Critical Theory, Race, Reconciliation, then Phone Calls on Great Topics

Alpha & Omega Ministries

Subscribe

Download

Share

00

Comments are disabled.

00:32

and all

01:38

Twitter, and it comes from James Lindsay, Dr.

01:46

James Lindsay, you may know who he is. He is an atheist. He was one of the three people that did the, let's show how insane modern scholarship has become in the grievance stuff, and so they submitted wildly crazy articles about wildly crazy stuff like dog sexual behaviors and the culture of rape and stuff in dog parks.

02:15

I mean, just that kind of stuff, and got them published just to show just how absurd the standards had become.

02:22

Anyway, I met Dr. Lindsay back in January, and this was just posted, so I thought you'd find interesting, because this is an atheist saying this.

02:33

Now, this is an atheist who's been around a lot of Christians recently, and I'm hoping, I had been hoping even back in January, but of course things have gotten a little insane since January all around the world, but yeah, but you know, hey, finally somebody calling in, but I would love to see an opportunity sometime in the future for Jeff and I to engage

03:00

Dr. Lindsay and some of his friends on atheism. I think it would be very interesting now that Dr.

03:07

Lindsay realizes, knows by experience that Christians can be thoughtful individuals, as can atheists, and so anyways, this is what

03:18

Dr. Lindsay had to say. At a recent conference I attended, I had the pleasure of listening to two black men talking about critical race theory and how races cannot reconcile because they're groups.

03:29

Only people, only individuals, only hearts can reconcile. This is an important message right now. They made the point that the only way entire races can reconcile is if everybody in each race agrees, which is impossible because some people aren't going to.

03:43

Some people are bad, some people are hurt, some people are grifters knowing they can run a con. Group identity fails here.

03:49

When we hear that we should listen more, I agree. I know the kind of people we should be listening to.

03:54

That's an important point, by the way. Let me just stop that for a second. Back in my day, in the olden days, you earned a hearing.

04:05

You earned it by your self -control, by what you accomplished in life, by your character.

04:15

You didn't earn it by simply having a skin color or an economic status. That's changed.

04:22

That has changed a lot. And I know the kind of people we should be listening to. Ones who are wise, ones who call for unity, ones who see wrongdoing as a matter of the individual person involved and responsibility resting on their shoulders, one -on -one.

04:39

I know he's an atheist, and I know a lot of you presuppositionalists are sitting there going, but but just just take a breath.

04:48

I know we'll get to it in time. Critical race theory teaches that individualism is an oppressive narrative used to maintain oppression to seduce people away from solidarity.

05:00

It says you're an ambassador of your racial group, and your identity is your racial identity first, other things later, if at all.

05:08

It's quite true. That's quite true. We have to reconcile as individuals, one to another, not as groups.

05:14

We have to stop thinking in terms of groups and remember that we're people, complex people, each capable of good and evil, doing right and making mistakes, including honest mistakes.

05:23

Groups can't reconcile. Now there's a lot there, and I know there's a lot there that's borrowing from the

05:29

Christian worldview. I get that. No question whatsoever.

05:35

Talking about good and evil and right and wrong and all the rest of it, I get it. But when you recognize, if you it says you're an ambassador of your racial group, that's what's a critical race theory.

05:50

It says you're an ambassador of a racial group, and your identity is your racial identity first, other things later, if at all.

05:57

That's why there can be no rapprochement between critical race theory and the

06:04

Christian faith. Because if you, it says we have to reconcile as individuals, one to another, not as groups.

06:12

If that's true, then I cannot be reconciled to someone who lives in the past, a past they never experienced.

06:22

So if you can hammer it into someone's mind every single day that their actual identity is derived from a people group that were wronged 160, 200, 400 years ago, you will make it impossible for reconciliation to ever take place.

06:45

Because you didn't do that back then, and they weren't actually there back then, so if reconciliation takes place, you have to have both sides, and the other side is unwilling to do it.

07:00

Groups can't reconcile. Not possible. So the question is asked,

07:06

James is an atheist, please consider why James understands this, the Gospel Coalition does not. Yeah, I don't know if you've been noticing, but there's been a lot of really sad stuff coming out of the

07:23

Gospel Coalition recently. Well, at least they haven't gotten quite as obvious about it as Campus Crusade, the old

07:40

Campus Crusade, the crew now. Wow. That's amazing.

07:47

One other thing, and then we'll go to your calls, interesting stuff I'm seeing on the calls right now, especially

07:54

PhD in church history. Oh, mm -hmm.

08:04

Not sure where to even suggest about that anymore. Sometime recently, sometime this week, earlier in the week,

08:18

I briefly commented on, and took just a quick glance at and commented on, the use of Exodus chapter 22.

08:27

By some people, during the height, I would say, well, the weekend and Monday, Tuesday, those are pretty high, the heights of the unrest.

08:40

I mean, it could take off again this weekend, I don't know, let's pray it doesn't. Even Antifa has to get tired at some point, you would think.

08:49

But anyway, I just did a quick look at Exodus 22 live on the air, and some pointed out that Jeff Durbin had taken a different understanding of it on Apology Radio like the day before, which

09:04

I had not heard. So I took another look at it and found out some interesting stuff.

09:11

So I decided to share that with you real quick, I'm not gonna spend a lot of time on it. Let me give you the context so you can see why the theories have been developed that have been developed about this.

09:22

Exodus 22 .1. If a man steals an ox or a sheep and slaughters it or sells it, he shall pay five oxen for the ox and four sheep for the sheep.

09:31

If the thief is caught while breaking in and is struck so he dies, I'm reading the NASB 95 here, and is struck so he dies, there will be no blood guiltiness on his account, but if the sun has risen on him, there will be blood guiltiness on his account.

09:47

He shall surely make restitution. If he owns nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft.

09:53

Then verse 4, if what he stole is actually found alive in his possession, whether an ox or a donkey or a sheep, he shall pay double.

10:00

Now the NRSV, the New Revised Standard Version says, listen carefully,

10:07

Exodus 22 .1. When someone steals an ox or a sheep and slaughters it or sells it, the thief shall pay five oxen for an ox and four sheep for a sheep.

