dwelt among us (John 1:14). And that’s why John the Immerser explained that Jesus “ranks before me, because he was before me” (John 1:30). That’s why Jesus said that He was from above, that He came down from heaven, that He came from God and was returning to God (John 3:13; 6:38, 41; 8:23; 13:3). That’s why Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 8:6, “yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.” Even more emphatically, he wrote, “For by him [meaning the Son!] all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities– all things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together” (Col. 1:16-17). The text is clear. The Son is eternal. The Son is uncreated. All things were created through Him and for Him. You really have to engage in a hopeless series of exegetical gymnastics to deny the plain sense of these words. And remember: In Isaiah, Yahweh said no one was with Him when He created the universe, yet these texts say He created all things through His Son. That can only mean one thing: The Father and Son are one God! And that’s why Jesus explained that it was His Father’s will “that all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father” (John 5:23). —— Links —— For a more extensive treatment of John 1.1, see Podcast 111 with John Schoenheit You can find the other episodes in this series on Refuting Brown’s Opening Statement here You can li

Listen to this episode on Spotify or Apple Podcasts. Jerry Wierwille and I systematically refute Michael Brown’s problematic case for the deity of Christ in his recent debate with Dale Tuggy. Due to the number of texts Brown crammed into his opening statement, this will have to be a multipart series. In this episode we begin by covering Brown’s assertion that believing that Jesus is a glorified man “neuter[s] the gospel” since a man’s death for our sins “is hardly a demonstration of the immeasurable love of God.” We discuss his contention that Isaiah 42.8 means that God does not share his glory with anyone else in light of the worship scene in Revelation 5. We explain the absurd claim that Jesus claimed to be the “I am” of the burning bush in John 8.58 as well as the alpha and omega texts in Revelation. To help you follow along, here is the relevant portion of the manuscript Brown used for his opening statement: Thanks so much for coming out tonight and for tuning in to our livestream, and thanks, Dr. Tuggy, for your comments, which I’m quite eager to rebut. The fact is, you claim that Jesus is simply a glorified man, and I want to declare in the clearest possible terms that the Son of God of the Bible – the one we rightly worship as God – is infinitely more than a glorified man. To make Him into a glorified man is to deny the clear and consistent witness of Scripture. To make Him into a glorified man is to neuter the gospel, since the idea that a glorified man died for our sins is hardly a demonstration of the immeasurable love of God. To the contrary, when God sent His Son to pay for our crimes, He was giving of His very self. So, again, I’m eager to rebut Dr. Tuggy’s opening comments, and it’s clear that a lot of his difficulties come from the fact that Son took on human form, hence praying to the Father and having the Father as His God. But for now, in my opening statement, I will lay out the clear scriptural case that the Son is fully divine, and since there is only one God, then God must be complex in His unity. Simply stated, this one God has revealed Himself to us as Father, Son, and Spirit, and if we are to accept the testimony of the Scripture, this is the only fair conclusion. For Dr. Tuggy and others, this is a logical contradiction, but the day we can fully wrap our minds around the nature of God is the day we’ve reduced Him to our level, thereby making a god in our image. The God of the Bible is marvelous and transcendent, without beginning and without end, rightly called in Judaism the eyn sof – the infinite One – and, according to the Scriptures, clearly complex in His unity. Will we accept the biblical witness, or will we try to create a god based on our own limitations and perceptions? In the Old Testament, the Lord stated categorically that He would share His glory with no one. As written in Isaiah 42:8, “I am the LORD; that is my name; my glory I give to no other, nor my praise to carved idols.” (See also 48:11, “For my own sake, for my own sake, I do it, for how should my name be profaned? My glory I will not give to another.”) Yet we see in the New Testament that massive glory and honor are given to the Son. As Revelation records, “Then I looked, and I heard around the throne and the living creatures and the elders the voice of many angels, numbering myriads of myriads and thousands of thousands, saying with a loud voice, ‘Worthy is the Lamb who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing!’ And I heard every cre

Are you curious how Dale Tuggy thinks he did on the Trinity debate with Michael Brown?  In this post-debate interview I ask him about his strongest points as well as what he thought Brown’s strongest arguments were.  I ask Tuggy about Brown’s Trinity theory and he explains the “one self” version of the Trinity as well as some of the major problems with that position.  In the end, Tuggy both gave Brown a lot of credit for his rhetorical style while remaining completely unconvinced that Brown’s position can stand up to the bible or plain old logic. Stay tuned next time when Jerry Wierwille and I discuss Brown’s opening statement and give brief answers to his many opening arguments. —— Links —— Visit Dale Tuggy’s website and podcast at trinities.org Check out Tuggy’s excellent YouTube video entitled, “Who Should Christians Worship“ You can either listen to the entire debate on podcast 158 or watch it on YouTube Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

Are you curious how Michael Brown thinks he did on the Trinity debate last weekend? In this post-debate interview I ask him about his strongest points as well as what he thought Dale Tuggy's strongest points were. We talk about his reticence to use traditional trinitarian language in light of his own unique heritage and ministry focus. I press him gently to explain his view of the Trinity in light of some of the confusion that arose during the debate. Next time, I'll be interviewing Dr. Tuggy and getting his response and then after that Jerry Wierwille and I are planning on thoroughly reviewing and rebutting Dr. Brown's opening statement, verse by verse. Now, I realize that a number of you may not appreciate me giving Dr. Brown an opportunity to defend his view of the deity of Christ, but if you've listened to this podcast for any length of time, you know that I end every episode with the words "the truth has nothing to fear." For me, that's not just a tag line, it's how I believe. I'm not afraid to hear arguments for the deity of Christ or the Trinity. It's healthy for those of us who are biblical unitarians to be challenged by passionate defenders of opposing positions. If I'm wrong about Jesus, I want to be corrected and if I'm right then hearing another viewpoint shouldn't be a threat. —— Links —— Visit Michael Brown's website and radio show at askdrbrown.org You can either listen to the entire debate on podcast 158 or watch it on YouTube Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

Last night Michael Brown (PhD NYU) and Dale Tuggy (PhD Brown U) debated the question, “Is the God of the Bible the Father Alone?” Tuggy affirmed while Brown denied. Both scholars recognize the inspiration and the authority of scripture over tradition. Both made an effort to found their beliefs using the bible, reason, and history. The debate went for nearly three hours and followed this format: Opening Statements (20 minutes each) Rebuttals (12 minutes each) 2 Rounds of Cross-Examination (7 minutes each) Concluding Statements (5 minutes each) Questions from the Audience (54 minutes total) Please leave your comments below. Who do you think won? Were both sides fairly represented? Whom should Tuggy debate next? Here are my notes for the two opening statements.  They aren’t perfect, but I tried to keep up with each. —— Notes —— Dale Tuggy’s Opening Statement The Father is the only God (1 Cor 8.6; John 8.54) Jesus is not God but messiah, God’s agent (1 Tim 2.5) compare 2 hypotheses in light of 6 indisputable facts 1. NT believe Father is one God alone 2. NT believes one God is the Trinity 6 Indisputable Facts all 4 Gospels feature a “mere man” compatible main thesis Jn 20.31 -> that’s it? nothing about Jesus being God the word God nearly always refers to the Father and no word refers to the Trinity they should sometimes use the word God to refer to the Trinity but they never do in the NT God is nearly always the Father no more than 8 texts where the term God refers to the Son a human can be referred to with the title God Jesus makes that point in Psalm 82 only the Father and Jesus are worshiped no worship of the Trinity no worship of all 3 persons-> no spirit! Phil 2.11 says that Jesus’ worship is indirectly to God by worshiping Jesus we worship the creator that God is triune or tripersonal is never clearly asserted in the NT poor Jewish theology is always assumed Jesus never gets around to telling us that God is 3 persons in 1 essence no controversy about the Trinity in the NT Trinity theories always engender controversy the NT controversies are over whether Jesus is messiah and whether non-Jews can be saved apart from Torah observance no NT author lifts a finger to limit or qualify clear implications of the son’s limitations Jesus got his mission, authority, message, power, from God no author shows any embarrassment that Jesus is subordinate Jesus is a real human man w/ a real human mom but w/ God as his father he was brought into existence in the womb the one God is eternal why aren’t the NT authors at all concerned to exert the eternal existence of the son will grant pre-existence but not eternality for purposes of this debate   Michael Brown’s Opening Statement not a catholic bone in my body Son of God is infinitely more than a glorified man this denies Scripture neuters the gospel a man dying for our sins is hardly a demonstration of God’s love son is fully divine can’t wrap our minds around the nature of God God is complex in his unity making a God based on our own limitations and perceptions God shares his glory w/ no one (Is 42.8) in Rev 5, massive glory a

