Speaker 1: Life Audio.
Speaker 2: All right, friends, welcome to the Sean McDowell Show. We
Speaker 2: are going live to take your questions. We have not
Speaker 2: done this in a long time. I used to do
Speaker 2: this almost weekly for a while. We want to bring
Speaker 2: it back to you. We're thinking about calling it Talbot Tuesdays.
Speaker 2: Today I'm here solo, but I could bring on, if
Speaker 2: it's helpful to you, a different talbot professor right now.
Speaker 2: For these three months, we're going to go Tuesday and Thursday,
Speaker 2: the second and fourth Tuesdays, and we want you to
Speaker 2: let us know is this helpful. Each week I'm going
Speaker 2: to bring on a talbot professor will take your apologetic
Speaker 2: biblical theological questions.
Speaker 1: And if this is helpful, we're going to keep it up.
Speaker 2: So please, I just told my team before we started
Speaker 2: that we're going to read every comment. We want to
Speaker 2: know if this is helpful to you. We want to
Speaker 2: know if this is interesting, what would you change? Do
Speaker 2: you want it every Tuesday? Would you engage?
Speaker 1: If that's the case.
Speaker 2: So, if you're listening to this on the audio later,
Speaker 2: you can email me Sean at Sean McDowall dot org,
Speaker 2: or head over to the YouTube page.
Speaker 1: And comment there.
Speaker 2: All right, we got tons of comments, dozens of questions.
Speaker 2: I'm going to dive in, and then we're also going
Speaker 2: to take some live ones if we can. If you
Speaker 2: post your questions in the live chat, I see him
Speaker 2: ConA up here on the side. I will take some
Speaker 2: of those live questions as well. All right, let's jump
Speaker 2: in the first one. No big surprise. Right at the
Speaker 2: top is free will versus predestination. We could spend the
Speaker 2: entire time talking about this, and we won't, but a
Speaker 2: couple comments.
Speaker 1: One.
Speaker 2: This is not just a challenge uniquely for Christians. Every
Speaker 2: worldview has to find and make sense of whether everything
Speaker 2: is determined and whether human beings genuinely have free will.
Speaker 1: Christians will differ on this.
Speaker 2: Some lean more heavily into free will and might be
Speaker 2: an Armenian type position. Some lean more heavily into what
Speaker 2: would be called a Calvinist worldview, and there's greater and
Speaker 2: lesser degrees that people hold those leaning more in towards
Speaker 2: God's sovereignty and having a different perspective of free will.
Speaker 2: My take, if I had to pick, since I'm an
Speaker 2: apologist and a philosopher, I find middle knowledge pretty compelling.
Speaker 2: I've interviewed William Lane Craig on this, and basically God
Speaker 2: has foreknowledge of not only what will happen, but what
Speaker 2: would happen in any conceivable situation, and he places us
Speaker 2: in the world knowing and in a sense sovereignly controlling
Speaker 2: towards his ends. But we freely act according to our
Speaker 2: own desires and will. Now this raises a million other questions, obviously,
Speaker 2: but I tend to find that most intellectually satisfying, and
Speaker 2: I think it matches up with scripture.
Speaker 1: By the way.
Speaker 2: Last point on this is some people say, well, there
Speaker 2: shouldn't be tensions within scripture when it comes to something
Speaker 2: like this. We should have a clear answer. And my
Speaker 2: question is why should that be the case. When you
Speaker 2: look at things like physics, light acts as a particle
Speaker 2: and then it seems to act as a wave.
Speaker 1: We don't know why.
Speaker 2: There's a paradox, there's attention there, there's some deeper truth
Speaker 2: that we're missing.
Speaker 1: So the older I get.
Speaker 2: While I find middle knowledge interesting in promising and one
Speaker 2: way to make sense of human free will and God's sovereignty,
Speaker 2: it bothers me less that we can't perfectly solve it,
Speaker 2: given that in other worlds like physics. There's also areas
Speaker 2: like light that seem to operate in different ways. If
Speaker 2: you disagree, chat give me your comments, throw them in
Speaker 2: there and we'll take your questions. I see people from Bakersfield, Singapore, Jamaica,
Speaker 2: New York.
Speaker 1: Awesome.
Speaker 2: Love it. Let's take one here from Philos Theos that says,
Speaker 2: doctor McDowell, what are your thoughts on oneness Pentecostals.
Speaker 1: Now I'm not going to.
Speaker 2: Speak specifically on oneness Pentecostals, but from what I understand
Speaker 2: of oneness, Pentecostalism is a view that there is it's
Speaker 2: a rejection of the Trinity, that God is triune. Now,
Speaker 2: let me just combine this with a question that somebody
Speaker 2: posted earlier. I saw as I was skimming through this
Speaker 2: before we started. It says this is from Steve and
Speaker 2: he says, explain trinity to an unbeliever's the toughest one
Speaker 2: to me. So I think in explain what I think
Speaker 2: the Bible teaches about the Trinity will be a general
Speaker 2: response to oneness Pentecostalism. Now, a few things about the Trinity.
Speaker 2: The word trinity is not in the Bible, obviously, friends,
Speaker 2: that's irrelevant.
Speaker 1: It doesn't matter there's.
Speaker 2: A lot of truths about God that the Scripture teaches
Speaker 2: where we don't find a word for it in the Bible.
Speaker 2: For example, the word a sayity is not in the Bible.
Speaker 2: That's actually a word for God's self existence. But many
Speaker 2: philosophers and theologians will point towards like Exodus three, where
Speaker 2: God reveals himself to Moses. He says I am who
Speaker 2: I am, meaning God is the self existent, eternal, uncreated being.
Speaker 2: That affirms a sayity even though we don't have the
Speaker 2: word a sayity. The same is true with trinity. It's
Speaker 2: not the word that matters, it's the doctrine that matters.
Speaker 2: So where's the word trinity come from? I believe in
Speaker 2: a church historian could correct me. I think it was Tortullian,
Speaker 2: maybe the end of the second century around that time,
Speaker 2: who first coined the term. He's an early church father.
Speaker 2: And it's a combination of two words try meaning three
Speaker 2: and nity comes from unity. So the trinity is meant
Speaker 2: to be a word that captures what the Bible teaches
Speaker 2: about the character of God, that there's threeness in God
Speaker 2: so to speak, and there's oneness in God. So oneness
Speaker 2: Pentecostals get the oneness right, but as far as I
Speaker 2: understand what they teach, would miss the threeness part. So
Speaker 2: what do we mean by the trinity? So actually let
Speaker 2: him take a step back, if that's okay. Fascinatingly, the
Speaker 2: earliest philosophical problem that people wrestled with, and this is
Speaker 2: according to Frederick Koppelston's History of Philosophy, he said, was
Speaker 2: the problem of the one and the many? On accounts
Speaker 2: for the unity in the world that ties everything together?