10:18

Now notice, the thief shall make restitution, but if unable to do so, shall be sold for the theft.

10:27

If a thief is found breaking in and is beaten to death, no blood guilt is incurred, but if it happens after sunrise, blood guilt is incurred.

10:38

When the animal, whether ox or donkey or sheep, is found alive in the thief's possession, the thief shall pay double.

10:43

Did you notice something? They've totally rearranged the text. RSV, NEB, NRSV all rearrange the text based upon a form -critical theory.

10:58

And this is what caught, this is what makes this a tough one, and this is why you get different interpretations.

11:06

What I saw when I first started looking at this, I'm looking at, I'm trying to, while on the air, look at the

11:13

Hebrew, look at the Greek Septuagint, look at the translation and discuss this with you.

11:21

And what is strange, and what made me view it as, but if the sun has risen on him, then there will be blood guiltiness on his account, because the very next line is, he shall surely make restitution.

11:35

If he owns nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft. So, in the current form of verse 3 of Exodus chapter 22, when it says there shall be damim, damim, dam is blood, damim plural, bloods, becomes a technical term for blood guilt or blood guiltiness.

12:02

And so it is, it is that legal responsibility before God for death.

12:13

And that's why you had the cities of refuge and all the blood guiltiness law and things like that in the

12:19

Old Testament. But it directly goes into, he shall surely make restitution, and so how can the sun rise on him?

12:36

And does, does it mean when, when the, when he is struck in verse 22, so that he dies?

12:46

Well, is it talking about being struck so that he does not die? What does this mean?

12:52

Well, the NRSV, notice what it said, if a thief is found breaking and is beaten to death, no blood guilt is incurred.

13:01

But if it happens after sunrise, blood guilt is incurred. So, here's, here's why even the translations are different and that's why you get all these different understandings.

13:15

The, I, I really do not have a lot of commentaries on Exodus.

13:22

I, I just realized where I do have one other I didn't look at and I'll, I'll look at it later on. But I've told the story before, but when

13:31

I was in seminary decades ago, my

13:37

Pentateuch teacher, who was a really good teacher, I had him for five or six classes, way off to my left, but again, that's where I learned that people way off to my left can have a lot of really good information.

13:50

You just have to filter the conclusions, basically. Anyway, he had us, for the

13:57

Pentateuch class, we had to read a commentary on each one of the five books and then we had to write reviews.

14:03

And I've told you a story, I read, was it Von Brueggemann? Was that who it was?

14:09

On Deuteronomy? Was that what it was? I could go look, it's, I kept all my seminary books.

14:16

And this is one of them right here. Same series, too. Anyway, I read it and that was the one where the only positive thing

14:26

I could say about it was that it had a good binding. And when he, when he assigned these books, he said, these are the best commentaries, in my opinion, in English on these books, the

14:38

Pentateuch, right now. So it's like, oh, great. But this is the one he assigned for the

14:43

Book of Exodus, Brevard Childs. Now, Brevard Childs presents what's called a canonical perspective on the

14:52

Old Testament. It's very much based upon form criticism, redaction criticism, etc.,

14:57

etc. Again, fascinating insights, lots that can be learned from Brevard Childs, but still way off to my left.

15:10

So when I looked it up in here, that's when

15:15

I realized that the theory that the RSV, New English Bible, New Revised Standard Version, what they're running on, is they see the same thing that immediately caught me.

15:29

I mean, if you're just reading the Hebrew, you just go, and I even, I even wrote to Michael Brown last night.

15:35

He hasn't gotten back to me. Well, he, he did say, I'll take a look at it, but I haven't heard back from him. He might got, when he starts writing, he just, just does, sort of tunes everything else out.

15:44

But I was like, Michael, have you looked at this? Because as I read this, the transition here is so fast, and I'm really struggling to see, and it, as far as I can tell, the

16:01

Greek Septuagint, the underlying Hebrew text, is tracking with it. It doesn't seem to have a different tradition that it's, that it's translating.

16:09

It's pretty much the same. The only difference that I see in the

16:15

Septuagint is they use Phanos for Damim in, in verse 1, and then they change that in verse 2.

16:28

They don't render Damim by Phanos. They, they have Anakos Estin. But other than that, it, there, there's no rearranging of the text or something like that.

16:38

Well, you get into Child's, and what Child's explains is that the forum critics have determined that, this is their theory, and that they're operating on, as far as even how they translate major translations, is that verse 2 and the first half of verse 3 is a later insertion.

17:03

Or, if not later insertion, a misplaced insertion of, or, or a disruption in the text.

17:13

So, when you look at the NRSV, they take the last part of verse 3, and they attach it to verse 1.

17:21

So, verse 1 becomes really long. And in verses 2 and, 2 and 3, verse 3 now becomes rather short.

17:28

But it takes out the issue. It makes the issue rather cut and dry, because you simply have, if a thief is found breaking in and is beaten to death, no blood gills occur, but if it happens after sunrise, blood gills incurred.

17:40

All the other stuff is now just attached to the theft things, before and after.

17:48

Well, that gets rid of the problem easily enough, but to my knowledge, they've never found a manuscript or anything else that, that has that form of the text.

17:58

It's, it requires you to have certain theories in regards to what you can do with the text that are somewhat, are somewhat troubling.

18:09

But it makes it fairly straightforward, to a point, because if a thief, see, the very term thief in Hebrew, in its root has the concept of stealthiness.

18:31

And so, it'd be more of someone who sneaks in, not always, it can be used metaphorically and all sorts of stuff like that, but if you're just thinking about right here, if a thief is found breaking in and is beaten to death.

18:48

So, it has the idea, it's not like they kick the front door in. This isn't a violent invasion.

18:56

This isn't home invasion robbery. This is someone who, at nighttime, is sneaking in and you thwack them a good one and they die.

19:05

You don't know why they're there. You don't know what their intentions are. If that would be the case, then, during the day, the idea would be you can tell this person does not mean you harm.