Before delving into specific biblical doctrines, we need to first think about what the bible is. In this lecture you’ll learn what the bible says about itself, some reasons to believe God inspired it, as well as the major types of biblical scholars and how they approach scripture. This episode, along with the last one, serves to round out the introduction to this course. —— Notes —— bibliology: one’s understanding about the bible what is the bible? a library of 66 books written by 40 people how should you interact with it?   claims that God inspired the bible Matthew 1.22-23 Mark 12.36 Acts 1.16 Acts 3.18 Acts 4.25 Acts 28.25-26 Hebrews 3.7 Hebrews 10.15-17 2 Timothy 3.16 2 Peter 1.16-21 Revelation 1.1-2   reasons why I believe the bible is genuinely inspired it claims it predictive prophecy unflattering honesty medical insights martyrdom archeology some more reasons ear-marks of eye-witnesses historicity of the resurrection of Jesus changed my life incredible preservation survived some Israelite and Judean kings who disregarded it (Manasseh->Amon->Josiah) survived 70 year exile in Babylonia survived Antiochus Epiphanes who tried to destroy the Torah survived destruction of Temple in a.d. 70 survived destruction of Jerusalem in a.d. 135 survived several Muslim empires survived all the crusades OT survived in high quality manuscripts (Aleppo, Leningrad, DSS, LXX) Diocletian tried to destroy the NT NT survived in over 5,000 Greek mss 531 language for whole bible, 1329 languages for NT   dichotomy today between bible-believing and bible-critical approaches to doctrine refer to youtube video of my lecture on Losing Faith from 500 enlightenment gave rise to intense philosophical and biblical criticisms most bible professors in most secular universities examine the bible from an atheist worldview some Christians affirmed these criticisms but tried to save Christianity Schleiermacher (1822): feeling of absolute dependence; entering into Christ’s perfect God consciousness Albrecht Ritschl (1852): kingdom of God = community of brotherly love (focus on Jesus’ ethics not miracles) Adolf Harnack (1886): fatherhood of God, brotherhood of man, worth of each soul, love rather than law Walter Rauschenbusch (1917): social gospel movement—focus on humanitarian needs other Christians dug in and fought the criticisms John Locke (1695) published The Reasonableness of Christianity William Paley (1802) early proponent of intelligent design Charles Hodge (1874) defended infallibility and attacked Darwinism Fundamentalist Movement (1910) In 19th and 20th centuries the liberals and conservatives fight it out major denominations split (Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians, Lutherans) as universities go liberal and biblical conservatives leave and start new schools 1806 Harvard splits to form Andover Theological Seminary 1908 Lyman Stewart started BIOLA; he’s the man who funded the 1910 “The Fundamentals” 1929 Princeton splits to form Westminster Theological Seminary 1976 Liberty University Founded a

Happy New Year. I’m so excited to begin with you a new class that covers a whole range of biblical doctrines. In fact, I’m going to combine two classes into one and I think they will work together really well. The first class was originally titled “Basic Bible Doctrine” and it covered approximately fifteen different major beliefs. The goal was to explain these aspects of theology and give supporting scripture and reasons for them. I’m combining this with a more advanced class called “Solutions to Bible Texts,” which deals with commonly misunderstood verses on a bunch of doctrines. I’m going to attempt to interweave these two, so that you get a comprehensive understanding of theology. Now I realize that you very well may disagree with my understanding on some of these beliefs, so we may have some exciting dialog in the comments on these episodes. I will freely admit at the outset that I don’t know everything and that I have been wrong in the past. I just ask that you give this class a charitable listen and check it against the scriptures to see if it is true. Hopefully, this will be a good way to lay it all out there and see what you think. To begin with, this episode is an introduction that covers some important basics about approaching truth and building biblical doctrines. —— Notes —— In one sense there’s nothing basic about bible doctrine. Constructing a coherent biblical theology on any topic takes immense effort from collecting the many texts on the topic to interpreting each of them based on their own literary, historical, and theological contexts to conceiving of an understanding that simply yet elegantly embraces the most texts possible while minimizing the number of difficult texts to comparing other doctrinal systems both ancient and modern—the process is anything but “basic.” Even so, the end result is often simple enough to comprehend and communicate, though it rests upon the work of teams of specialists drawn from a variety of fields. the bereans Acts 17.11 what was Paul trying to convince them to believe? neither accepted nor rejected<–really impressed Paul tested Paul’s message against the scriptures   why is it so important to be willing to change our beliefs? b/c it’s easy to misunderstand the bible geographic separation (what’s the Arabah?) cultural separation (did they have divorce? could they read? did they have running water?) different religious groups (what’s the difference between a Saducee and a Pharisee?) language (what language did Jesus speak? how do we know that? ephphatha) metaphysics: function over essence (why did God call the light day?) anachronism: since everything is so different, it takes serious work to not read our own ideas into the bible   reasons why it can be hard to change our beliefs easier to keep them the same might need to leave our church might lose friends, relationship with kids (Ray Faircloth), marriage (1 Cor 7) might lose job opportunities identity might be wrapped up in being 3rd generation church of God or whatever remember when I went to BU and got asked what I was anabaptist, adventist, biblical unitarian, restorationist my core identity (what defines me at more core, but doesn’t change no matter where I am on my quest for understanding) love God follow Christ seek truth   typical to think doctrine doesn’t matter or worse that it’s divisive not taught to argue constructively head knowledge vs. heart knowledge mind vs. emotions vs. actions fal

Greg Deuble grew up in the Church of Christ in Australia, went to N.S.W. Bible College in Sydney, and spent fifteen years serving as a pastor and evangelist.  One day he attended a meeting during which Anthony Buzzard challenged him on his belief in the deity of Christ.  Rattled, Deuble began on a quest to reassess all of his doctrinal convictions in light of scripture.  As a lifelong member of the restorationist tradition, Deuble always wanted to practice the authentic Christianity of the apostles and couldn’t just slough off such important questions.  The result was his book, They Never Told Me This in Church, an exposé of how bad philosophy corrupted the teaching of scripture. —— Links —— Visit Greg Deuble’s website at thebiblejesus.com Get his book They Never Told Me This in Church on Amazon Take a look at this YouTube video where Deuble shares his testimony Get in touch with Deuble at [email protected] Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

For more than a decade, Sam An has faithfully served as an administrator and teacher at the Korean Extension of the Atlanta Bible College. In this interview, you’ll learn about his own story of faith as well as what God is doing through his ministry to touch Koreans both in America and in South Korea. —— Links —— Check out the Korean Extension’s website at abcke.weebly.com Watch Steve An teaching in Korean on his YouTube channel Apply to be a student at the Atlanta Bible College Korean Extension Get in touch with Sam An at [email protected] or by calling (678) 392 – 2600 Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

Have you heard of the Christian Disciples Church?  They are a biblical unitarian group scattered throughout Asia primarily.  In this episode Calvin Chan, who has been with the disciples since the beginning, will tell you the story of how this group got started as a student disciple movement.  He also shares about how the founder, Pastor Eric Chang, reexamined what the bible says about Jesus and had the courage to change his mind when he was in his seventies. —— Links —— Check out the Christian Disciple Church online Take a look at The Only True God online or on Amazon. Also, here’s the sequel, The Only Perfect Man Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

This is the fourth and final part of our Misunderstood Texts about Jesus series with Bill Schlegel. In this episode he offers remarks on Philippians 2.5-6, Colossians 2.9, and Revelation 1.17. After this, I ask him one of the biggest questions on this subject: if Jesus isn’t God then how can his sacrifice possibly pay for our sins? As usual Schlegel points out that this is not a biblical question–Jesus never asked it, Paul never asked it, and John never asked it. If no one ever makes this point in scripture, maybe we should wonder why our questions are so out of line with theirs? —— Links —— Check out the other episodes in the Misunderstood Texts about Jesus series. To learn about Schlegel’s backstory, listen to Interview 31: Master’s University Prof. Finds Son of God, Loses Job Check out his excellent book, the Satellite Bible Atlas Follow Bill Schlegel on his blog or on YouTube For an extensive list of verses and explanations from a biblical unitarian perspective, visit christianmonotheism.com (use the scripture index on the right) Watch “Five Major Problems with the Trinity” on YouTube Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

In parts one and two, we examined ten misunderstood verses in the Gospel of John. In part three, we’ll examine seven more texts from the rest of the bible: Genesis 1.26 Isaiah 9.6 Matthew 2.2 Matthew 28.9 Matthew 28.19 (cf. 2 Cor 13.14) Romans 9.5 Acts 20.28 Repeatedly, Bill Schlegel calls us back to understand each verse within its immediate and canonical contexts, rather than reading in later theological commitments. —— Links —— Check out the other episodes in the Misunderstood Texts about Jesus series. To learn about Schlegel’s backstory, listen to Interview 31: Master’s University Prof. Finds Son of God, Loses Job Check out his excellent book, the Satellite Bible Atlas Follow Bill Schlegel on his blog or on YouTube For an extensive list of verses and explanations from a biblical unitarian perspective, visit christianmonotheism.com (use the scripture index on the right) Watch “Five Major Problems with the Trinity” on YouTube Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