Speaker 2: And what accounts for the difference? So early Greek philosophers
Speaker 2: are like, everything is water and air and fire and dirt,
Speaker 2: arranged in different fashions. So there's unity, but there's difference
Speaker 2: maybe how it's arranged. So when we look in the world,
Speaker 2: we see a lot of there's one body, but there's
Speaker 2: many parts. There's one nation, but different members. There's one
Speaker 2: cluster of grapes, but different grapes. E plur mis uni
Speaker 2: there's one nation but different states. E plur mish uni
Speaker 2: means out of the many one? So what unifies the
Speaker 2: world and what accounts for the difference. The Christian answer
Speaker 2: is it's found in the character of God. The oneness
Speaker 2: is that there is one God who exists in being
Speaker 2: and nature. That's the oneness, the threeness, or the try
Speaker 2: is there's a distinction in persons, one God who eternally
Speaker 2: exists as three persons. So I was just teaching my
Speaker 2: classyear and I walked over by undergrad class at Biolah,
Speaker 2: and I was talking about the trinity. And if I
Speaker 2: said there's one God and three gods, that would be
Speaker 2: a contradiction. I said, there's one person and three persons,
Speaker 2: that would be a contradiction. That's not what the Bible teaches.
Speaker 2: It affirms that there's one God in being, and yet
Speaker 2: the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are each divine. Now
Speaker 2: no one debates that the Father is divine. I won't
Speaker 2: go into the passages about Jesus. Be good point to
Speaker 2: John one one in the beginning was the word. The
Speaker 2: word was with God, and the word Jesus was God.
Speaker 2: So the word Jesus is God. He's divine, but he's
Speaker 2: also distinct from the Father. So the Father's God, the
Speaker 2: Jesus is God. And I've been reading this morning. I
Speaker 2: read in Act chapter five where Anonius and Sapphire are
Speaker 2: told by Peter when they lie, they lie to the
Speaker 2: Holy Spirit, and they specifically lied to God. So the
Speaker 2: father's divine, the Son is divine, the Holy Spirit is divine.
Speaker 2: But there's one being in essence. There's three persons who
Speaker 2: are divine. Now, the person who wants to explain it
Speaker 2: to an unbeliever, I would I've given up trying to
Speaker 2: use perfect illustrations for the Trinity. When I taught high
Speaker 2: school years ago, I'd have students come up with them,
Speaker 2: and I kid you not.
Speaker 1: I had one student, never forget.
Speaker 2: It, goes, mister macul I got it a peanut Eminem goes,
Speaker 2: there's the shell of the chocolate and peanut. And part
Speaker 2: of me is like, creative. The other part of me
Speaker 2: is like, are you serious? We were comparing the character
Speaker 2: of God with a peanut Eminem. There's not a perfect
Speaker 2: illustration because we're talking about the character of God that
Speaker 2: is unique. I don't think we need a perfect illustration
Speaker 2: to an unbeliever, I might say, and this comes from
Speaker 2: Millard Erickson's book. He says, there's one what God and
Speaker 2: three who's There's one bean who is God and three
Speaker 2: persons who share that divine essence. And the try is
Speaker 2: the threeeness a per since the entity comes from the unity. So, yes,
Speaker 2: it's difficult to understand. Yes, it stretches our imagination, but
Speaker 2: I believe because this is what scripture teaches, and I
Speaker 2: think it actually helps make sense of the oldest philosophical challenge,
Speaker 2: namely the One and the many. All right, I see
Speaker 2: a ton of questions come through. My goodness, here's some
Speaker 2: practical ones. Here's a ton.
Speaker 1: I love this. This is fun.
Speaker 2: By the way, let me take one that was submitted earlier.
Speaker 2: Why did Jesus choose the time period he did to
Speaker 2: reveal himself. That's a great question. Let me pull up
Speaker 2: here Galatians four, I think gives a sense of this.
Speaker 2: Of course, Paul's letter to Galatia. He says, but when
Speaker 2: the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his son,
Speaker 2: born of a woman, born under the law. And of
Speaker 2: course the question is what's meant about the fullness of time?
Speaker 2: I think there's a lot of pieces of this. Of course,
Speaker 2: theologically and biblically, we could look back about how God
Speaker 2: progressively revealed himself over time, through the patriarchs, through the
Speaker 2: person of Moses, through the prophets, during the United Kingdom.
Speaker 2: God is slowly revealing his desire and his will for
Speaker 2: the people. That's the importance of the story of the
Speaker 2: Hebrew Scriptures. But of course, if Jesus is the Messiah,
Speaker 2: the divine Messiah, then the Old Testament is preparing the
Speaker 2: way for the coming of the Messiah. So there's a
Speaker 2: certain biblical theological building that's taking place for Jesus to come.
Speaker 2: But I also think what's fascinating is that there were
Speaker 2: certain structures in place where the message could get out
Speaker 2: to the world in a way it couldn't centuries later
Speaker 2: or much earlier, namely the Pax Romana. You had peace
Speaker 2: in Rome. You had a way for people to write
Speaker 2: letters and deliver them hence Paul's letters. You had transportation
Speaker 2: that was possible around the world. So not only was
Speaker 2: their biblical and theological precedent and the expectation of a messiah.
Speaker 2: And there's people who know this far better than I do,
Speaker 2: but historically there was a very unique window. And I
Speaker 2: looked at this in my work on the Apostles, because
Speaker 2: I remember thinking, do they even have the ability to
Speaker 2: get around the world, And there were maps of ships
Speaker 2: that went out and roads that went out around the
Speaker 2: world from the Middle East. It's like it all kind
Speaker 2: of culminated in that moment theologically and practically for the
Speaker 2: message of Jesus. Like it says an acts take it
Speaker 2: to Jerusalem, Judaea, Samaria, and the ends.
Speaker 1: Of the earth.
Speaker 2: They actually had the ability to get that message out
Speaker 2: at that unique moment. So I think God was preparing
Speaker 2: and orchestrating all those things sovereignly for his message to
Speaker 2: get out. All right, let's take a couple more here
Speaker 2: and we'll look live. I see a bunch of these
Speaker 2: coming in this. This is fun. Thanks for joining us again.
Speaker 2: Those of you just join us, we are giving this
Speaker 2: a shot to see if you enjoy a live Q
Speaker 2: and A here from Tabat School Theology. I'll be completely
Speaker 2: honest with you. Thaddeus Williams professor was supposed to join me,
Speaker 2: but I texted him the wrong date. This is completely
Speaker 2: on me. My plan is to have another talbot professor
Speaker 2: here with me and we will take your questions together,
Speaker 2: and we're thinking about calling it Talbot Tuesdays. So let
Speaker 2: us know if that's helpful. If that's interesting to you,
Speaker 2: let us know, and you can even let me know
Speaker 2: what talbot professor would you like me to have on
Speaker 2: there's a chance I could get maybe JP Morland the
Speaker 2: legend to join us. Maybe I don't want to make
Speaker 2: any promises. All right, let's see man a live. Questions
Speaker 2: are rolling in here, my thoughts on oneness, Pentecostals, predestination,
Speaker 2: and Calvinism. Of course, let me go back to this
Speaker 2: questions here. Honestly, I'll be really honest with Some of
Speaker 2: these questions are really nuanced, and I'd have to prep
Speaker 2: to answer some of them. So maybe in the future
Speaker 2: I can look at some of the questions that are
Speaker 2: written and give you my two cents on it. Let's see,
Speaker 2: here's an interesting one. How come we don't have any
Speaker 2: stories about Jesus growing up? Was it not as important
Speaker 2: as part of the gospel? Do you think we could
Speaker 2: have learned things about adolescence through his own story? Now,
Speaker 2: of course we could learn things about adolescents from the.
Speaker 1: Story of Jesus.
Speaker 2: I wish we had stories about this. When you get
Speaker 2: into the kind of the second century. In the third century,
Speaker 2: you have these apocryphal accounts coming, which are invented fictional
Speaker 2: stories about Jesus, like claiming to be God doing miracles
Speaker 2: as a child. I think there's a story, maybe it's
Speaker 2: the infancy gospel of Thomas of turning a pigeon into clay,
Speaker 2: or the opposite, I'm forgetting off the top of my head.