19:18

That they are trying to steal something. You catch them, you, let's say, you know, most, most homes back then did not have multiple rooms in the sense of walls separating them.

19:30

There might be hanging things and stuff like that, but if you find someone sneaking around, you know, behind one of the curtain type things you had to try to find some food, that's different than someone who's going where your treasure chest is and they've got a knife.

19:50

Or your daughter, right. So, the idea is there is a need to take into consideration a motivation.

20:03

And daylight allows that, nighttime doesn't. So, if you're gonna break in to someone's home at night and you die, your family does not get to have any vengeance because you, that's what you can expect.

20:24

Because no one can tell. But the idea is, if it's light enough to be able to determine motivation, then you have that issue.

20:35

That's, that's taking the theft part out.

20:42

That's, that's going with the RSV, NRSV and taking the theft part out and making a disconnection to the he shall surely make restitution.

20:56

If you take that out and attach it to verse 1, there you go. So, I wondered what was going on there, because when you, when you just try to read the

21:09

Hebrew or follow the sense in the Greek Septuagint, it's just sort of like, man, that's a fast transition.

21:16

What's, what, what, what be going on there? So, I still want to do some more, a little more digging in with some of the, if I can track down some more conservative commentaries to see if there might be some, some more there.

21:29

But I just ran into that and I was, I was like, oh, okay. All right. Well, that's, that's interesting.

21:36

And my audience is the kind of audience that actually finds that kind of thing interesting. So, I thought I would share it with you. And there you go.

21:45

I have now shared it with you. And you're all sitting there going, but you're supposed to tell us what the final answer is.

21:50

Well, not necessarily. Not necessarily at all. All right.

21:58

Okay. Got a little bit of a theme going here today, don't we? Yeah, I guess.

22:04

I don't know. We'll see. All right, let's go to Jason. Hi, Jason. Hello, Dr.

22:11

White. Yes, sir. Yeah, fellow Phoenician here. Anyways, I guess my question has to do with the issue of civil disobedience and,

22:25

I guess, the Christian in this context we have today. These past few months have shown that the government can definitely extend, overextend its reach.

22:39

And I guess my question is, where is, like, the obvious moral issues like abortion and, like, say, not being allowed to worship freely, those are pretty straightforward, at least for some people.

22:56

But what about issues of, like, freedom, like, in this context?

23:02

Where does the Christian have the right to, I guess, put his foot down when there is an overextension?

23:11

Well, obviously that's a pretty big subject that would be worthy of extended discussion.

23:25

I'm not sure that it's a phone call extended discussion type thing.

23:32

For sure. But I think we have to recognize that the

23:40

Christian faith has to be able to exist in many different contexts in the world today.

23:47

And we as Americans, we have to differentiate between seeking to protect the rights that have been given to us by our forefathers and by our governmental system, and what it means to be a

24:03

Christian. And so, conflating them can become extremely dangerous.

24:12

Having to think through these things, very, very important. And so, the Apostle Paul is a

24:19

Roman citizen. He utilizes the privileges of being a

24:25

Roman citizen in his ministry experience when he's about to be beaten.

24:32

He says, is it legal to bind and to beat a Roman citizen? And they are frightened to death because they weren't allowed to even do what they had already done to him at that point.

24:43

And so, he utilized the advantages that he had and the rights that he had as a

24:50

Roman citizen. But at the same time, many of his fellow

24:56

Christians would not be able to do that because they were not Roman citizens. And so, what would they then be called upon to do?

25:07

And would Paul himself be willing to give up his rights as a Roman citizen for the propagation and promulgation of the

25:17

Gospel? At the same time, we know that there were times in Roman history where there were rebellions, revolutions, uprisings.

25:29

That happened a lot. You would think that that wasn't the case, but remember, even

25:36

Roman soldiers can only move so fast in the ancient world. There's no helicopters, no

25:41

CNN, no radios, things like that. And so, you did have a lot of rebellions and things like that where Christians had to make decisions concerning, were they going to join in this rebellion?

26:00

Because there was plenty of reason to question the right of the

26:07

Roman state to do the things that the Roman state did. Plenty of reasons. But what about situations where law and order breaks down in a major Roman city?

26:22

Let's say the garrison has been driven out and a legion has not yet arrived, and there is just simply anarchy in the city.

26:29

What do you do as Christians? What do you do if you are in a home and you have your wife and your children?

26:37

What do you do if someone comes busting in? See, we're not the first people to have faced these issues and to have thought through these issues.

26:47

So, all of these questions require,

26:53

I think, both individual thought as well as corporate thought. But first and foremost, corporate thought within the local body, within the people that you actually know, people who know you well enough to know whether your attachment to your style of life is what is driving your exegesis, rather than really looking at long -term understanding of these things.

27:21

So that's why I think it should happen first and foremost amongst people you actually know within the body. And then between bodies, too.

27:28

No one body has all wisdom, obviously. But there needs to be, I think, to be an order in which to think these things through.

27:36

And when we come to different conclusions, then it's good to try to talk those things through as best we can.

27:45

I think a lot of this has been forced upon us with, well, forced upon us with great speed.

27:52

None of us sitting around on New Year's Day watching the football games had a clue that it was gonna take this exact form.

28:02

There are people who thought, you know, we've got some problems coming, and yeah, but who could have seen the pandemic followed by race riots on a level we've never seen in just a matter of months just piling on top of each other, together with the big issue of the church and the state and shutting churches down and all the problems that it's becoming pretty obvious to me that a lot of churches are really, really, really struggling to reopen in a way that I don't think they ever expected that they would struggle to reopen.

28:42

But there are clearly problems worldwide because it is this staggered, slow reopening.

28:51

And by the way, I did hear a little factoid on the news this morning that I found fascinating.

28:58

Yesterday was the first day the city of New York reported zero deaths from the coronavirus since the height of the pandemic.

29:06

Just look at what is going on in New York City. Evidently, fire is very good for the virus because, wow, who could have seen that coming?

29:20

Yeah, he was saying the reporting agency is probably closed. But anyway, so I don't have any easy answers here.