This is part two of my series with Bill Schlegel, former professor of the Israel Bible Extension and long time bible teacher and geography expert. Last time we discussed five major texts in the Gospel of John and this time we cover four or five more: John 10.30 John 10.33 John 13.18-19 John 20.28 1 John 5.20 Next time we’ll discuss a number of more important verses in the rest of the bible. —— Links —— Check out the other episodes in the Misunderstood Texts about Jesus series. To learn about Schlegel’s backstory, listen to Interview 31: Master’s University Prof. Finds Son of God, Loses Job Check out his excellent book, the Satellite Bible Atlas here Follow Bill Schlegel on his blog or on YouTube For an extensive list of verses and explanations from a biblical unitarian perspective, visit christianmonotheism.com (use the scripture index on the right) Watch “Five Major Problems with the Trinity” on YouTube Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

Today we are beginning a new series called “Misunderstood Texts about Jesus” with Bill Schlegel. Professor Schlegel lived and taught the bible and geography in Israel for more than three decades. Recently, he came to change his mind on the deity of Jesus, seeing him now as God’s man rather than a God-man. Since he made this change, several friends and acquaintances have brought up a number of scriptures that they believe prove Jesus is God. This podcast series is Schlegel’s opportunity to answer these commonly misunderstood verses and explain what they mean. In this episode we discuss the following texts: John 1.1 John 1.14 John 1.18 John 5.18 John 8.58 Next time we’ll discuss five more scriptures from John. —— Links —— To learn about Schlegel’s backstory, listen to Interview 31: Master’s University Prof. Finds Son of God, Loses Job Check out his excellent book, the Satellite Bible Atlas here Follow Bill Schlegel on his blog or on YouTube For an extensive list of verses and explanations from a biblical unitarian perspective, visit christianmonotheism.com (use the scripture index on the right) Watch “Five Major Problems with the Trinity” on YouTube Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

Q: How do you know the bible is true? A: Because God wrote it. Q: How do you know God wrote it? A: Because the bible says God wrote it. Q: But, how do you know the bible is true? Here we encounter the classic circular argument for the bible’s inspiration. Surely, there’s a better way to go about establishing God’s influence on this book. In this episode we’ll take a look at three main comparative texts from the same part of the world and same time as the bible was written, including the Enuma Elish, the Code of Hammurabi, and the Ebers Papyrus. By comparing the bible to these Babylonian and Egyptian texts we can see just how unusual it was in its own context. This, in turn, helps up have more confidence that God in fact did work with the authors of his book, providing them with an alternative source of information that cut against the grain of wisdom of their age. Stay tuned afterwards for a couple of event announcements Winter Teen Camp held at Living Faith Christian Church in Warwick, RI (Dec 28-30) winterteencamp.com a weekend for teens to learn about God and spend time together building relationships and serving the community early bird rate is only $60.00 for those who register by December 9th. After December 10th the cost is $75 Revive 2019 held at Woodstock, CT (Jan 4-6) lhim.org/revive a weekend for young adults (20+) to worship and enjoy time with other believers theme is Wisdom, looking at the wisdom literature, including Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes $146 per person, please register if you know you’re coming so we can get a good count —— Links —— See also the YouTube video God Speaks through Scripture (10 reasons to believe the bible is true) More resources on the reliability and trustworthiness of the bible Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

Our world seems intent on trotting out the same extremist examples of Christianity as either a homophobic religion (think Westboro Baptist Church) or a totally accepting faith (think Episcopalians). However, these are not the only positions Christians take on this subject. In this talk, Wesley Hill, assistant professor of biblical studies at Trinity School for Ministry, not only advocates for but lives out a third way. Hill identifies as gay while agreeing with the historic view of the church that marriage is only between a man and a woman. Not only that, he wants to help other gay and lesbian people come into Christianity without compromising what the bible teaches on sexuality or lying to themselves about same-sex attraction. Consequently, he is committed to singleness for life. This is hard road to walk, but he believes it’s the best way forward. Even so, he’s concerned about gay Christians getting their needs met for intimacy and friendship within the church. How tragic would it be to heroically sacrifice marriage and parenthood on the altar of biblical faithfulness only to wake up at 65 years old, alone, single, isolated, and without meaningful connections to anyone? Hill says the church needs to step up not only by rooting out homophobia, but also building and strengthening friendship bonds between singles and singles as well as singles and families. He concludes, “God calls us precisely in saying, ‘No’ to same-sex marriage to say, ‘Yes’ to intimacy, ‘Yes’ to Christian community, ‘Yes’ to same-sex friendship, ‘Yes’ to a life of love in the body of Christ.” —— Links —— Read more about spiritual friendship at spiritualfriendship.org Hill’s faculty page at the Trinity School for Ministry Check out his book, Washed and Waiting: Reflections on Christian Faithfulness and Homosexuality, which tells his story of reconciling his faith with his sexuality and how he came to think of celibacy as his calling. See also Interview 18 with Becket Cook, a fashion set designer who likewise embraced celibacy to follow Christ For more, search Youtube for testimonies by Christopher Yuan, Rosaria Butterfield, Jackie Hill, and Sam Allberry. Also, see Podcast 82: Biblical Boundaries for Same-Sex Attraction as well as Podcast 83: Questions about Gay and Lesbian Christians Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

Our culture longs for authenticity. We’re tired of fakers and phonies who say one thing and do another. People should just be true to themselves and have the courage to flout tradition when it holds them back from genuine self-expression. However, this mentality results in major individual and social problems from sexually transmitted diseases to sexual harassment to racism and mass shootings. Christianity offers a better way, by providing a standard to conform ourselves to that maximally enables human flourishing. —— Notes —— Colossians 3:1-5 The terminology in v5 is excessively hostile: “put to death what is earthly in you.” Don’t reason with it, or seek to diminish its influence. Don’t try to understand it, or make excuses for it. Kill it! Put it down. Colossians 3:6 God did not design us to behave this way. He gave us passions but placed boundaries on them. When people defy His original intention, it bothers Him. Colossians 3:7-10 This is the language of clothing: put off and put on. We must strip off the old way of being a human (Adam) and clothe ourselves with the new way of being a human (Christ), which is being renewed in knowledge according to the image of its Creator—the way God originally designed us. Colossians 3:11 Not only behavior but social barriers need to change. Ethnicity, social status, education, independence are all outshone by the splendor of Christ’s radiant glory, enabling harmony between us all. Colossians 3:12-17 Imagine that there are two towns that live by each of these opposing ways: Freetown and Corpus Christi. Which would you rather live in? As you conform to the Christian lifestyle, it becomes second nature. It does not crush you or rob you of your humanity, but it provides the necessary boundaries to make human growth and flourishing possible. —— Links —— More episodes like this: Off Script 1: Seeing the Filter Off Script 2: Hyper-Individualism Off Script 3: Tolerance 72: Free as a Fish on Land Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

When it comes to Genesis 1, Christians tend to divide into two major camps: old earth and young earth creationists. The former sees the days as long periods of time (e.g. Hugh Ross) while the latter insists on literal twenty-four hour periods (e.g. Ken Ham). Professor John Walton of Wheaton College advocates for a different reading of the bible’s first chapter. By carefully comparing Genesis to other ancient near eastern creation texts, he proposes that it’s talking about God providing functionality to the already-existing cosmos rather than creating structures ex nihilo. —— Links —— For a much more in depth explanation of Walton’s perspective on Genesis 1, see his book The Lost World of Genesis One Visit his faculty page at Wheaton College See podcast Off Script 30: Stewarding the Earth or 84: Kingdom Restoration Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