Speaker 2: These are invented stories because people are asking this question
Speaker 2: in the second century, what was baby.
Speaker 1: And young Jesus?
Speaker 2: Like I think the main reason why we don't have
Speaker 2: more of these stories, it's just the nature of how
Speaker 2: ancient biographies were written. So the Gospels are understood by
Speaker 2: most scholars, and in my assessment of this, I would
Speaker 2: agree with it as an ancient form of biography. They're
Speaker 2: not mythical accounts. Hence Luke begins his gospel by saying
Speaker 2: many of undertaking a drop and account of the things
Speaker 2: that have happened among us, And it talks about investigating
Speaker 2: carefully and talking with eyewitnesses, so Theophilis and his audience
Speaker 2: can know the certainty of things that have been written.
Speaker 2: These are historically based accounts.
Speaker 1: Now.
Speaker 2: The difference is in that time they didn't just write
Speaker 2: books chronically in the story of the Caesars, chronically in
Speaker 2: the story of prophets, like our biographies today. If one
Speaker 2: of our presidents writes a biography, we want to know
Speaker 2: is we want to know all the things of their life.
Speaker 2: The way biographies were written in the ancient world typically
Speaker 2: and generally was to only include a part of somebody's
Speaker 2: life if it advanced the theme of the book that
Speaker 2: it was contained within. So I think of the one
Speaker 2: story we do have a Jesus, of course, in Luke
Speaker 2: chapter two, Atthew Mark Luke, and this is where he's
Speaker 2: in his father's house. I won't read the whole thing,
Speaker 2: but it's in Luke two forty one through fifty and
Speaker 2: his family leaves for a day, come back, can't find
Speaker 2: him for like two days. It's like three days Jesus
Speaker 2: on his own. And at the very end of this story,
Speaker 2: when they finally find them, they're worried. It is why
Speaker 2: are we searching for me? He asked them to his parents,
Speaker 2: didn't you know that it was necessary for me to
Speaker 2: be in my father's house? But they did not understand
Speaker 2: what he said to them. So this story is included
Speaker 2: because it's teaching something about people not understanding the person
Speaker 2: of Jesus and the identity of who Jesus is. So
Speaker 2: matth Mark Look and John, as interesting as those stories
Speaker 2: would be, felt that it wasn't necessary to tell earlier
Speaker 2: stories of Jesus. Hence they tend to introduce some like
Speaker 2: the baptism when his public ministry began. I think that's
Speaker 2: really what's at stake here, all right, man, Some of
Speaker 2: these are tough, some of these particular verses.
Speaker 1: Here's one.
Speaker 2: This is a good question, keeno my identity.
Speaker 1: Then I'm gonna switch back to.
Speaker 2: The live stream here for a second and see what questions,
Speaker 2: oh man, good questions. Let me see here some of
Speaker 2: these are tough. Oloha from Hawaii. Nice to have you here.
Speaker 2: What do you think about the Brian Standard Bible translation.
Speaker 2: I've never read it, didn't know it was a thing. Sorry,
Speaker 2: I wish I could comment on that one. I did
Speaker 2: hear in class that Scott Adams passed away. I don't
Speaker 2: know the story of what happened at the end. Just
Speaker 2: did a video last week about him where he said
Speaker 2: he was planning on coming to the faith, and part
Speaker 2: of me wants to pause, even though he's passed, and
Speaker 2: just pray that he really, in fact did come to
Speaker 2: the Lord and repent and understand what the gospel is.
Speaker 2: But I don't know the answer to that.
Speaker 1: Okay, let me see here which person the trainee should
Speaker 1: I pray to?
Speaker 2: Oh, this is actually an interesting question, Okay, And then
Speaker 2: I'll come back to the ones that were posted earlier.
Speaker 2: Which person the trainey should I pray to each one?
Speaker 2: Or different things? So in principle, if it's helpful to you.
Speaker 2: Fred Sanders is a teacher at BIOL. He's one of
Speaker 2: the leading Trinitarian scholars in the world today. Wrote a
Speaker 2: book in the Holy Spirit. If I remember, maybe six
Speaker 2: or eight, ten months ago, I interviewed him about this
Speaker 2: and we broke it down. So I'm doing my best
Speaker 2: to remember what he said in his book in the
Speaker 2: Holy Spirit. But I think what he said and I
Speaker 2: understanding scripture is if the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit
Speaker 2: are each divine and God, it doesn't seem to me
Speaker 2: wrong in principle to pray to Father, pray to the Son,
Speaker 2: or pray to the Holy Spirit. I don't think that's
Speaker 2: a wrong thing you do theologically or biblically speaking. Enough,
Speaker 2: I'm missing something posted here that I'm not thinking off
Speaker 2: the top of my head, and I'd be happy to
Speaker 2: revisit it. But I do think we see a pattern
Speaker 2: most consistently in the scriptures that we tend to see
Speaker 2: the model of praying to the Father in the power
Speaker 2: of the Holy Spirit, in the name of Jesus. That
Speaker 2: seems to be a common pattern, that the name, that
Speaker 2: the name of Jesus has given us access to the Father.
Speaker 2: We pray through the power of the Holy Spirit, and
Speaker 2: we pray to the Father. That's the pattern that I
Speaker 2: think we consistently see. But I certainly wouldn't go so
Speaker 2: far as to say it's wrong for somebody to pray
Speaker 2: to the Holy Spirit, who is God, pray to Jesus.
Speaker 2: In fact, I think we have an appeal to this
Speaker 2: maybe in the story of Steven if I remember where
Speaker 2: he kind of prays and appeals to Jesus. So I
Speaker 2: think that's more of the norm than I consistently see
Speaker 2: and the pattern. But I don't think there's something wrong
Speaker 2: in praying to the Father or the Son or the
Speaker 2: Holy Spirit, since each one is divine. But post and comment.
Speaker 2: Let me know if if you see that, if you
Speaker 2: see it differently, let me see this one. Okay, here's
Speaker 2: an interesting question. Actually I promised I went back to
Speaker 2: earlier once and then I'll come to that one. Sorry,
Speaker 2: let's see here why there are some tough questions here, Okay.
Speaker 1: Let me take this one. VM Sushi, great name. By
Speaker 1: the way, it says.
Speaker 2: Is Scripture truly the word of God? If so, why
Speaker 2: is it open to interpretation? Shouldn't it be timeless? Also,
Speaker 2: I believe that there's an intelligent design to the universe,
Speaker 2: But how does that lead to the Bible? Okay, this
Speaker 2: is two separate questions. Let me take the second one.
Speaker 1: First.
Speaker 2: I do believe there's intelligent design. I've written a book
Speaker 2: on this, come to think of it, with William Dempsky.
Speaker 2: It doesn't take us all the way to the Biblical God.
Speaker 2: I don't think it's meant to. So there's different arguments.
Speaker 2: For example, the kalom cosmological argument thereby ends exist has
Speaker 2: a cause. The universe began to exist, Therefore the universe
Speaker 2: has a cause. William Lane Craig lays out, and I
Speaker 2: think he's right that if there is a cause to
Speaker 2: the universe, this cause must be uncaused, This cause must
Speaker 2: be changeless, must be immensely powerful.
Speaker 1: Seems to require a.