29:28

I am very, very, very concerned that we are moving into a period of time when the way of discussion within our society is going to be so based upon a totalitarian mindset that we will be literally looking at the choice of the gun barrel versus bowing the knee.

29:55

And that's actually not a difficult choice to make. It's the long -term easy pressure that causes compromise.

30:03

When someone puts a gun to your head and says, deny Jesus, most of us know exactly what to do and how to do it, and are given a grace to do it.

30:12

I mean, Christians have been doing that for a long time. The enemies of the faith know it's long -term economic pressure that creates apostates, not short -term violent pressure.

30:24

So we'll see what type of form that takes. Unfortunately, the economic pressure all too quickly, once it gets to a certain level, turns into a spiritual pressure also.

30:39

Well, of course. Like, yeah. Oh, I agree with everything you just said.

30:45

Yeah, but I didn't give you any easy answers because there really aren't any easy answers. Yeah, for sure. Like, I was speaking to my parents quite a bit about this issue.

30:53

They come from communist Romania. They're immigrants here. Yeah, and they're just alarmed and, like, amazed, like, at how fast things have evolved.

31:05

Oh, yeah. Everybody, everybody that I know of that has come from Eastern Europe, that knows socialism and communism, who's come to the

31:13

United States, is sitting here going, oh my gosh, it chased us here. And that's what's going on. They see it. They see it.

31:19

They see it with great clarity. And the fact of the matter is, the young people, young people under 30, under 35, in this nation that are the products of the educational system, public educational system, they have been taught not to see it.

31:34

And that's exactly what's going on. Yeah, you're right. Yeah, yeah. You're right. All right, Jason, thanks for your phone call.

31:40

Yeah, thanks for giving me an answer. All right, all right. God bless. All right.

31:47

We can probably take and take another one. It all depends on if I wax as long as I did on that one.

31:54

Let's talk with Jake in Missouri. Hi, Jake. Hi, Dr. White. First off, can you hear me okay?

32:01

I can hear you just fine. Okay, I just got a new phone and I'm an immigrant to technology, so.

32:08

Okay. Let me just give you a general question, and then if you want specifics in my situation,

32:15

I can supply those. My general question is, when do you know your church has become too woke for you to stay?

32:24

When do you need to leave? When identity politics becomes more important than the

32:33

Bible's teaching on the relationship of Christians to Christ? Sorry about that. I was taking a drink.

32:39

When identity politics becomes more important than what the Bible teaches about our unity in Christ, our unity around the table of fellowship, and eclipses the reality that the only basis of unity we have is found in the one imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ.

32:59

Once that becomes secondary or begins to be reinterpreted in light of categories of justice, social justice, critical race theory, intersectionality, and especially identity, so that a person's identity is not first and foremost their identity in Christ.

33:20

If in a church your identity is first identified with your ancestors rather than with Christ, you've already gotten into a really bad position in that fellowship.

33:37

So, I mean, that's, without any more specifics, I mean, I just think that's a real good standard that you can utilize.

33:46

I mean, I could give you examples of where, when the preaching moves away from exegesis into all sorts of stories and allegories and bringing people in who may not even been

34:03

Christians and lifting them up as examples and that type of thing, that's sort of a byproduct.

34:10

But theologically, if you want the theological dividing line, are you first and foremost a

34:19

Christian because of the fact that you have been united with Christ, you've died with him, you have been raised with him, his spirit lives within you, and the reason that you and the person next to you in the pew, no matter what their ethnic history, the reason the two of you can come forward to receive the elements in the table together on an equal footing is because you're both indwelt by the

34:47

Spirit of God and you both have the imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ equally. That is the basis of Christian unity and when that becomes overshadowed by, you need to first and foremost think about the other person's ethnic history.

35:07

However far back you want to take that, whether it's ten years or a thousand years, whatever you do, once identity politics becomes central, the doctrine of justification will have to be minimized as a result.

35:23

And that's pretty much once that has already happened, it's probably too late to hit the emergency brake, but you never know.

35:33

So till then, stay and pray and try to be an influence in a gospel direction?

35:42

Yes, most definitely. I mean, a strong emphasis on the real basis of unity amongst believers would be obviously what is needed, and that basis in Colossians 2 and Colossians and Ephesians both address the same issue very, very clearly.

36:04

That would be a good thing to try to bring in. Obviously, this rarely happens just overnight.

36:14

Normally what happens is you've got your older elders and then you get younger guys coming in that slowly start trying to move the ship because the seminary they went to was already soaked in this stuff and people just didn't know it.

36:31

And people just didn't know it and they've already got the rudder all the way over to the left and people are wondering why the ship is shaking, and that's why.

36:42

That's normal. That's been my experience so far. That's been my experience so far. Okay? Well, thank you, that's a real good rule to follow and real good thoughts there.

36:52

One other question, and I'll hang up and just listen to your answer. Loved your sermon series on the

36:58

Holiness Code. Listened to all 38 of them, and would like to do some more reading in that area, so what would you recommend?

37:06

And I'll go ahead and hang up and listen to your answer. Thank you. Okay, thanks Jake. Well, let me give you a book that really challenged me.

37:19

I've still got stuff to think through on it, but the most important part is it's scholarly and therefore it has a really good bibliography.

37:27

And I had not read it when I did that series, but when I read it, it resonated with me having done that series.

37:34

And that's called The Mission of God by Joseph Boot. He's up at the

37:39

Ezra Institute in Canadia. They're having their own problems up there. But I would assume that Joe has a pretty good bibliography in there.

37:51

I don't think I have it in here right now. I thought I did. But anyway, that would be a good place to look.

38:00

All right, let's go to Tennessee and Charlie. Hi, Charlie. Hey, Dr.

38:06

White. How you doing? Thank you for taking my call. I have a, I don't know, a unique question, but you're sort of an inspiration behind just listening to your recent podcast.

38:17

I have an undergrad in Bible teaching, a master's in Bible exposition, but recently I feel like the Lord has laid on my heart to get a

38:24

PhD in church history, I think specifically historical theology. And I'm not sure if that's wise or that's foolish, but I wanted to get your perspective just for the sake of schools that I'm looking at.