Do you ever stop and marvel at God’s creation? Are you in wonder at what he has made? Too often we take God’s masterful creations for granted, instead of seeing them as pointers back to God’s ingenuity, generosity, and artistry. Although we can’t always take time out to praise God for plums, palm trees, and panthers, when we can it’s helpful to meditate on his handiwork. Here’s the video from this message that shows the relative sizes of our solar system’s planets and sun with other much bigger stars: Here are a couple of praise songs that tap into the proper sense of wonder we should experience because of God’s works:   Notes Psalm 19.1-6 The heavens declare God’s glory Psalm 104.1-35 The psalmist works through creation, marveling at God’s manifold artistry and brilliance. Psalm 8.1-9 Even though God is so powerful, so transcendent, so majestic, he still cares about us puny humans. C. S. Lewis’ attention to God’s every-day marvels: Lewis’s keen, penetrating sense of his own heart’s aching for Joy, combined with his utter amazement at the sheer, objective realness of things other than himself, has over and over awakened me from the slumbers of self-absorption to see and savor the world and through the world, the Maker of the world… Lewis gave me, and continues to give me, an intense sense of the astonishing “realness” of things. He had the ability to see and feel what most of us see and do not see. He had what Alan Jacobs called “omnivorous attentiveness” (Alan Jacobs, The Narnian, p. xxi.) I love that phrase. What this has done for me is hard to communicate. To wake up in the morning and to be aware of the firmness of the mattress, the warmth of the sun’s rays, the sound of the clock ticking, the coldness of the wooden floor, the wetness of the water in the sink, the sheer being of things (quiddity as he called it). And not just to be aware but to wonder. To be amazed that the water is wet. It did not have to be wet. If there were no such thing as water, and one day someone showed it to you, you would simply be astonished. He helped me become alive to life. To look at the sunrise and say with an amazed smile, “God did it again!” He helped me to see what is there in the world — things which if we didn’t have them, we would pay a million dollars to have, but having them, ignore. He convicts me of my callous inability to enjoy God’s daily gifts. He helps me to awaken my dazed soul so that the realities of life and of God and heaven and hell are seen and felt. I could go on about the good effect of this on preaching and the power of communication. But it has been precious mainly just for living. John Piper, “Lessons from an Inconsolable Soul,” Feb. 2, 2010, Desiring God Conference for Pastors   —— Links —— This message was inspired by Jerry Wierwille’s phenomenal sharing, “God — Our Spectacular Creator,” presented at Revive 2016. Check out Podcast 53: Does God Exist? for more examples of God’s creation pointing to him more sermons by Sean Finnegan see also John Cortright’s sermon, “The Living God“ Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License

Kenneth LaPrade lives in El Paso, Texas, on the border between the United States and Mexico. His wife is Mexican and many of the folks in his house church are from Mexico. In such a context, immigration is always a touchy subject, but lately some Christians have baptized certain political rhetoric and presented it as &#8220;the&#8221; Christian position on this complicated issue. LaPrade sees this as merely one aspect of the much larger problem of Christians trying to take power in America as if establishing God&#8217;s kingdom here, now. In this interview, he urges us to retain the bible&#8217;s teaching about the future kingdom and see ourselves as Christians first and Americans (or Mexicans) second. Here&#8217;s the text of Ken LaPrade&#8217;s statement on how Christians should orient themselves politically that inspired this interview: I honestly feel a bit frustrated concerning the following situation (which I will briefly describe), and I believe its persistence is related to Satan&#8217;s tricks to promote biblical unawareness concerning the priority of the future kingdom. I know that my attempted reminders, in certain cases, keep falling on deaf ears. Please, pray concerning this highly distracting issue. I am earnestly still prayerfully concerned about so-called Christian efforts at erroneous &#8220;kingdom NOW&#8221; thinking &#8211; such as an obsession with American politics, either defending or demonizing &#8220;Trump&#8221; or current social or political trends. I personally work with several immigrants who have been quite hurt by very strange, insensitive comments (even bullying remarks) posted quite publicly as if representing a &#8220;Christian&#8221; perspective! In my estimation, ALL such misguided trends (either to justify or condemn pagan leaders in a pagan nation) are a failure (among so-called Christians) to really grasp the Kingdom of God as FUTURE! Present hurtful rhetoric is tantamount (in my assessment) to the hypothetical absurdity of retroactively getting 1st century Christians to hotly debate whether Tiberius, Nero, or Domitian were better or worse for the Roman Empire! As is obvious, 1st century Christians were far too future Kingdom focused to be so distracted! We, as 21st century Christians, do not help anyone by being seduced into speaking for one side or another of two (or more) warring camps of Gentile hate-mongers who are ruled in typically corrupt Gentile fashion! &#8220;Christian&#8221; pop-culture labels pasted on political &amp; social movements do not &#8220;Christianize&#8221; blatant disregard for Jesus himself. Neither do they &#8220;COVER&#8221; for outright demonic evil &#8211; whether from &#8220;the left&#8221; or from &#8220;the right.&#8221; We&#8217;d be better off suffering NOW for obeying him, rather than getting bamboozled by a pseudo-Christian ( with NO Future Kingdom focus) bandwagon to get our way now &#8211; as if entitled …. by an &#8220;American idol.&#8221; Biblically speaking, the USA, and all current nations (Gentiles by nature) await JUST dismantling when our true theocratic King (Jesus) comes to reign. I still pray that King Jesus&#8217; perspective NOW have the priority that it should have, at least among those who try to faithfully await his much needed intervention. —— Links —— Get in touch with Kenneth LaPrade at [email protected] Listen to Interview 14: Ken LaPrade’s Baptism Journey Read articles by LaPrade that he wrote for Glad Tidings Books mentioned in this interview: <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Coming-Kingdom-Theology-Changing-Church

Last week we examined what the bible teaches about heaven. This week we&#8217;ll see what it says about hell. John Cortright explains there are three meanings of hell in scripture, including tartarus where fallen angels are temporarily imprisoned, hades/sheol where the dead remain until resurrection, and gehenna where the wicked are destroyed in the final judgment. —— Links —— More Restitutio podcasts with John Cortright Also, get more of Cortright&#8217;s sermons, classes, and articles at Living Hope Community Church Listen to an excellent debate on hell (eternal conscious torment vs. annihilationism) Podcast 10: Is Hell Forever? Chris Date vs. Phil Fernandez Check out the kingdom of God class podcasts Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License. &nbsp;

What is heaven? Throughout the bible we find different layers of meaning, including (1) heaven as sky, (2) heaven as God&#8217;s throne, and (3) heaven as God&#8217;s realm or dimension. Although heaven is a reality, it is not where we go when we die. Rather the bible teaches that the dead are asleep until the resurrection when they inherit the earth, renewed and restored. —— Notes —— Louis Armstrong and Ella Fitzgerald famously sang about heaven: Heaven, I&#8217;m in heaven And my heart beats so that I can hardly speak And I seem to find the happiness I seek When we&#8217;re out together dancing cheek to cheek Yes, heaven, I&#8217;m in heaven And the cares that hung around me through the week Seem to vanish like a gambler&#8217;s lucky streak When we&#8217;re out together dancing cheek to cheek[1] 2 Samuel 18.9 9 And Absalom happened to meet the servants of David. Absalom was riding on his mule, and the mule went under the thick branches of a great oak, and his head caught fast in the oak, and he was suspended between heaven and earth, while the mule that was under him went on. he was between heaven and earth what does that mean? he was between the sky and the land heaven is the sky Heaven as Sky (Realm of the Birds) Genesis 1.14-20 14 And God said, &#8220;Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night. And let them be for signs and for seasons, and for days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light upon the earth.&#8221; And it was so. 16 And God made the two great lights&#8211; the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night&#8211; and the stars. 17 And God set them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, 18 to rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening and there was morning, the fourth day. 20 And God said, &#8220;Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the heavens.&#8221; Genesis 1.28 28 And God blessed them. And God said to them, &#8220;Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.&#8221; this is where my title comes from heaven’s for the birds! Matthew 6.26 26 Look at the birds of the air [οὐρανός]: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? so heaven’s for the birds but, it’s more than that! Heaven as God’s Throne Isaiah 66.1-2 1 Thus says the LORD: &#8220;Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool; what is the house that you would build for me, and what is the place of my rest? 2 All these things my hand has made, and so all these things came to be, declares the LORD. But this is the one to whom I will look: he who is humble and contrite in spirit and trembles at my word. control room (throne): where God makes plans/decisions storehouse: where rewards are stored up w/ God Jesus says to lay up treasures in heaven where moth and rust cannot destroy (Mt 6.20) Peter says we have an inheritance imperishable kept in heaven (1 Pet 1.4) Paul says our citizenship is in heaven (Phil 3.20) N. T. Wright: “What then do the New Testament writers mean when they speak of an inheritance waiting for us in heaven? This has been much misunderstood…The point of such passages, as in 1 Peter 1.4, 2 Corinthians 5.1, Philippians 3.20, and so forth, is not that one must ‘go to heaven’, as in much-popular imagination, in o

Robin Todd has faithfully served as the director of the Worldwide Scattered Brethren Network for the last 10 years. He helps biblical unitarians find each other all over the United States as well as some other countries. In this interview, we talk about how he got started, what it takes to get on his list, and how he sees the future of the network. —— Links —— Visit the Worldwide Scattered Brethren Network or email Todd to get on his list or to volunteer to help with the website: [email protected] If you live in Europe and you&#8217;d like to get in touch with Werner Bartl, you can reach him at [email protected] For more about virtual church, see Interview 32: Virtual Fellowship for Isolated Believers (John Truitt) To tune into Living Hope&#8217;s weekly live webcast, go to lhim.org/webcast on Sundays from 10:30 am &#8211; 12:00 pm EST Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License. &nbsp; &nbsp;