Speaker 2: Level of intelligence to bring this in. I'm not certain
Speaker 2: Craig makes that argument, but I think you could make
Speaker 2: that point. Spaceless can't rememor if I said timeless or not.
Speaker 2: I think you could make a case that is personal
Speaker 2: because other non physical things that are timeless, like numbers
Speaker 2: or laws of physics, don't have causal powers. Persons have
Speaker 2: causal powers. Now, that doesn't get us all the way
Speaker 2: to the Biblical God. Hence many Muslims use the Kalom
Speaker 2: cosmological arguments. In fact, many of them formulated it early on.
Speaker 2: Now some people say that's a critique of the Clom.
Speaker 1: It's not.
Speaker 2: It's natural theology. It's only it critiques pantheism because it's
Speaker 2: a personal cause universe had a beginning. Critiques naturalism because
Speaker 2: it points to a cause outside of and beyond the universe.
Speaker 2: It points to God condition consistent with the Judeo Christian tradition.
Speaker 2: You could point towards fine tuning, clearly also an immaterial cause,
Speaker 2: because it's fine tuning the universe as a whole, also
Speaker 2: very intelligent. I think when we point towards things like
Speaker 2: intelligent design in the DNA points towards a cause that
Speaker 2: itself is immaterial and minimally incredibly smart and intelligent that
Speaker 2: can only take us so far. It's not a criticism
Speaker 2: to say it doesn't take us all the way to
Speaker 2: God of the Bible, it's not meant to all right,
Speaker 2: So back to this point.
Speaker 1: Is scripture truly the work out?
Speaker 2: If so, why is it open to interpretations. One of
Speaker 2: the most important distinctions I learned in grad school. And
Speaker 2: let me tell you the backstory if I remember this correctly,
Speaker 2: It was in a class I took when I was
Speaker 2: here at Talbot in my Philosophy of Religion program with
Speaker 2: Gary Dewize on the philosophy of science. And for some reason,
Speaker 2: I think I asked him the question related to right
Speaker 2: and wrong, and there's a question about how do we
Speaker 2: know we can have certain how do oh live? I'm
Speaker 2: fumbling this a little bit. It was a question about
Speaker 2: how we can know there's a right and wrong when
Speaker 2: people differ over what's right and wrong. And he said
Speaker 2: to me, he said, Sean, I think you're confusing metaphysics
Speaker 2: with epistemology. Now, don't lose me here. This distinction is
Speaker 2: really really important. Metaphysics or sometimes called ontology, relates to
Speaker 2: what is, It relates to being. Pistemology is how we
Speaker 2: know what is true. So metaphysics ontology the study of reality,
Speaker 2: the study of being. Pistemology is the study of knowledge.
Speaker 2: There's a difference between whether something is right or wrong,
Speaker 2: true or false, and our ability to know whether it's
Speaker 2: right and wrong, true or false. So something could be
Speaker 2: true but we have no way of knowing it. The
Speaker 2: mere fact that we can't know it doesn't mean that
Speaker 2: it's not true. So Scripture truly the word of God?
Speaker 2: My answer would be yes. Now I'm not going to
Speaker 2: lay out a case for that here. That's not the question.
Speaker 2: But if scripture is truly the word of God, we
Speaker 2: mean that God is ultimately the source and he pend
Speaker 2: it so to speak through about forty different authors. But
Speaker 2: it's truly the word of God if God is the
Speaker 2: source behind it. And of course pass is like two
Speaker 2: Timothy that talks about scripture being God breathed and useful
Speaker 2: for teaching and rebuking passes like one Peter one, twenty
Speaker 2: and twenty one, I believe it is about scripture. Let's
Speaker 2: let's pull this one up. We see why I find
Speaker 2: this right here? If I'm getting this right at first
Speaker 2: Peter twenty wrong invalid? Oh first Peter two twenty of course.
Speaker 1: Nope?
Speaker 2: Is second Peter embarrassing? Why I might not thinking of
Speaker 2: this one all right now I'm killing myself. Is it
Speaker 2: one twenty? Oh? There it is found it second Peter
Speaker 2: one twenty known this first of all, that no prophecy
Speaker 2: of scripture comes from someone's own interpretation. For no prophecy
Speaker 2: was ever produced by the will of man, but men
Speaker 2: spoke from God as they were carried along by the
Speaker 2: Holy Spirit. Now I'm not making an argument here. I
Speaker 2: realize I'm using scripture to explain this. But this is
Speaker 2: a Christian view that scripture in fact is the word
Speaker 2: of God. It says, then why is it open to interpretation?
Speaker 2: Now we've moved from metaphysically scripture is the word of God.
Speaker 2: God is the author behind it. But then now when
Speaker 2: we talk about why is it open to interpretation? Now
Speaker 2: we're talking about epistemology. So we can't just because something
Speaker 2: is the word of God doesn't mean we can't disagree
Speaker 2: about it. If it's open to interpretation and people say
Speaker 2: interpret it this way, I'm terbret it that way. It
Speaker 2: doesn't follow that there's no proper interpretation, and it doesn't
Speaker 2: follow that it's therefore not the word of God. I mean, look,
Speaker 2: if the Holocaust really happened, why do some people deny it. Well,
Speaker 2: if some people deny the Holocaust for whatever reasons, maybe
Speaker 2: they're psychological reasons, maybe their worldview reasons. Does that follow
Speaker 2: that the Holocaust didn't happen?
Speaker 1: Of course not.
Speaker 2: So we have to look at which interpretation of the
Speaker 2: Holocaust of a biblical passage is most reasonable. So, if
Speaker 2: scripture truly is the word of God, and God has
Speaker 2: written it to instruct us and to guide us and
Speaker 2: to invite us into conversation, and God has given us
Speaker 2: free will, I would expect there to be differences in interpretation.
Speaker 2: In no way do differences in interpretation take away from
Speaker 2: the fact that the Bible is the word of God.
Speaker 2: All right, let's go back to question answer here I
Speaker 2: will do. I came to your school last year to speak.
Speaker 1: It was amazing. Thank you, Kate.
Speaker 2: That's really fun. I appreciate. That's wonderful to hear from.
Speaker 2: All right, let's take this one live and see if
Speaker 2: I can help it. It says question, is it reasonable
Speaker 2: to believe that God set the universe in motion and
Speaker 2: allows it to run according to its own laws without
Speaker 2: actively intervening in events? Is it reasonable to believe this?
Speaker 2: If I understand the question clearly, this person is saying
Speaker 2: is that this is kind of a deistic view of God.