38:38

I'm just concerned that, am I going to get a good education or not? And just your perspective on if you were going to get a degree, a church history degree, like where would you go?

38:48

What would you focus on? I guess, is there a specific teacher you would focus on?

38:54

And just getting your perspective on it. Well, a couple things. Technically, the program

39:01

I'm in is in church history, technically, even though it's a very technical aspect of church history, text criticism and CBGM and stuff like that.

39:10

But I guess the real question that I have would be, what do you want to do with it?

39:17

What is, what is, what reason? Because, I mean, partly because if you want to teach and you want to be a part of the system as it exists right now, the system may not be in existence for much longer, to be honest with you.

39:35

I think, I mean, I think there's major, massive changes in education coming. I mean,

39:41

I just discovered yesterday, I'm not sure if I didn't, if I didn't tell

39:46

Rich this either, the Mormons are not having their general conference in October again. They're gonna do it all virtually.

39:52

And BYU may not even meet this fall, may not even have in -person, in -person classes. That's gonna, if that happens generally, that's gonna have a huge impact on institutions, seminaries, all sorts of things like that.

40:08

I can see major changes coming and if major changes happen in our society, as the past number of months would seem to indicate they are, that could totally change not only how education is done, but who can teach, what you can teach, the whole nine yards.

40:27

So I have a feeling, my theory would be, that the person who wants to teach and edify the body, first and foremost, over the next 30 years, is going to be trained and prepared differently than people have been for a long, long time.

40:51

So I can't just simply go, well, you know, in the olden days, this program here was great and that program there was great, so on and so forth.

40:58

I think we have to recognize that that big -box seminary standard, go become a professor someplace, live in a nice little house off -campus, go play softball with the students type thing, that's probably not gonna be the reality that we're gonna be facing in our society over the next number of decades.

41:21

That's, something tells me that if you want to teach church history, and obviously I believe that's a vitally important subject to be teaching, you might actually be itinerant.

41:34

You might actually be doing it on the dark web. You might be doing it in such a way that your lessons are being passed around at coffee houses on jump drives without hopefully anybody seeing.

41:50

You may have to be very, very different in your approach than people were 20 years ago.

42:02

I would like to be wrong about that. Wouldn't we all like to see the normal return?

42:08

Well, I just don't see that that's a possibility. So that can impact what you choose to do as far as where you go, because you can get a fantastic education today without uprooting yourself and indebting yourself to $120 ,000.

42:27

That was not possible 15 years ago. It is possible now. Now, obviously, that requires a tremendous amount of dedication and discipline and things along those lines, but it can be done if what you want to do is to be able to teach in the church more so than fitting into the old -style, you know, fight -your -way -up through the adjunct, associate, full tenure, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

42:59

All that, I think, is falling apart. I really do. I just honestly think that's coming apart at the seams, and I just don't think that the futures could be able to sustain that kind of thing.

43:10

So those are issues that you have to have to put together, because almost all the seminaries have put together online components with a residency, and I think, especially with what has just happened, that's going to become more and more the case.

43:31

And European seminaries, European universities likewise have research -only

43:39

PhDs where you don't have residency at all. You need to go a few times to meet with professors and things like that, but you so many, you know, if you have a good library near you, you know,

43:53

I have Arizona State University nearby, and I've got Phoenix Seminary nearby, and if you've got good libraries nearby you, and so much information is now fully digitized and able to be accessed in that way as well.

44:07

So, you know, if you've got a good Dr. Vater, a good doctoral advisor who can really put the whip to you and make you do that type of thing, you can do that without uprooting your family and moving off someplace.

44:20

That can be done. So, really depends on what you want to do, how long you want to take to do it, and, you know, really what your ultimate goal is, because I've always told people if you're going to do something along those lines on the doctoral level, then for me,

44:45

I've benefited from reading people's dissertations when I know that I was only one of maybe ten people in the world that ever did.

44:53

Okay, so there is a room, there is room for that in the really, really super, super, super technical thing, but if there's some way to make your doctoral work be edifying and blessing to a larger audience, so minimally doing it in such a way that you always have in the back your mind this is going to become a book someday that real people in the pew are going to be able to read and going to be able to help them.

45:19

That's something I always kept in mind. I always wanted my education, and I can point you to the chapters in various of my books that came out of that kind of stuff.

45:30

That's how I made that work, in essence. So, you know, the real question is, what's the motivation?

45:39

Where do you want to do it? And then that's going to determine, are you going to make application in Europe?

45:48

Are you going to, is there someplace close by? How much online? How much you're willing to spend?

45:55

Do you want to have takeout loans? There's just all sorts of things. It depends upon, are you married?

46:00

Do you have kids? Where are they in life? There's a million different things there. You know, you talk with your elders, you talk with, because I assume you're involved in a church, you know, what is this going to involve in regards to your ministry within the church?

46:15

Can it be something you can, that can add to and benefit your ministry within the church?

46:20

These are all things that I think are sort of important. Yeah, I agree. I think originally when

46:28

I spoke with my Master's Advisor, I did want to actually pursue a doctor in order to be a professor, really engage in the academic community.

46:37

But I think I Am Married, my wife, has sort of shifted my perspective to maybe doing this more

46:43

YouTube video -wise, creating content lessons through that means, so that it could generate more viewership.

46:51

But also at the same time, I've talked with my church, and I've talked with my pastor about partnering with them, about doing it through them as well.

46:59

And ultimately, like, my interest is in the Anti -Nicene Fathers and their perspective on, like, creation, evolution, just that conversation.

47:09

Just because I do love apologetics as well, and just so many people I see are, you know, it's just a difficult struggle.

47:17

Like, as a teacher, I see my students, like, accepting or rejecting, and I'm like, I just want to be able to know, okay, what does the church teach, and specifically that creation, evolution topic.

47:28

So that's sort of how I got my interest piqued a lot, was doing that area.

47:34

Okay, all right. All right, Charlie, well, hopefully my thoughts were helpful to you, and because there's a lot of things to take into consideration on something like that.