In this concluding teaching of our apologetics conference, John Truitt gleans from Christ&#8217;s example key ways that we can imitate him in our own evangelistic efforts today. He begins by looking how Jesus was completely obedient to God and how he prepared himself (both in knowledge and experience). Next Truitt urges us to get moving, expecting God to direct us as we are obedient. Lastly, he emphasizes the importance of radical love to our neighbors and the need for community. Here now is podcast 148 Evangelism, Jesus&#8217; Way with John Truitt —— Links —— To find out how to join John Truitt&#8217; s virtual church online watch this video or contact him directly at [email protected] Check out the podcast episode with Truitt: &#8220;Virtual Fellowship for Isolated Believers&#8220; Check out the other talks in this Apologetics Conference For more, here’s an entire Apologetics Class Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

Have you ever been in a corn maze? The reason they work is because you can only see right in front of you. If you had a live drone feed, you could easily orient yourself and find the way out. This is the benefit of history. We live in a postmodern culture, but it&#8217;s hard to see or understand what that means since we&#8217;re surrounded with it. In this exceptional presentation, Kegan Chandler guides us through the history of premodernism, modernism, and postmodernism so that we can orient ourselves to how many people in our world think and approach life. Not only will this give you a drones-eye perspective of our current situation, but it also will help you understand how to better share your faith with postmodern people. —— Notes —— Metanarratives and Postmodernism (Kegan Chandler) What is postmodernism? How in the world did we get here? Where do we go from here? Postmodernism is a worldview based on French philosophers, Derrida, Foucault, Lyotard w/ these four characteristics: no objective truth (Derrida) only interpretations (Derrida) no meta-narrative (Lyotard) interpretation in society results from power not truth (Foulcault) meta-narrative: overarching account that provides a pattern or structure for ppls beliefs and experiences postmodernist mission: deconstruction identify social constructs in the world and break them down if everything is deconstructed, what do we fill it with? our experiences community First Star Wars w/ Luke vs. last star wars w/ Luke, deconstructs everything premodernism belief in objective truth problem: priestly class determines truth problem: superstition authority structure suffocated learning and creativity Renaissance was a way to recover art and classics that the church had suppressed premodernism crumbles Reformation Galileo defeats Aristotle (dropping 2 lead balls from leaning tower of Piza) this challenges authority of Aristotle heliocentricity also challenges church&#8217;s imprimatur of Ptolemaic geocentricity modernism rejection of authority time and numbers don&#8217;t guarantee truth reason alone can find truth naïve optimism (holocaust, communism, eugenics) epistemological revolution, exalting empiricism, which reduced miraculous to superstition we can save the world if we just apply reason and science postmodernism glad that modernism rejected authority reject the idea that human institutions and states can save us only the individual can be free get rid of objective truth to build our own realities rejection of meta-narratives distrust that reason can bring enlightenment or satisfaction pomo is good for Christianity b/c it defeat naïve secular utopian dreams defeats empiricisms accepts supernatural, transcendent ennobles the individual&#8217;s journey of discovery problems w/ postmodernism the statement &#8220;there is no objective truth&#8221; is self-defeating you can always disagree, saying &#8220;that&#8217;s just your interpretation&#8221; I can just say &#8220;pomo is wrong&#8221; and no one can disagree b/c then they would have to appeal to objective reality just b/c everyone has their own interpretation doesn’t mean that there isn&#8217;t one correct one on any given subject a post-postmodernism worldview belief in objective truth belief in the right authoritative sources of truth (scripture) value

How should we think through the different major religions of our time? Are they all the same? What are their differences? In this presentation, philosopher of religion, Dale Tuggy, works through key questions that can help us differentiate and distinguish religions from each other. In the second half of his talk, he invites the audience to diagnose various quasi-religious perspectives popular in our culture, before offering comments on each. &nbsp; Loading... Taking too long? Reload document | Open in new tab &nbsp; —— Notes —— aspects of religion practical &amp; ritual experiential &amp; emotional narrative doctrinal &amp; philosophical ethical &amp; legal social &amp; institutional material religious diversity vs. religious pluralism diversity: people are loyal to different religions pluralism: all religions are equally valuable on moral questions, major religions have a lot of common-sense overlap if they weren&#8217;t plausible and didn&#8217;t help they wouldn&#8217;t have gotten so popular four core claims diagnosis: fundamental problem facing humanity cure: how to positively and permanently resolve the problem methods: what to do to get the cure exemplar: actual person(s) whose lives show us how to live out the methods, getting the cure Christianity is more focused on truth than any other religion this is why we&#8217;re so quarrelsome this is why we write and read so many books shouldn&#8217;t assume other religions care about doctrine like we do there&#8217;s one theology/teaching per religion not even w/in Christianity Christianity on the four core claims we are fallen and sin, which causes dysfunction, harm, and death Christ died to pay for sin conversion, disciplines, follow Christ Jesus, apostles, Christian heroes over time &nbsp; —— Links —— Visit Dale Tuggy&#8217;s website and podcast at trinities.org Listen to other podcasts with Dale Tuggy Check out the other talks in this Apologetics Conference For more, here’s an entire Apologetics Class Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

How do you know the difference between what's right and wrong? Do morals have an absolute source or does society determine them? In this talk, Kenny Willenburg explains the classic moral argument as well as how we can use this approach to "turn the tables" when people object to Christianity on moral grounds. I've also left in a fair amount of discussion following Willenburg's presentation. —— Notes —— if morals are objective then they are obligatorythere must be a source for moralsthe most reasonable source is God if there is no God, there couldn't be objective morality Richard Dawkins (God Delusion)- God of the OT is jealous, petty, control freak, etc. three problems saying God is immoral doesn't disprove God's existence○ Hitler didn't exist b/c the things he did were too badsaying the creator is evil is arrogant○ if there is a creator then he would have the right to interact w/ creation however he wantedcan't claim God is immoral b/c w/o God's existence there's no standard by which to judge God relativism is taught in our culture as the only absolute truth tolerant of anything but intolerancecan't push religious ideas on others, but that is pushing secularism on usno one is allowed to criticize anyone's actions sources for morality morality can't be individually determinedmorality can't be socially constructed○ actually, our culture got its ideas from a Judea-Christian background○ thus, this proves what the non-theist is trying to disprovemorality comes from nature (i.e. Darwinian evolution)○ how is self-sacrificial care of the weak/unproductive helpful to the herd?○ morals are simply evolutionary hold overs○ not clear how this is obligatory —— Links —— Check out the other talks in this Apologetics ConferenceFor more, here’s an entire Apologetics ClassIntro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

In the second presentation of this Apologetics Conference, we delve into a comparison of three major time periods: (1) the age of authority, (2) the age of reason, and (3) the age of authenticity.&nbsp; We look at how people practiced their faith in each as well as what criticisms apologists answered.&nbsp; For our post-modern time, I recommend the strategy of discussing a social issue, showing how our society is failing to address it, and how Christianity can offer a solution.&nbsp; Last of all we try out this strategy on a number of controversial issues, including gun violence, sexual harassment, and&nbsp; technology use. Here is the handout I used: —— Links —— Check out the other talks in this Apologetics ConferenceFor more, here's an entire Apologetics ClassIntro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

Today we are starting something new. I&#8217;m very excited to present to you in its entirety, the apologetics conference held in Paducah, KY last June. We&#8217;ve got a great line up of speakers for you including Jerry Wierwille, myself, Kenny Willenburg, Dale Tuggy, Kegan Chandler, and John Truitt. It was a wonderful time of meeting people and working together to figure out ways of reaching the millennial generation with the gospel. As it turned out, a great majority of the presentations focused on understanding the post-modern worldview. This was so helpful, because it’s nearly impossible to discuss important issues if both people are unaware of the fact that they are each coming from incompatible worldviews. Although, for many of us, our natural inclination is to show someone why their underlying assumptions are invalid, a better starting point for evangelism is to work within their post-modern outlook to show how attractive and awesome the gospel is. In this first presentation, Jerry Wierwille covers a brief history of how major philosophers initiated a movement that led to sequestering away of faith as something personal and private. Then he shares how to broach spiritual topics with secular people around us. His talk is relatively short, only 34 minutes long, but I also included the questions and comments, which went for another half hour. —— Notes —— Rene Descartes (1596-1650) early 1600s cogito ergo sum put himself at the center of reality rather than God previously, scientists located God at the center of the universe and from there derived his laws divided mind from matter &nbsp; John Locke (1632-1704) empiricism sense perception is the basis for true knowledge/reality &nbsp; David Hume (1711-1776) skepticism anything not proven using scientific method is not verifiable &nbsp; Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) appearances of forms absolute idealism law of non-contradiction freedom above nature &nbsp; Georg Hegel (1770-1831) dialectic idealism thesis, antithesis, synthesis &nbsp; value/fact divide religion relegated to the mind, but not objective &nbsp; humanism manifestos in 1933, 1973, 2003 progressive philosophy of life that w/o supernaturalism affirms our responsibility to lead ethical lives live well, fully values and ideals however carefully wrought are subject to change knowledge derived by empirically humans are part of nature, the result of unguided evolution ethics derived from trial and error, treat others as having inherent worth and dignity life&#8217;s fulfillment found in wonders and joy of human existence humans find meaning in relationships; want a world free of cruelty; differences resolved cooperatively w/o violence working to better society maximizes happiness; support a just distribution of nature&#8217;s resources so as many as possible can enjoy a good life; human rights; civil liberties; civic duties to vote the responsibility for our lives is ours and ours alone &nbsp; private life (values) &#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;- public life (facts) &nbsp; you can have beliefs, but they are private privatization is one of the main problems in our society for evangelism culture/public life must be devoid of religion you can believe what you want, but don&#8217;t tell me what to believe we all make our own truth called judgmental, traditionalist, intolerant </u