Speaker 2: That God exists, set the universe in motion, allows it
Speaker 2: to run according to the laws that God set up
Speaker 2: and doesn't intervene in these events. That's a deistic view
Speaker 2: some people. There's a range of different people that have
Speaker 2: held theism. For me, where I would agree with deism
Speaker 2: is I think there's an intelligent designer. I think the
Speaker 2: evidence points towards a mind behind the universe, a mind
Speaker 2: and a purpose, an exquisite even within the laws of
Speaker 2: physics and cosmology themselves, as we move into fine tuning,
Speaker 2: are exquisitely within parameters to allow life. So I think
Speaker 2: that I agree with that. Where I differ with deism
Speaker 2: is I would say two things. First off, sometimes I've
Speaker 2: seen deism explained in a way that if God sets
Speaker 2: up these laws, then he's kind of limited by these
Speaker 2: laws and can't intervene. I've never fully understood that, because
Speaker 2: if God is the one who speaks brings something new
Speaker 2: existence for nothing, God creates the universe, and he makes
Speaker 2: these laws, and these laws seem to be contingent. They
Speaker 2: didn't have to be set the law of say the
Speaker 2: cosmon we're constant or the strength of gravity. If they're
Speaker 2: contingent and God is the one who set them up,
Speaker 2: then God could obviously, given what it means to be God,
Speaker 2: change or adapt them if he wanted to, or God
Speaker 2: could act through them if he wanted to. I see
Speaker 2: no in principal reason why God could not act through
Speaker 2: the laws that God creates. But the main reason I'm
Speaker 2: not a deist is not philosophically. I'm not a deist
Speaker 2: because I think Jesus really did miracles. I think he
Speaker 2: really walked on water. I think he really healed the blind,
Speaker 2: I think he really healed lepers. I think he actually
Speaker 2: rose from the grave. So a Jewish, Muslim Christian position
Speaker 2: rejects deism and says we have an involved God. But
Speaker 2: the reason I am a Christian and I don't stop
Speaker 2: with the laws being kind of set themselves is because
Speaker 2: I think there's a God who answers prayers. And I've
Speaker 2: done full videos on this. You can see with Candy
Speaker 2: Brown and make up your own mind about the data
Speaker 2: pointing towards prayers. I've done specific videos, did one just
Speaker 2: a few weeks ago on God doing miracles in the
Speaker 2: past and in the present, so you can believe that.
Speaker 2: But I think the miracles from the Old Testament and
Speaker 2: in practice today seriously challenge this claim towards theism. I
Speaker 2: hope that helps some. All right, let's take a look
Speaker 2: number one. I don't know are people voting on these?
Speaker 2: I don't know what these number ones mean? I guess
Speaker 2: I gotta figured out. That's my bad. I will get
Speaker 2: on that. It says, is struggling with sin a good
Speaker 2: reason to doubt your salvation, or is to struggle the
Speaker 2: sign that you are indeed saved. That's a really interesting question.
Speaker 1: I don't let me think so. My thoughts on doubt is.
Speaker 2: I understand why people doubt. People can doubt morally, people
Speaker 2: can doubt intellectually. My response is not to judge you
Speaker 2: and say stop doubting. I would point towards the passage
Speaker 2: in Jude I think it's one twenty two one or
Speaker 2: one twenty two that says have mercy on those who doubt.
Speaker 1: It can be painful.
Speaker 2: I went through in my own life a period and
Speaker 2: I was like really seriously questioning if I thought Christiane
Speaker 2: was true, the Bible was true, if I wanted to
Speaker 2: follow Jesus, and I felt it it was painful. So
Speaker 2: people can doubt for a lot of reasons. It can
Speaker 2: be intellectual, it can be the will that we just
Speaker 2: don't want to believe. It can be morally because of sin.
Speaker 2: So in some ways, if you're going to sin, it's
Speaker 2: natural that you would doubt because of it. So it's
Speaker 2: not so much that it's a good reason to doubt,
Speaker 2: but it's understandable that if we're involved in sin, it's
Speaker 2: going to make us question certain things about God and
Speaker 2: be likely to reject it. My obvious response in this
Speaker 2: case is I would I'd encourage you strongly to number one,
Speaker 2: don't keep it to yourself. Share with somebody you have doubts.
Speaker 2: It confesster like a kisser, and it can wreck just
Speaker 2: your freedom and life, and it can really deconstruct to
Speaker 2: the point of deconversion. So share it with somebody, trust,
Speaker 2: Share it with somebody who would listen, and don't let
Speaker 2: that sin if it goes unaddressed. I mean, the Bible
Speaker 2: has really strong things to say about sin leading ultimately
Speaker 2: towards death, sometimes physical death, relational death, and spiritual death.
Speaker 2: So I would get to the root of it, and
Speaker 2: if that's the sin that's going on, confess it and repent.
Speaker 2: Know that there's a God who loves you and for
Speaker 2: gives you, and will restore you and make you, make
Speaker 2: you new.
Speaker 1: Sean.
Speaker 2: The numbers mean top commentors got it. Thank you for
Speaker 2: communicating that to me. My bad feel like a boomer here?
Speaker 1: All right?
Speaker 2: Does God get tired of the same prayer? Here's one
Speaker 2: of the interesting things. I don't know what it means
Speaker 2: for God to get tired. A lot of human languages
Speaker 2: use what's often called anthropomorphizing language to describe God, like say, regret,
Speaker 2: but God doesn't regret the way that we do. I
Speaker 2: think these are hooks that are somewhat analogies to get
Speaker 2: us closer to understanding God, but they don't perfectly match
Speaker 2: on to God. So does God get tired of the
Speaker 2: same prayer? God doesn't get tired, He doesn't get worn out.
Speaker 2: And in some ways, I want to say, what kind
Speaker 2: of prayer? Is this? A sincere, heartfelt prayer to the Lord?
Speaker 2: I can't imagine God would get tired of that. I mean,
Speaker 2: we're taught how to pray the Lord's prayer. Would God
Speaker 2: get tired of that same prayer? Not necessarily? I think
Speaker 2: the question is less what does God get tired of?
Speaker 2: But what are we praying? And why are we praying it?
Speaker 2: I think that's the bigger question. So if I use
Speaker 2: the rope prayer and it's lost its meaning, then clearly
Speaker 2: I'm not able to connect with God and cry out
Speaker 2: to God and relate to God in the same kind
Speaker 2: of way. So that might be the time to change
Speaker 2: the prayer. Sometimes, if I'm not connected with God, use
Speaker 2: a fixed, pre planned prayer like the Lord's prayer, or
Speaker 2: of course in John chapter seventeen, where Jesus teaches his
Speaker 2: disciples how to pray and sometime and pray it. So
Speaker 2: on this question, this is really interesting. I've never actually
Speaker 2: thought about this. Does God get tired of the same prayer?
Speaker 2: I would encourage you to think less about God getting
Speaker 2: tired and more about our heart and our posture before
Speaker 2: the Lord. If we can be sincere and trusting of
Speaker 2: God to Him with the same prayer, then keep it up.
Speaker 2: If that rope prayer is getting in the way, then
Speaker 2: shift your game plan, all right. Third question about calendism.
Speaker 2: Shift away from that one for right now. So here's
Speaker 2: a good one.
Speaker 1: All right. I'll give some thoughts on this one. This
Speaker 1: one is tough. How is Jesus.
Speaker 2: Omniscient if he does not know the day or the hour?
Speaker 2: This is a fair tough question. I remember the first
Speaker 2: time I really wrestled to this again. It was actually
Speaker 2: a class in my master's program here with Gary Deuiz
Speaker 2: and we were looking and it's first time was like,
Speaker 2: wait a minute, Jesus God that he doesn't know certain things?
Speaker 1: How do I reconcile it to you?
Speaker 2: And maybe I'd heard it before when I was younger,
Speaker 2: is the first time it really hit home with me.
Speaker 2: And of course the challenge is is that we believe
Speaker 2: Jesus is God, which the scriptures clearly teach. I've been
Speaker 2: reading Acts in the morning and I think Acts twenty
Speaker 2: twenty eight. I'm just going to make this point and
Speaker 2: then come back to it. I think it's a great
Speaker 2: example verse I just committed myself to memorize. It says,
Speaker 2: oh luke, no wonder, it's not there losing my mind.