47:42

So thank you for calling today. All right, all right, God bless. Bye -bye. Well, speaking of biblical creation,

47:48

I'm wearing my Biblical Science Institute t -shirt today. I forgot to say, Biblical Science Institute. Jason Lyle, I got it yesterday in the mail.

47:57

I ordered it off Amazon, actually. He didn't charge nearly enough for it.

48:04

It's like, I think we've finally found someone who is a worse marketer than we are here with Alpha and Omega, and that might be

48:13

Jason Lyle, because he's selling them for what it costs him. And I'm like,

48:19

Jason, there's a numbers thing. I mean, here's a guy who can write books about Einsteinian physics and time theory and stuff, but can't figure out that most of us are more than willing to spend five dollars more for our t -shirt than it costs him, so that he can eat a cheeseburger.

48:37

You know, it's just sort of how it works. It's good. It's okay. Go to Biblical Science Institute.

48:44

Support Jason. Anyway, all right, let's talk with Maureen. Hi, Maureen. Yes, hello.

48:50

Can you hear me? I can. Oh, great. I am, actually, I was trying to be anonymous, but I am in Chicago, so you can understand what that means.

49:01

Yes. I am in a wonderful church, biblical, they teach the

49:06

Bible line by line, everything is good as far as that. Right now,

49:11

I am hearing more and more buzzwords about systemic racism, white privilege, white supremacy, and I am concerned about that.

49:23

Right now, we are not meeting, we're meeting just online, and so I haven't been able to speak to anybody, and I'm just wondering, as a woman, a single woman, what is my place in speaking to any leadership about these things?

49:39

I'm very scared, I don't want to cause trouble, I don't want to be disrespectful, but there's a lot of concerns that I have.

49:46

Like I said, we're not meeting, and yet they joined a protest the other day. Nothing violent, they're not into that.

49:55

These are wonderful people, godly people, I know them personally, and I love them. I'm just very concerned the direction that we are going, and I don't know what my place is as a single woman to deal with it.

50:06

Right, right, I hear you. Well, I very much appreciate the attitude that you want to have in approaching this subject.

50:15

There needs to be, I think there should always be openness on the part of any eldership to speak with folks about this, and to sit down, answer their questions, and talk with them about it.

50:30

If you encounter any real resistance in being able to do so, that's probably not a good sign, but it sounds like you probably wouldn't.

50:38

It sounds like there's, as long as there remains a dedication to the Word of God, and I'm not sure if you heard the previous caller when someone asked, you know, where do you draw the line?

50:49

What are the things you're listening to and finding? And I emphasize the theological aspect at that point.

50:55

I don't know if you've seen the presentations from a couple years ago at the

51:02

G3 conference that we did on the subject of social justice. So, Voti Baucom, myself,

51:08

Tom Askell, Josh Bice, Phil Johnson, and others made presentations that, if you would review them and hear what they're saying, you might have a means of, if you meet with one of the elders, saying, you know, this is what

51:32

I've heard from someone like Voti Baucom, who is saying things like this.

51:38

Where do we stand on this? What direction are we going? I know there's a tremendous amount of pressure here in Chicago in light of the situations here, the violence that exists within the city, the economic strains that have only been intensified because of the pandemic panic, and then the overreaches of the government, and then all the violence, and the burning, and looting, and everything else you put all together.

52:09

And every eldership in everywhere in Western culture, and really globally, is having to think through and address and struggle in providing meaningful answers and direction at this particular point in time.

52:24

And I know that in the vast majority of elderships, when you approach the elders with an open

52:33

Bible and a real desire to understand exactly where they're coming from, they really, really appreciate that, and they'll be very, very open with you about it.

52:43

Are you familiar with James Cone? I have been listening to some information about him.

52:50

I was listening to the Just Thinking podcast. Yes. I really enjoy, so yes,

52:55

I've educated myself on that somewhat. Right, okay. Well, if you look up James Cone, C -O -N -E, on our search engine, and look up some dividing lines

53:06

I've done where I've gone through James Cone's teachings, he's sort of a litmus test, and I think it's fair to ask,

53:18

I would ask any elders of a church, what do you think about James Cone?

53:23

What do you think about his legacy and specifically about his theological teachings? Because if a church is teaching

53:32

Scripture line by line exegetically, then they are going to have an extremely strong adverse reaction to James Cone, because that's not where he's coming from at all.

53:46

And so that would be a real watermark. I mean, if there's any lack of clarity in being able to say, oh no, no, no, that's not where we're going, then that could be an issue.

54:00

If there's a, well, you know, he's got some insights, that's probably indicative that minimally that movement is moving in to the end of the leadership, even if it hasn't totally taken over quite yet.

54:15

So that would be something to look for as well. Okay, and what if you do speak to them and it is just, the narrative is just taken for granted that there is white supremacy, systemic racism, there's not even any...there's

54:33

no questioning it, that's like the bottom line where they start. I'm not saying that's the case yet, but if you get that type of attitude, then where do you go?

54:47

I'll be honest with you, I don't have a list of places for Chicago right now. I'm sure

54:52

I could probably track one down eventually, but yeah, if it's sort of taken as a given that this is where we start and there's not any grounds for having a biblical discussion as to where that's gone wrong, then yeah, that's obviously going to be a problem.

55:13

Sadly, you know, in days past I could have said, well,

55:18

I'm sure you could call Moody Bible Institute and they'd be able to direct you someplace. I can't say it anymore because I was just looking at a book by a

55:25

Moody professor that is just nothing but social justice. I mean, it's just straight straightforward neo -Marxist stuff, and so I can't even make that recommendation.

55:36

But there are, obviously, God still has people who are not confused about that in the area, and I'm sure we could probably track them down for you over time as to who they are.

55:50

But right now, off the top of my head, not knowing where in the city you are, and right now I'd imagine transport in the city is somewhat chaotic.

55:57

Yeah, I don't have a car, and I'm not getting on a bus anywhere, so I'm staying in my house.

56:03

I fully understand, I fully understand. But yeah, but I would hope that there would be a willingness to discuss those things and to especially emphasize the supremacy, sufficiency of Scripture to be able to address those subjects.