How much does truth matter to you? In particular, how should we think about Christians who hold very different views on key subjects? For example, I&#8217;m a biblical unitarian, someone who believes that we should take Jesus literally when he called his Father &#8220;the only true God.&#8221; Of course I believe Jesus is God&#8217;s only begotten son, the anointed Messiah who died for our sins, but I don&#8217;t affirm the fourth century doctrine of the Trinity. Some Christians would call me a heretic beyond the pale of fellowship or even salvation (even if I do believe the gospel message with all my heart). Others would say I&#8217;m deceived but would have no problem working together in various areas. Chuck Whitlock, a bible student, husband, and father of five has been wrestling with precisely these questions over the last 5 or so years. Having grown up in strong evangelical denominations his whole life, he had to rethink his relationship with mainstream Christianity when he began changing several of his key beliefs. In this interview, we discuss various ways to think about this issue, based on Whitlock&#8217;s paper (see below). He steaks out a balanced position between writing everyone off who disagrees with him and accepting everyone as brothers and sisters without regard for their beliefs. —— Links —— Read Chuck Whitlock&#8217;s entire paper below Email him at [email protected] Check out his blacksmith forges For Dale Tuggy&#8217;s presentation on John Locke&#8217;s minimalist definition of Christians based on the simple confession that Jesus is Messiah, see Heretic! Four Approaches to Dropping H-Bombs For more on biblical unitarianism, check out these podcasts, especially Podcast 44: The Immutable Shema as well as christianmonotheism.com More info about KingdomFest (Sep 7-9, 2018) Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License. &nbsp; Does Truth Matter? Truth matters! &#8230; but how much? &nbsp; Introduction: There is a significant distance between the Biblical Unitarian faith and &#8216;orthodoxy&#8217; in its various forms. If you haven&#8217;t come to this conclusion, just try to advance the idea that Jesus is not God and see what kind of reception this gets:) Even less divisive topics, such as resurrection or the gospel of the kingdom, meet with great opposition. The apparent incompatibility between Biblical Unitarianism and &#8216;orthodoxy&#8217; causes one to wonder what it means that other Christians don&#8217;t seem to be interested in the truths we&#8217;ve discovered. Both parties reference the same book and so there is something very familiar in &#8216;orthodoxy&#8217;. A little scholarship shows us how &#8216;orthodoxy&#8217; represents the Hellenization of the original Jewish Christian faith. Most of the terms and characters are retained but the meanings are either co-opted or obscured such that, today, in very real terms, they have a different Jesus, a different God, and a different Gospel. &nbsp; How much does that matter? What does it mean? &nbsp; Who is saved?: I recognize that this bumps into the impossible question of who is truly saved. That s

Are you looking for a Christian blog to encourage you in your faith? In this short interview Kirk Walden shares about his new website, 1stfaith.com, and the work he and his team are doing to live out 1st century Christianity in the 21st century. First Faith aims to simplify and strengthen your faith so you can take the next step in your journey with God. —— Links —— Visit 1st Faith at 1stfaith.com Check out Jennifer Walden&#8217;s fine articles &#8220;Buried Desires&#8221; and &#8220;When Life Sucks, Jesus Carries Us&#8220; More about Kirk Walden&#8217;s pro-life work here Listen to his earlier interview, &#8220;Advocating for the Unborn&#8220; Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

Kirk Walden has been advocating for the lives of the unborn since 1991 when he became the director of a small pregnancy help center in Auburn, Alabama. Over the last 17 years, he&#8217;s focused on fundraising for Heartbeat International, which supports pregnancy centers, adoption agencies, and maternity homes. In this interview I ask him about how he talks to both Christians and non-Christians about this sensitive and emotionally explosive issue. He lays out his case using biblical and scientific reasoning, but what really comes through strongest is his incredible sense of compassion for those who find themselves in this situation. —— Links —— More about Kirk Walden here Get a copy of his book, The Wall, on Amazon Find out more about Heartbeat International Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

This is part 6 of the Calvinism Debate Can you lose your salvation? If God saves someone, will they always persevere? What about people who leave the church? These are important questions and they are at the heart of this last discussion on Calvinism. Blake affirms that after regeneration, absolutely nothing can separate someone from God&#8217;s saving love. Jacob denies &#8220;once save always saved,&#8221; putting forward instead that the warning passages in the bible make the most sense if someone can actually fall away. Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll. —— Links —— Check out the other posts in this Calvinism debate here More info about Jacob and Blake here See Jacob Roher’s interview on the gospel or watch his sermon, “How to Treat Other Christians.” His email is [email protected] See Blake Cortright’s podcast on spiritual disciplines as well as how to quit pornography. Follow him on Twitter @blakecortright Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

This is part 5 of the Calvinism Debate When God calls you, can you say, &#8220;No?&#8221; According to Calvinism, God&#8217;s grace is irresistible, meaning when he determines to save someone, he always achieves his goal. In other words, his call is always effectual. On the other side, Arminianism teaches that God offers grace, but people can freely choose to accept it or reject it. His call is general and people respond differently. Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll. —— Links —— Check out the other posts in this Calvinism debate here More info about Jacob and Blake here See Jacob Roher’s interview on the gospel or watch his sermon, “How to Treat Other Christians.” His email is [email protected] See Blake Cortright’s podcast on spiritual disciplines as well as how to quit pornography. Follow him on Twitter @blakecortright Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

This is part 4 of the Calvinism Debate Did Jesus die to make it possible for anyone to be saved or did he only die for the elect? In this discussion between Blake Cortright and Jacob Rohrer, they discuss this important issue and how it relates to evangelism. Blake affirms limited atonement while Jacob argues that Jesus died for sinners in general. Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll. —— Links —— Read my biblical and historical survey of the atonement, called Why Did Jesus Die?, or watch the video presentation. Also check out these other posts on the subject. Check out the other posts in this Calvinism debate here More info about Jacob and Blake here See Jacob Roher&#8217;s interview on the gospel or watch his sermon, &#8220;How to Treat Other Christians.&#8221; His email is [email protected] See Blake Cortright&#8217;s podcast on spiritual disciplines as well as how to quit pornography. Follow him on Twitter @blakecortright Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

This is part 3 of the Calvinism Debate Does God predestine everyone who will ever be saved before they&#8217;re even born? Blake affirms that not only does God choose whom he will save in eternity past, but he did so without regard to any conditions or qualities of what these people will do. Jacob denies, arguing that everyone has free will to choose God or reject him. God does predestine, but in a general rather than specific way. Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll. —— Links —— Check out the other posts in this debate here More info about Jacob and Blake here See Jacob Roher&#8217;s interview on the gospel or watch his sermon, &#8220;How to Treat Other Christians.&#8221; His email is [email protected] See Blake Cortright&#8217;s podcast on spiritual disciplines as well as how to quit pornography. Follow him on Twitter @blakecortright Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

This is part 2 of the Calvinism Debate Just how fallen are we? What does it mean to be dead in trespasses and sins? Are we so depraved and mired in sin that we cannot even have faith in God? Blake Cortright says answers, &#8220;Yes.&#8221; Unless God quickens us through his spirit, we are innately unable and unwilling to reach up to him in faith. Jacob Rohrer says, &#8220;No.&#8221; Though we are fallen, we are still capable of responding to God&#8217;s call. Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll. —— Links —— Check out the other posts in this debate here More info about Jacob and Blake here See Jacob Roher&#8217;s interview on the gospel or watch his sermon, &#8220;How to Treat Other Christians.&#8221; His email is [email protected] See Blake Cortright&#8217;s podcast on spiritual disciplines as well as how to quit pornography. Follow him on Twitter @blakecortright Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