Speaker 2: Acts John X twenty versus twenty eight. It says, be
Speaker 2: on your guard for yourselves and for all the flock
Speaker 2: was the Holy Spirit? Is the point you do is
Speaker 2: over seers to shepherd the Church of God, which he
Speaker 2: purchased with his own blood. Now Jesusesus died is purchased
Speaker 2: by God because Jesus is God. So John, as I
Speaker 2: mentioned earlier, clear to teach Jesus God. We haven't luke.
Speaker 2: Of course, it's all over, Paul, How can he not know?
Speaker 2: The key to this is what we mean by Jesus
Speaker 2: taking on human flesh in the incarnation. Jesus is divine,
Speaker 2: but he's also human. So the tension we see in
Speaker 2: the scriptures is sometimes Jesus knows things is seemingly only
Speaker 2: God can know. He knows things about the woman in
Speaker 2: John chapter four, the woman at the well. He knows
Speaker 2: things about what the religious leaders are thinking in Mark
Speaker 2: chapter two with the paralytic, so he has divine insight.
Speaker 2: But he also says he doesn't know the time, and
Speaker 2: he doesn't know the hour, And I think what's going
Speaker 2: on here? My best is that Jesus doesn't seize being God.
Speaker 2: He has that knowledge as God, but he chooses to
Speaker 2: take on certain limitations to access that knowledge in his
Speaker 2: humbling himself. Hence Philippians chapter two five through seven, as
Speaker 2: he takes on human flesh. So not a perfect analogy,
Speaker 2: but one that comes to mind is if I chose to, Oh,
Speaker 2: my son's thirteen now, so he's a pretty good athlete actually,
Speaker 2: and I'm turning fifty in spring. But if I chose
Speaker 2: to compete with somebody and tie my feet together, I
Speaker 2: limit certain powers that I have. I still latently have them,
Speaker 2: but I've chosen to limit them to compete with somebody
Speaker 2: who has less powers. In some ways, I think this
Speaker 2: is what Jesus is doing. Is God doesn't cease being God,
Speaker 2: that would be heresy, but willingly submits himself to the
Speaker 2: Father to access and use certain things that he knows
Speaker 2: as God. There's no contradiction that is there, and I
Speaker 2: think it's in fitting with what.
Speaker 1: The scriptures teach. Boy, that's a tough one.
Speaker 2: All right, let's go back to some of these live
Speaker 2: questions here. Boom boom, let's see here. Oh gosh, some
Speaker 2: of these. You're gonna get me on the record. I'll
Speaker 2: just be honest with you, and I might backtrack when
Speaker 2: we're done. So you're getting me live in this one.
Speaker 2: BK Sample says, again, I've never thought about this. This
Speaker 2: is what makes this fun is on a scale of
Speaker 2: one to ten, how important is the doctrine of biblical inerrancy. Now,
Speaker 2: when we say how important is the doctrine of biblical inerrancy,
Speaker 2: we have to say important for what? If the question
Speaker 2: is on a scale of one to ten, how's important?
Speaker 2: How important is the doctrine of biblical inerrancy for salvation?
Speaker 2: I would say zero. You don't have to believe in
Speaker 2: biblical inerrancy to be saved. In fact, again, maybe I'll
Speaker 2: backtrack this. I think you can reject biblical inerrancy directly
Speaker 2: and still be saved. The way to be saved is
Speaker 2: to recognize my sinfulness, to recognize who Jesus is, cry
Speaker 2: out in repentance, and ask God to forgive me. If
Speaker 2: we believe in that way, we are saved. So in
Speaker 2: terms of salvation, I don't think biblical inerrancy matters at all.
Speaker 2: Now for Christian living, That's where I think biblical inerrancy
Speaker 2: is very important now part of me, since I teach
Speaker 2: at Biola and Talbot, I'm tempted to say it should
Speaker 2: be a ten, But I don't know if I'm quite
Speaker 2: ready to land there. I don't know, because I know
Speaker 2: a lot of Bible believing, faithful Christians who love the
Speaker 2: Word and live it out in their life and aren't
Speaker 2: biblical errentists. So if it's not a ten, and it
Speaker 2: might be, I put it awfully close to that because
Speaker 2: I don't want to crack open the door and say, well,
Speaker 2: there could be an air here, could being an air there.
Speaker 2: It starts to remove the authority of God and our
Speaker 2: life and put the authority in us to pick and choose.
Speaker 2: That makes me nervous. Biblically speaking, I don't see Jesus
Speaker 2: doing that. I don't see Paul doing that. I don't
Speaker 2: see people doing that through the history of the Church.
Speaker 2: So I would put it pretty close to at tend
Speaker 2: for consistent faithful Christian living off the top of my head.
Speaker 2: Very interesting question by the way. Oh, somebody Goodbye Park
Speaker 2: said please people press like button only fifty one likes.
Speaker 2: Let's go, folks, get the likes going and again. Oh,
Speaker 2: we'd love to see Sean and west Huff together. I
Speaker 2: would love to get Wes huff on.
Speaker 1: He's a friend.
Speaker 2: I think we're at the event coming up with rus
Speaker 2: Lawn KB. I will be at that event together. I
Speaker 2: don't think we're doing something on stage together. I might
Speaker 2: be doing something with Gavin Ortland there. I think we're
Speaker 2: figuring it out, but I'd love to have Wes on.
Speaker 2: He's a rock star. He was just on the Sean
Speaker 2: Ryan Show amazingly.
Speaker 1: Check it out.
Speaker 2: I haven't had a chance to watch it, but we'll
Speaker 2: get him on here in due time. Honestly, I didn't
Speaker 2: ask him for a while to come on because everybody
Speaker 2: was asking him after Rogan. Want to give him a break,
Speaker 2: but definitely want to get Wes huff on here for sure.
Speaker 2: Do you having a good resource is another interesting question.
Speaker 1: Oh by the.
Speaker 2: Way, make sure you hit like, please and comment. I
Speaker 2: told my team before I'm gonna read all of these.
Speaker 1: Is this helpful?
Speaker 2: Do you want these live on Tuesdays where we could
Speaker 2: just take your questions or we could take something that
Speaker 2: happened in the culture that day and talk about it
Speaker 2: or respond to it. My plan is to have a
Speaker 2: Talbot professor here with me every Tuesday, and there's some
Speaker 2: talent professors that are some of the leading scholars in
Speaker 2: the world, like Clint Arnold on acts, I mean, one
Speaker 2: of the leading in the world on spiritual warfare. We
Speaker 2: have some top level scholars, So let us know. Do
Speaker 2: you want this every Tuesday? Talbot Tuesdays what would you change?
Speaker 2: Let us know how helpful this is, because we want
Speaker 2: this to serve you all right, resources on biblical inerrancy.
Speaker 2: I'm not an expert on that, but I would definitely
Speaker 2: say Norm Geisler has done a lot of careful work
Speaker 2: on biblical inerrancy. I hosted a debate recently with John
Speaker 2: West and michae Lacona because we're seeing a certain debate
Speaker 2: or I don't know, fractures the right word within the
Speaker 2: evangelical world and scholarship about how flexible is the term inerrancy,
Speaker 2: And a number of scholars point towards more flexibility in
Speaker 2: it in the author's changing and adapting things for their
Speaker 2: theological ends. Then there's others that are more conservatives. So
Speaker 2: John West took kind of a traditional classic view. Michael
Speaker 2: ConA pushed back from his perspective based on his recent book.