56:19

But that's where you got to start, and if you just approach them prayerfully with a gentle spirit, that's the best that you can do.

56:28

That's the best, that's the right way. Okay, thank you very much. Thanks, Maureen. All right, bye -bye.

56:33

All right, two more calls. We'll wrap things up here. Oh goodness. Let's talk with Colin.

56:42

Hi, Colin. Hi, how's it going? Good. Okay, cool.

56:47

Well, first of all, thanks for everything you do. We really appreciate it. I had a question about the nature of Christ and what it means to be fully human.

56:58

Something I constantly think about, and it gives me a little trouble, is when we say Jesus was fully human, it seems to me that that would sort of have to entail being a human person, and I know that anytime a second human person is really mentioned in the context of the nature of Jesus, it's sort of just labeled as Nestorianism and tossed aside, but I was wondering if there's a possible view of a human person being encompassed by and united to a divine person, so that they're not exactly separate, but they're united.

57:29

I just think that, you know, we're humans, we're persons, and when we say, well, Jesus took on flesh, it sort of sounds like, well, the divine person took on a body, but just taking on a body isn't what makes you a human.

57:42

I mean, we can lose our body when we die, but we're still human. You know, we're still a person, and so forth, and I also just think it sort of answers a lot of biblical questions about no one knows, you know, he doesn't know the day or the hour, he grows in wisdom,

57:54

I think there's a verse that says that. Okay, I'm a little confused. What church are you in that would say that Jesus...

58:03

I don't understand where you're getting the that's just tossed off as Nestorianism. The Doctrine of the

58:09

Hypostatic Union specifically says that Jesus is one person with two natures, and the

58:16

Hypostatic Union emphasizes the reality of the full humanity of Christ, and Nestorianism, Nestorius may not have been a

58:27

Nestorian, but Nestorianism fundamentally divided the human...

58:35

divided Jesus into two persons in the sense of by denying the term

58:42

Theotokos and saying that Mary was only the

58:48

Christokos, the one who gave birth to the Christ and not to the

58:54

God -man, the real problem with that was the possibility of denying the

59:01

Hypostatic Union. It sounds... I'm not sure if you're talking about Eutychianism, where you're talking about Apollinarianism, but the point of the

59:11

Hypostatic Union is that you have the divine nature and the human nature, they are not intermingled, so you have half -God, half -man.

59:24

There is not a replacement of the spiritual or mental aspect of the human with the

59:35

Logos, as you would have in Apollinarianism or in some forms of William Lane Craig's teachings.

59:41

He calls it Neo -Apollinarianism. And then you don't have just simply a split between the two that could lead to Adoptionism and other forms in Historianism.

59:52

So it's a balanced recognition that Jesus, that the

59:59

Son, the second person of Trinity, takes on a full human nature, but it's a perfect human nature, it's not a fallen human nature.

01:00:08

So I'm not sure where you're... Well, and that's where I'm asking, is when we say he took on a full human nature, how can you have a full human nature without being a human person?

01:00:20

That's the thing, and I know there's... I'm not sure what you mean by human person, because Jesus is a human person,

01:00:27

I don't understand why you're saying that. He's a human person and a divine person, both.

01:00:33

Well, okay, so what you're saying is, Jesus wasn't a human person, he was only a divine person?

01:00:41

No, I'm saying that maybe I've misunderstood the doctrine of the Hypostatic Union, but that's what is conveyed to me when we say that he's one person with two natures.

01:00:52

Well, that's because when you say one person, you're not denying either the divine nature or the human nature, but you are not making the human person a separate person so that there is some type of schizophrenic conversation going on between two different...

01:01:12

Okay, okay, real quick, I appreciate that point, and that's why the Nestorian, the word separate is really important, because I wouldn't be saying that when

01:01:20

I think about these issues that I would make them separate, I would make them united so that, you know, it's more of like a unidirectional understanding that if you draw a circle and then a smaller circle inside, that the human person is encompassed by the divine person.

01:01:34

So it's not like they'd be talking to each other, it's just that they're... Well, but one is eternal and one is not.

01:01:42

That's one thing to keep in mind. One is eternal, one is not. Jesus is clearly a human person in the sense that he is born, he grows, he increases in wisdom and stature before dying...

01:01:54

And my main question is, was that person a created person in terms of the human nature of the aspect?

01:02:00

Of course, of course. He couldn't have been eternal. There's no such thing as an eternal human being. The human nature that Jesus takes on...

01:02:07

And the divine person didn't undergo a change, so... That's right, that's right. Is it wrong to say that Jesus is two persons?

01:02:14

Well, see, you're identifying the natures and taking that term nature and making it the same thing as person.

01:02:22

So we use the term person to speak to a totality, and you're using it to refer to natures.

01:02:30

And that's what would end up creating the division between divine and human.

01:02:36

So I can say Jesus is a human person without turning Jesus into two persons, one divine person and one human person, as if those are complete categories that can be separated out from one another the way that we are.

01:02:55

Jesus is absolutely unique, and so how that hypostatic union works to where he is one person with two natures, those natures don't...

01:03:05

That doesn't mean that the divine nature was incomplete or the human nature was incomplete. It just means that they cannot be...

01:03:12

that they cannot be intermixed. As soon as you intermix them, like Eutyches did, then you no longer have a truly divine nature or a truly human nature.

01:03:24

But when you say person, see, we use person of a... I'm trying to find a term, and this is the struggle that was had in the early church.

01:03:31

The early church struggled because any human language we use is going to carry with it not only physicality, but limited categories of our own experience, and Jesus is absolutely unique.

01:03:43

So that's where this problem is. That problem was exacerbated in the early church by the fact that this conversation took place once the

01:03:51

Greek -Latin split had taken place. And so the West is using Latin, the East is using Greek, so you have to translate.

01:03:58

And so hypostasis and ousia and persona and all these terms, and one early father will use it one way and another early father will use another way, and that's where you end up with all of these very, very difficult issues and where a lot of the concern came from.