This is part 1 of the Calvinism Debate Today we begin an extended series on Calvinism and Arminianism. For those of you not familiar, Calvinism, named after John Calvin (d. 1564), holds that God sovereignly chooses and effectually saves all whom he decides to save based on his predestined will whereas Arminianism, named for Jacobus Arminius (d. 1609), asserts that people freely choose to accept or reject the gospel message that God graciously offers to all. Traditionally, Calvinism breaks into five major points, summarized by the acronym, TULIP, which stands for the following: Total Depravity Unconditional Election Limited Atonement Irresistible Grace Perseverance of the Saints In this episode we begin by laying down the framework for future discussions. Subsequent episodes will each take up one of these five points of Calvinism. Jacob Rohrer Holding the Arminian position is Jacob Rohrer, a graduate of the Atlanta Bible College. At the time of this recording he served as the Lead Worship Pastor of Living Hope Community Church in Latham, New York. Now he serves as the Assistant Pastor and Worship Leader at Lawrenceville Church of God in Springfield, Ohio. Blake Cortright On the Calvinist side, Blake Cortright graduated from Regent University in Virginia. He serves in missions work to the Democratic Republic of the Congo and leads worship at Living Hope Community Church in Latham, New York. Cortright also wrote and directed The 46ers, a documentary about the high peaks in the Adirondacks of New York State. Sean Finnegan is the moderator. He serves as the Associate Pastor at Living Hope Community Church and has degrees in theology (B.A., Atlanta Bible College) and church history (M.T.S., Boston University). You can find out more about Sean here. Our aim in this initial episode is to briefly discuss the origins of Calvinism and Arminianism, as well as their predecessors. Additionally we urge listeners to have an open mind going forward, regardless of which side of the issue you are approaching it from. Don&#8217;t confuse the value of an idea with the person&#8217;s name associated with it (the genetic fallacy). Instead measure the theology against scripture, logic, and life experience. Pray and ask God to help you understand his book. Here is proof that discussing deep theology and leading worship are not mutually exclusive. In this shot, Jacob is on the drums and Blake is playing guitar at Living Hope Community Church. Subsequent episodes will be audio only and appear here each Thursday at 8pm EST, starting on May 31, 2018 and following. —— Links —— See Jacob Roher&#8217;s interview on the gospel or watch his sermon, &#8220;How to Treat Other Christians.&#8221; His email is [email protected] See Blake Cortright&#8217;s podcast on spiritual disciplines as well as <a href="http://restitutio.org/2017/05/

Last time, Jerry Wierwille explained the concept of covenantal nomism&#8211;the idea that rather than seeking to earn their salvation through perfect obedience, Jews at the time of Christ looked at the Law as a covenant God graciously entered into with his people. They enter that covenant by birth and then need to remain faithful to it through obedience to Torah. This time he shows how this new perspective on Paul affects how we read his epistles. Looking at the first few chapters of Galatians, Wierwille deciphers what Paul was saying about the Law for Christians both Jewish and Gentile. —— Links —— Listen to Wierwille’s previous interviews here Check out these sermons and articles on Wierwille’s website (JerryWierwille.com) Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

How did Jews at the time of Jesus understand their relationship to the Law? Did they believe in &#8220;works righteousness&#8221;&#8211;the idea that only by obeying the commandments of Torah could they earn salvation? Did they believe in grace? Jerry Wierwille leads us through this important issue so that we contextualize the epistles of Paul within their own thought-world. Drawing on the work of Krister Stendahl, E. P. Sanders, and James D. G. Dunn, Wierwille presents the view known as covenantal nomism, often associated with the new perspective on Paul. —— Links —— Listen to Wierwille&#8217;s previous interviews here Check out these sermons and articles on Wierwille’s website (JerryWierwille.com) Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

Pastor Daniel Calcagno lays out a his case for what he calls a positive view of Torah. He believes that the cleavage with Judaism in early church history is something the apostles never envisioned. Sadly, this parting of the ways led to confusion, doctrinal drifting, and persecution. Although Calcagno does not believe Gentiles need to keep the Law, he sees no reason for Jews to stop observing Torah. Here are his notes: TOWARDS A POSITIVE VIEW OF THE TORAH by Daniel Calcagno Restoring the Jewish Identity Markers to the Church The Hebrew word “torah” means “instruction” and refers primarily to the first five books of the Bible but more specifically can refer to the commandments of God in those books. In this podcast, Daniel attempted to show that it is biblical and proper for a disciple of Jesus to have a positive view of the Torah, specifically those elements of the Torah that are usually associated with Jewish identity (i.e. the Sabbath, the festivals, keeping kosher, etc.). The Torah’s own presentation of the enduring nature of the commandments associated with Jewish identity: The Sabbath: Exodus 31:13 Passover: Exodus 12:14 The Day of Atonement: Leviticus 16:29 The Aaronic priesthood: Exodus 29:9 Sign of a False Prophet: Deuteronomy 13:1-5 Positive Statements about the Torah in the rests of the Hebrew Scriptures: Psalm 19; Psalm 119; Joshua 1:7-8; Jeremiah 9:12-13; Malachi 4:4; Ecclesiastes 12:13. Jesus and the Apostles were Torah-observant: The Sabbath: Luke 4:16-17; Mark 1:21; Luke 23:56 Passover: Luke 22:15-20; 1 Corinthians 5:6-8 Pentecost: Acts 2:1; Acts 20:16, 1 Corinthians 16:8-9 The Day of Atonement: Acts 27:9 The Feast of Booths: John 7:2, 10, 14, 37 Hanukkah (extra-biblical Jewish holiday): John 10:22-23 Daily Jewish Prayer: Acts 2:42, 3:1, 6:4 Liturgical Blessings: Matthew 14:19-20, 26:27; Acts 27:35 Tzitzit: Matthew 9:20-21 Keeping Kosher: Acts 10:14 Circumcision: Luke 1:59-60, 2:21, Philippians 3:5, Acts 16:3 Offering Sacrifices: Acts 24:17 Baptism/Ritual Immersion: Acts 2:41, 9:18 They Torah will be observed in the kingdom: Isaiah 2:3; Isaiah 66:23; Ezekiel 45:17; Zechariah 14:16-17; Isaiah 56:6-8 Positive Statements about the Torah by Jesus: Matthew 5:17-19; Matthew 23:23 Paul was a Torah-observant Jew: Paul was born to Jewish parents: Philippians 3:5 His name was both Saul and Paul: Acts 13:9 Paul was educated under Rabbi Gamaliel: Acts 22:3 Paul attended synagogue on the Sabbath: Acts 17:2-3, 18:3-5 He said that served God “…believing everything that is in accordance with the Torah…” (Acts 24:14). He testified that he had “…committed no offense either against the Law of the Jews” (Acts 25:8). He was NOT teaching the Jewish people to forsake Moses, to not circumcise their children, nor keep Jewish tradition. James said about Paul: “…there is nothing to the things which they have been told about you, but that you yourself also walk orderly, keeping the Torah.” (Acts 21:24). Positive Statements about the Torah by Paul: Paul said “…it is not the hearers of the Torah who are just before God, but the doers of the Torah will be justified.” (Romans 2:13). He said “Do we then nullify the Torah through faith? May it never be! On the contrary, we establish the Torah.” (Romans 3:31). He said “the Torah is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.” (Romans 7:12). He said “…I joyfully concur with the Torah of God in the inner man” (Romans 7:22). He said “…the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the Torah of Go

Born to Italian immigrants, Daniel Calcagno grew up in Canada, near Niagara Falls and attended a Pentecostal church.&nbsp; After he began taking his faith seriously, he started researching the Jewish people&#8211;especially those who believe in Jesus.&nbsp; Over time he founded Messianic Niagara, a local home group with a website that promoted audio teachings. &nbsp; However, it was in listening to Michael Brown&#8217;s show that Calcagno came across the biblical unitarian theology of Anthony Buzzard.&nbsp; For some time he had felt uneasy about the Trinity, and now he had an alternative that fit much better with the bible&#8217;s Hebrew context.&nbsp; Now he serves as the pastor of Glad Tidings Church of God in Fonthill, ON. —— Links —— Follow Daniel Calcagno on Twitter, YouTube, or at MessianicNiagara.com Visit him at Glad Tidings Church of God in Fonthill, Ontario, Canada Listen to Michael Brown&#8217;s discussion with Anthony Buzzard on his show Line of Fire Listen to more Restitutio interviews here Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

Having believed in the permanence of salvation for 46 years, Dan Gallagher recently changed his mind to believe in what he calls continuance in faith&#8211;the idea that those who fail to continue in faith can be lost. The whole process took about fourteen years from when a book introduced him to a number of verses that are difficult to interpret from a once-saved-always-saved perspective. Here is his account of how he came to a new understanding on this issue and why he thinks it&#8217;s so important. —— Links —— Email Dan Gallagher at [email protected] His ministry is called Lean on Jesus and you can follow him on his podcast, YouTube, facebook, or at leanonjesus.com Listen to more Restitutio interviews here Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

Are you longing for fellowship with other like-minded believers? In this interview, John Truitt of Kentucky shares how he uses video conferencing to have interactive and encouraging virtual fellowships. Whether you want to join in with what he does or you want to start your own, this conversation is loaded with helpful guidance on how to succeed. &nbsp; —— Links —— Get in touch with Truitt at [email protected] Here&#8217;s a link to Truitt&#8217;s facebook See the Christian Virtual Fellowship YouTube channel More information about the 20s and 30s Apologetics Conference (June 8-10) Listen to more Restitutio interviews here Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