Speaker 2: So that might be one you could watch and that
Speaker 2: would help you kind of make a decision there about
Speaker 2: biblical ergancy. But I think Geisler has a ton of stuff.
Speaker 2: People watch this stuff. Gosh, here's a good question, and
Speaker 2: I feel like I'm not going to give you a
Speaker 2: great answer to this one. What blind spots do Western
Speaker 2: apologists often have when speaking to Asian or honor shame cultures.
Speaker 2: You know, I think one big thing, one big blind spot,
Speaker 2: is I think we tend to see things so individualistically
Speaker 2: about me and my relationship with Jesus, and especially in
Speaker 2: an honor shame culture, there tends to be a real
Speaker 2: collective understanding of identity. And I've seen this as I've
Speaker 2: traveled in places around the world like I've seen this.
Speaker 2: I go to Philippines, go to Singapore, and go to
Speaker 2: other countries. This Western rugged individualism me and Jesus seems
Speaker 2: to be really common, and we've all got to go
Speaker 2: out and defind ourselves and really find our own identity
Speaker 2: is more of a Western thing, and we shift that
Speaker 2: and fail to read the Bible through the lens of
Speaker 2: honor shame, even things like the death of Jesus and
Speaker 2: how we often talk about the physical pain, which I
Speaker 2: talk about and it's terrific, and I think the physical
Speaker 2: pain highlights the depth of sin and the cause of death.
Speaker 2: But kind of realize crucifixion was the most painful and
Speaker 2: shameful death imaginable. Typically strip naked, put out publicly to
Speaker 2: be shamed in front of the world. That was one
Speaker 2: of the worst things imaginable in an honor shame culd
Speaker 2: So I think in general, to answer question, there's probably
Speaker 2: a lot of Asian and individuals from honor shame cultures
Speaker 2: who could answer this way better than I could. But
Speaker 2: I think we look at things individualistically and we miss
Speaker 2: the narrative what it means to be a part of
Speaker 2: an honor shame culture and kind of read different things
Speaker 2: into the scriptures, like it's me and Jesus. If I
Speaker 2: miss something, tell me I'd love to know. Okay, let's
Speaker 2: look at some other questions here. Get a good microphone
Speaker 2: and make consistent content. Is this microphone not good? I
Speaker 2: thought I've got a pretty good content here. Let me
Speaker 2: know if I need to get closer to get louder.
Speaker 2: It's not a good mike. I'd happy to be work
Speaker 2: on that. What would you like to see? Let me
Speaker 2: keep going here, man, it's some interesting questions from the East,
Speaker 2: which I love. Let's go here one this pentecostalism again.
Speaker 2: Hope someone's defending that fair enough. Maybe I'll let me
Speaker 2: know if you want me to host a conversation. I'd
Speaker 2: be happy to host a debate between somebody who believes
Speaker 2: the Trinity and oneness Pentecostalism, that might be an interesting
Speaker 2: conversation to have. This is very helpful and cool. Awesome,
Speaker 2: Thanks Laura. How would you best dissuade someone from being
Speaker 2: a new Age Christian? Well, I would say two things.
Speaker 2: First off, I would encourage that so called new age
Speaker 2: Christian to listen to my friend Melissa Doherty. She's a
Speaker 2: wonderful YouTuber former New Age new Thought, has a wonderful
Speaker 2: book out on this. Had a chance to interview her
Speaker 2: about her is a great interview. She talks about this
Speaker 2: a lot, and so I would encourage this new age Christian.
Speaker 2: I'd say, watch Melissa already and tell us what you think.
Speaker 2: The second thing I would do is if I was
Speaker 2: speaking with a new Age Christian, and you'll find that
Speaker 2: I do this in a lot of my conversations.
Speaker 1: Ask questions.
Speaker 2: Jesus asked between the Gospels and Acts five hundred and
Speaker 2: forty I'm sorry, three hundred and forty questions. In Paul's writings,
Speaker 2: we have two hundred and sixty two questions. In the Gospels,
Speaker 2: there's three thousand questions, questions, questions, questions.
Speaker 1: So if I have.
Speaker 2: Somebody and they are a New Age Christian. I'm going
Speaker 2: to say, tell me what you mean by being a
Speaker 2: Christian and tell me what you mean by new Age
Speaker 2: and how you reconcile the two. Clearly, this person doesn't
Speaker 2: really believe New Age, but this person really doesn't believe
Speaker 2: the Gospel because they are air reconcilable belief systems. So
Speaker 2: ask a lot of questions, understand, try to just understand
Speaker 2: where the person is coming from, and then get to
Speaker 2: the heart and say, since you describe yourself as a
Speaker 2: New Age Christian, a Christian is a follower of Jesus,
Speaker 2: help me understand what Jesus taught that you think would
Speaker 2: line up with New Age beliefs and.
Speaker 1: Go to the texts.
Speaker 2: There are none that in the right context actually teach
Speaker 2: new Age ideas. And that's because in New Age you
Speaker 2: find that human beings are a part of God or
Speaker 2: have divinity within. Jesus taught, like in Mark seven, he
Speaker 2: taught really clear, that's out of the heart that comes
Speaker 2: sloth and wickedness and pride and lust and all sorts
Speaker 2: of sins. So new Age and Christianity have a different
Speaker 2: view about human nature. New Age and Christianity also have
Speaker 2: a different view about the understanding of God. What did
Speaker 2: Jesus believe about God? Well, he clearly believed in the
Speaker 2: view of God as held through the Jewish scriptures, expanded
Speaker 2: in him being God in human flesh. Jesus believed in
Speaker 2: One god Mark chapter twelve, the Lord our God is
Speaker 2: one New Age what's the New Age view of God?
Speaker 2: God is not a personal being? On New Age God
Speaker 2: is a force. So I would ask this individual, since
Speaker 2: you're New Age Christian, do you believe humans are naturally
Speaker 2: good and divine as we see in a lot of
Speaker 2: New Age thought? Do you think good human beings are
Speaker 2: sinful and corrupt as we see in Jesus? Do you
Speaker 2: think we are all a part of God it's this
Speaker 2: energy essence that lives Or is God a try personal being,
Speaker 2: a personal being who exists outside of us who we
Speaker 2: can have a personal relationship with. There are other differences,
Speaker 2: but the bottom line is I would ask a lot
Speaker 2: of questions. I want to know this person means by
Speaker 2: New Age Christian, and I would try to untangle what
Speaker 2: it means to be New Age, what it means to
Speaker 2: be Christian, show the tension between the two, and invite
Speaker 2: the person to follow what Jesus really taught. That's how
Speaker 2: I think I would approach that one. All right, I
Speaker 2: love this type of Q and A thank you. Awesome
Speaker 2: to hear. Let me keep going here, man, there's a
Speaker 2: ton of questions. I'm sorry if I miss your questions
Speaker 2: here again, I might have time for one or two
Speaker 2: more here, But let us know how helpful is this?
Speaker 2: Do you want me to bring in Talbot professors? Would
Speaker 2: you love this every Tuesday? If we did Talbot Tuesday's
Speaker 2: live Q and A with you, would you attend? Would
Speaker 2: you prioritize it? What should we do differently? You can
Speaker 2: come and here on YouTube, or you can email me
Speaker 2: Sean at Sean McDowell dot org. My team will take
Speaker 2: a look. We are really trying to serve you in
Speaker 2: twenty twenty six. That is Christian skeptics, others, et cetera.
Speaker 2: All right, you see that the guy that you did
Speaker 2: a testimo video on DIT. I think that person is
Speaker 2: referring to Scott Adams. Maybe that's possible. I'm not sure.
Speaker 2: If it's somebody else, send me a note if I
Speaker 2: missed it. I'd like to know. Let me go back
Speaker 2: towards the top here what questions am I missing here? Oh,
Speaker 2: here's an insie one, Hi, doctor McDowell, love what you do?
Speaker 2: A question I have is what is a pervasive heresy
Speaker 2: you see in the modern church?
Speaker 1: Currently? All right? Here we go? Are you ready?
Speaker 2: I think one of the earliest heresies, or at least
Speaker 2: false views that was challenging the church is gnosticism. It's
Speaker 2: gnosticism and narcissism saw the physical world as bad and corrupt,
Speaker 2: and true identity being in the soul and salvation evolves
Speaker 2: leaving this fallen physical flesh behind and entering into a spiritual,
Speaker 2: meaning non physical state. I think the Protestant Church is
Speaker 2: completely it might be overstated. I think it's deeply influenced
Speaker 2: by gnosticism. Randy Alcorn talks about this a ton in
Speaker 2: heaven that we have when it comes to the afterlife.
Speaker 2: We have a gnostic kind of platonic view that we're
Speaker 2: just spirits and we're not fleshly, and we're not physical.
Speaker 2: You see that in heaven. Maybe I'm jumping the gun here.
Speaker 2: I hope it's okay. But my next book coming out
Speaker 2: I am co editing, is it's won't be out for
Speaker 2: a year. We're writing actually going to start writing my
Speaker 2: first chapter tomorrow, to be honest with you, is co
Speaker 2: writing it with johnstone Street. We're calling it Reframing Reframing Sexuality,
Speaker 2: and the idea is that it's a Protestant the evangelical
Speaker 2: theology of the body. I think Catholics have a much
Speaker 2: more robust and arguably biblical and consistent theology of the
Speaker 2: body against gnosticism. Now this doesn't mean I'm going to
Speaker 2: agree with Catholics on everything. When we get to birth
Speaker 2: control and some of those differences is not my point.
Speaker 2: That's a separate conversation we could have. But I think
Speaker 2: a big heresy in the Church, which when it comes
Speaker 2: to sexuality, is we we really downplay the body. And
Speaker 2: I'll keep this vague because it's not the conversation. I
Speaker 2: don't know if kids are listening when it comes to
Speaker 2: certain sexual behavior. I've asked a lot of evangelical experts
Speaker 2: and the answer is kind of like, if you pray
Speaker 2: about it, and if you have a clear conscience in
Speaker 2: your mind, almost anything you do physically with your spouse
Speaker 2: is okay. When I hear those kind of answers, I
Speaker 2: think this is kind of a Gnostic view that ignores
Speaker 2: the fact that the body means something. It's been designed
Speaker 2: for certain purpose. We actually communicate more with our bodies
Speaker 2: without words than we do with words. So the reason
Speaker 2: I think this is an important harassing the church is
Speaker 2: when it comes to issues like transgenderism today, which roots
Speaker 2: identity in my soul. So somebody would say I'm a
Speaker 2: man trapped in a woman's body. My soul defines me,
Speaker 2: not my body. That's a certain gnostic kind of belief.
Speaker 2: So I think the Protestant or Evangelical church has had
Speaker 2: a lot of interaction and thought about responding to certain
Speaker 2: transgender ideas. But we've bought into many, let's just say,
Speaker 2: gnostic ideas about the self, and it's left us without
Speaker 2: a robust way of responding. So there's plenty of other heresies,
Speaker 2: but that's one that comes to mind, and when I'm
Speaker 2: writing on and thinking about more and more. All right, friends,
Speaker 2: I see a ton more questions here. Thank you for watching,
Speaker 2: Thanks for your question. Seriously, please take a minute. You
Speaker 2: watched and you joined me, even if you watch this
Speaker 2: later or not live, and let me know are these
Speaker 2: kind of live q and as helpful would you like
Speaker 2: me to bring on other Talbot professors. We will be
Speaker 2: doing this for the next three months every other two Tuesday,
Speaker 2: the second and the fourth Tuesday, January, February and March.
Speaker 1: In two weeks.
Speaker 2: I'm bringing on my colleague Thaddeus Williams. We'll try to
Speaker 2: bring on Scott Ray, We'll try to bring on Eric Thomas,
Speaker 2: We'll bring on Matt Williams. We've got some others. But
Speaker 2: let me know, would that be helpful every other Tuesday?
Speaker 2: Is this something you'd want every Tuesday? How would you
Speaker 2: do a Q and A on this channel? How would
Speaker 2: it be helpful to you to serve you, whether you're
Speaker 2: a believer or not. Don't forget to hit subscribe. We've
Speaker 2: got here's some of the shows coming up. I've got
Speaker 2: a show coming up specifically on some new archaeological digs
Speaker 2: on Jericho.
Speaker 1: Super interesting.
Speaker 2: My son had a pretty radical how do I describe this? Well,
Speaker 2: my son, I want him to put it in his
Speaker 2: own words, but for a while became hooked on pornography
Speaker 2: and came out of it a number of months ago
Speaker 2: and experience pretty radical transformationist faith. I have never in
Speaker 2: my life seen somebody change more dramatically. He's only twenty
Speaker 2: one years old, and he asked if he could share
Speaker 2: his story, so I interviewed him. I'm going to put
Speaker 2: that up next week. We've got a Muslim coming on
Speaker 2: to talk about the Trinity. We've got a lot of
Speaker 2: other interviews coming on. Make sure you hit subscribe and
Speaker 2: follow us, and we're doing this live from Tabascool Theology.
Speaker 2: We would love to have you join us. Of course,
Speaker 2: I teach in the program on apologetics. We have programs
Speaker 2: on marriage and family. We have programs on theology Old Testament,
Speaker 2: New Testament, et cetera, in person and distance. Last thing,
Speaker 2: if you're like I'm not quite ready for a master's degree,
Speaker 2: we just totally rebooted, rebooted our certificate program. And this
Speaker 2: is a program where we get some of the top
Speaker 2: apologists to lecture and we just kind of walk you
Speaker 2: through to learn apologetics formally. And if you look in
Speaker 2: my life stream below, I have a significant discount below
Speaker 2: twenty five percent off for those who want to do
Speaker 2: the certificate program. All right, don't forget to hit subscribe,
Speaker 2: don't forget to hit a like or leave a comment
Speaker 2: that would help, and please let us know leave a comment.
Speaker 2: My team is going to watch all of these and
Speaker 2: try to respond. Hey, friends, if you enjoyed this show,
Speaker 2: please hit that fall button on your podcast app. Most
Speaker 2: of you tuning in haven't done this yet and it
Speaker 2: makes a huge difference in helping us reach and equip
Speaker 2: more people and build community. And please consider leaving a
Speaker 2: podcast review. Every review helps. Thanks for listening to The
Speaker 2: Sean McDowell Show, brought to you by Talbot School of
Speaker 2: Theology at Biola University, where we have on campus and
Speaker 2: online programs and apologetic spiritualformation, marriage and family, Bible and
Speaker 2: so much more. We would love to train you to
Speaker 2: more effectively, live, teach, and defend the Christian faith today
Speaker 2: and we will see you when the next episode drops.