Bill Schlegel, professor and cofounder of The Master’s University extension program in Israel (IBEX), was studying the phrase &#8220;Son of God&#8221; and came to understand the term did not correlate with the traditional &#8220;God the Son&#8221; teaching, but instead meant God&#8217;s heir, the king he has designated to rule the world.&nbsp; Although he had taught the bible faithfully in Israel for more than two decades, he knew that this discovery would cost him dearly.&nbsp; In the end he lost his job at the institution he founded as well as any opportunity to preach and lead the church he helped to start.&nbsp; He&#8217;s been maligned by many who used to regard him as a brother and blackballed in the evangelical world.&nbsp; Why would Professor Schlegel go through all of this?&nbsp; Why wouldn&#8217;t he just sign the statement of faith for another year and carry on in his work?&nbsp; He had discovered a truth so profound and so irrefutable, that he could not hide it under a basket&#8211;he had to let it shine, even if it cost him everything.&nbsp; Here is his story. —— Links —— Follow Bill Schlegel on his blog or on YouTube Purchase The Satellite Bible Atlas on Amazon Master&#8217;s official statements about the termination of Schlegel Israel Bible Extension (IBEX) John MacArthur&#8217;s The Master&#8217;s University Listen to more Restitutio interviews here Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

Join Professor N. T. Wright as he shows how well Paul&#8217;s epistles fit with the Hebrew prophets and the Gospels. Rather than seeing Paul as the purveyor of a heavenly hope wherein saints may enjoy disembodied bliss, Wright highlights a number of key passages that unlock Paul&#8217;s kingdom-centered hope. —— Links —— Take a look at Wright&#8217;s big book on Paul or his recent shorter one Delve deeper into Wright&#8217;s courses at ntwrightonline.org Access free audios/videos at the ntwrightpage.com Check out my youtube talk on Pauline Eschatology Listen to more Restitutio podcasts on the kingdom of God, including &#8220;Heaven Is Not My Home&#8220; Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

This is part six in our series on responding to your questions and comments. In light of our killing series, we considered whether Christians should kill the old, the young, enemies, or criminals, however we never addressed the morality of God killing. Brian asked: Can I expect a subsequent episode where you discuss a sort of ‘divine inflicted’ death, for example, the event with Nadab and Abihu in Leviticus 10; also the deaths of Ananias and his wife, Sapphira, in Acts 5? If yes, wonderful, if no, then perhaps you could consider it. Hopefully in the future we can delve more deeply into this subject, but for now, here is a brief response to this important question. —— Links —— Check out the episodes in our killing seres See other episodes responding to your questions and comments Intro music: “Protofunk” by Kevin MacLeod. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

This is part five in our series on responding to your questions and comments. In this Q &amp; A episode, we address two commenters who responded to Off Script 34: Killing the Unborn (A Christian View of Abortion). Dan Fitzsimmons responds to Candace who inquired why Dan would vote against capital punishment but not against abortion even though he opposes it on moral grounds. Rose Rider responds to John&#8217;s lengthy comments in which he called into question the legitimacy of using the bible to arrive at a position on abortion. —— Links —— Listen to the episode that this comment came from: Off Script 34: Killing the Unborn (A Christian View of Abortion) See other episodes responding to your questions and comments Intro music: “Protofunk” by Kevin MacLeod. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

This is part four in our series on responding to your questions and comments. In this episode, we respond to a comment made on Off Script 37: Killing Criminals, in which we took the position that capital punishment is a biblically justifiable practice, but in America today it is fraught with problems, including the outrageous cost of death row and the possibility of executing the innocent. We respond to the comment of someone named Sean who challenges us on our view of the Sermon on the Mount that Jesus is challenging the old way of living and laying out a new way. He also makes a couple of secular arguments in favor of capital punishment. Here is Sean&#8217;s comment in full: I think this discussion has to take a lot more into account, but clearly this would take hours and hours to encompass it all… This is a huge subject really. But for example, such as Abraham saving Lot by killing people to rescue him. This was obviously when there were less governmental type controls but the point remains the most righteous man on earth, the father of the faith killed to save someone. There’s also laws about the requirements of helping someone being attacked, which could clearly result in the death of an attacker. I don’t think vengeance is the same as self-defense, and many equate these two… I used to. And I still have the same objection that seems to arise about Matthew 5 and Jesus’ “…but I say unto you…” statements having to do with contradicting the Torah. I don’t see this as logical, nor a possible understanding if you believe the Messiah was a sinless man. To have any man come into Israel and start teaching contrary to God’s law(even if just in THAT time period) by definition would have been sin and the man should have been ignored/killed. (Isaiah 8:20, Matthew 5:19, Deut 4:2) No one could convict the Messiah of sin, that one would have been obvious if that’s what he was doing. He *had* to keep the Torah, right? Or do you believe he didn’t keep it? That might have to be clarified. The secular arguments are based on the risk of human error. By those types of standards no one should drive automobiles either because thousands of people die each year innocently due to the error of other operators. As sad as the situation is—there’s always a risk of human error/corruption, and God -still- gave the death penalty in his Torah. The young man seems to be arguing against God’s own commands. And one also must address the many assumptions that are built into his objections against capital punishment. To say “it costs more” to prosecute for the death penalty versus lifetime of prison is not the point—even if it were, it’s still proper justice according to God’s laws. God never said to hold anyone in confinement for the entire life. It also likely WOULDN’T cost more if there were so many other regulations in place that make it that much more expensive. It’s morally reprehensible to pay for convicted murderers to continue to live on our own backs for their lifetime. Take note also, that even with Paul as a former murderer and what he taught later–he said if he did anything worthy of death, he’d submit to it. Acts 25:11 Overarching all of this is clearly the most poignant thing of all—without the death penalty you would have no death of the Messiah and a risen savior. Again, I know this is a huge topic and I just thought I’d weigh in a few things on my mind that I don’t think really got full weight in this discussion. I think I also have more to say on the subject from Scripture because I used to hold the same view as many of you until I re-examined it. —— Links —— Listen to the episode that this comment

This is part three in our series on responding to your questions and comments. In Off Script 28: Seeking a Christian View on Refugees and Immigrants, we concluded on the basis of several scriptures in the Old Testament as well as the Great Commission that Christians should welcome refugees into their countries. In response to this, William wrote: First, Thank you for your podcasts and all the work that you do preaching the word of God and your Unitarian teachings. I have to take the other side when it comes to Muslim immigrants coming into this country from the mentioned 7 Muslim countries. In December 2015, President Obama signed into law a measure placing limited restrictions on certain travelers who had visited Iran, Iraq, Sudan, or Syria on or after March 1, 2011. Two months later, the Obama administration added Libya, Somalia, and Yemen to the list, in what it called an effort to address “the growing threat from foreign terrorist fighters.” So Trumps “temporary 90 day ban” was justified considering he is coming into office and now it’s his problem to solve and protect the American people from terrorism. I don’t want to turn this into me defending Trump because I don’t agree with all of his policies, but I do agree with the temporary ban to come up with a way a vetting refugees who come with less then amiable intentions. Ok, first Exodus 23:9 “You shall not oppress a sojourner. You know the heart of a sojourner, for you were sojourners in the land of Egypt”. The key word for me is “heart” The heart of the sojourner. What are the intentions of the refugee? do they plan to live among you and abide in God’s law? If they don’t, do you still accept them as your brother even if they want to kill you or convert you through force? Do you allow mosques to operate that call for jihad and sharia law, infecting peaceful Muslims? Surly you wouldn’t invite someone into your home if you thought their intentions were to harm you or your family. Europe has has a policy of dropping off Muslims into their country and Europe is mess. All I’m saying is that it was not Gods intention to have his people treat sojourners as brothers if they would not assimilate into the culture or worse…destroy it. God Bless. In this episode, Dan takes the lead in responding to William. Here are some quotes from our discussion: &#8220;How many minds can be changed by radical love like that [the Good Samaritan Parable]? How many barriers of racism and nationalism could be torn down by that, by that kind of radical love? That&#8217;s the attitude we should have toward outsiders, not, &#8216;Hey stay away because we&#8217;re afraid that you might shoot us even though our own countrymen are shooting us at a far higher rate.&#8221; &#8211;Dan &#8220;The kingdom will be a melting pot anyway; it will be a true melting pot where the one thing that we have in common and the only thing that matters is that we are citizens of the kingdom of Christ. So we look forward to that day and in the meantime we are have the opportunity to live like that now.&#8221; &#8211;Rose &#8220;How cool is it that other nations want to come here? How much easier does it make it to fulfill the Great Commission where Jesus says, &#8216;Go make disciples of all nations?&#8217; Well if the nations are all coming here? There are all in Chinatown and Koreatown and Polishtown or whatever towns in New York City, then how much easier is it to fulfill that Great Commission?&#8221; &#8211;Sean —— Links —— Listen to the episode that this comment came from: Off