01:04:16

But I think what might be helpful is just to keep in mind that Jesus has to be fully human to function as the

01:04:25

God -man so that his sacrifice is truly the giving of a human life. But Jesus cannot be two persons because then the one that gives himself is not the one who is speaking in John 17.

01:04:44

There has to be a unity of voice, intention, and purpose for Jesus to be the

01:04:52

God -man, but there has to be a recognition of the distinct natures without an intermixing.

01:05:00

That's where, when I went over this recently in the catechism questions we do as a part of our church services at Apologia, I introduced everybody to Nestorianism, Polynarianism, Eutychianism, so that you sort of, if you put them on a graph, it would sort of like be the edges of a triangle, and if you know where the the edges are, you can stay in the middle.

01:05:25

And when you're talking about someone like Jesus who's absolutely unique, same thing with the Doctrine of the

01:05:31

Trinity in regards to Godhead, we can say these things are not true, and so we can define the outer boundaries more easily than we can say this in the center is true, because on the outer boundaries we can say it's not like this, it's not like that, we can use analogy, and that's how we're comfortable as human beings to go.

01:05:56

When we have to define the exact divine essence, when you have to define perichoresis, the interpenetration of the divine persons and the divine nature, when we have to describe the hypostatic union, we're talking about absolutely unique things that any type of analogy that we try to apply to it is going to end up leading us into error.

01:06:14

So that's where the balance is to be found, and the balance is to be found in that Jesus has to be a true human person, not to the exclusion of the divine nature, but not in the sense of person as in separated out over here someplace, and then you can see the same thing with the divine person, and so they're just two different people that happen to be in dwelling the same body.

01:06:37

That's where you end up with a real problem. There is the hypostatic union is hypostasis and union.

01:06:46

The union does not mean interpenetration, it does not mean mixture, but it's also a real union.

01:06:52

That's where the Nestorianism goes wrong. I'm not sure that Nestorius went wrong there, but that's where Nestorianism goes wrong, because the union is there without intermixture.

01:07:03

That's where the balance has to be found, or the scriptural witness to who Jesus was falls apart. Okay, thanks for waiting, thanks for waiting, so thanks for waiting to like the last call of the day,

01:07:14

Colin, I appreciate that. I mean, you've been sitting around, you've been sitting around in in your house, stuck under the lockdown for all this time, going, what did

01:07:22

I come up with? At the end of the show. Yeah, I'm one of those, I'm a statistic, I'm a first -time gun owner because of what's going on out here.

01:07:29

Well, in California, what did you do, find it on the street? I mean, how in the world did you get one right now?

01:07:36

Aren't there enough hoops to jump through? Wow, good, yeah. All right, Colin, thanks for your call.

01:07:43

Thanks, dude, I appreciate it. Dude, definitely. Dude, California call.

01:07:51

All right, last phone call, let's talk to Art in Chicago again. Yes. Wow. Thank you for taking my call.

01:07:58

Do you have good locks on your doors, Art? Fortunately, I live in the suburbs where we have a very low crime rate.

01:08:06

Okay, good. The rioters stay away from my little suburb. Well, I won't tell them where it is then, how's that?

01:08:14

Yes, thank you. Okay, all right, what's up? John 316 has the word believe in it, or believeth in the

01:08:20

King James Version. What's the tense of that verb in the Greek? Is it past tense, is it present indicative, active, or what is the tense of that verb believes?

01:08:31

Well, here's the problem, it's not a verb. It is a participle, and the beauty of the Greek language is that a participle can have both elements of a noun and a verb combined in it.

01:08:44

That's why I love participles. Participles are beautiful. Participles are the paint palette that the

01:08:50

Spirit uses to create the beauty and the color and the texture of the text. And so, what you have is a substantival participle in the present tense, but remember, when you leave a finite, the realm of the finite verb and enter into the participle, certain elements that might be emphasized in a finite verb are not necessarily emphasized in the corresponding participle, especially when it becomes a substantival participle.

01:09:29

That doesn't mean that it's not still there, but it becomes something that you have to interpret within the context.

01:09:36

And so, what you have is hinapas hapistio, in order that everyone believing ais in him should not perish but have everlasting life.

01:09:44

This is in a, what's called a subjunctive, it's a hinap clause, in order that everyone believing.

01:09:52

So, it's present tense. Present tense would normally indicate ongoing action.

01:10:00

Now, the question would be, does the verb pastuo contain within it a kind of action that can be ongoing, iterative, aorist, as in a one -time type thing?

01:10:18

And what about in this context? That's what has to be done to really answer your question well.

01:10:25

And what's interesting is there is a consistency in the Gospel of John in his utilization of present participles in contrast to aorists or perfics or other forms.

01:10:41

And so, I would say that in the Gospel of John specifically, there is actually a documentable and strong emphasis upon the present participle and the fact that true saving faith, the one who believes, that's a present participle, that is a belief that is going to be ongoing.

01:11:04

That is a belief that is not an aorist or a single -action type, because elsewhere in John, he does use the aorist forms for people who believe in Jesus and then turn around and deny

01:11:19

Jesus. So, in John chapter 8, they believed in Jesus. By the end of the chapter, they're picking up stones to stone him. John chapter 2, they believe in Jesus because they saw the miracle of the change in the water and the wine, but Jesus does not entrust himself to them because he knows what's in their heart.

01:11:33

It wasn't present tense faith. In John, when it's present tense faith, it's saving faith.

01:11:39

And so, this is his norm, this is John's normal way of describing a true believer. Hapest you own, the one believing in him shall not perish.

01:11:49

So, I do think you can make a strong case that the present tense in the participle is significant, but you'll notice

01:11:57

I didn't just simply say, oh, it's present tense, that means this. I recognized the things that have to be done, and I would say to you that those things are fulfilled exegetically, and so there is a strong emphasis upon the ongoing action of that belief, and that's what saving faith is.

01:12:16

Yes. I thank you for that. Does that help? That helps, and if the lady who called two callers ago from Chicago, I might be able to help her if she wants to talk to me, if you know how to put it together.

01:12:31

Well, how about I put you on hold, Art, and I get your information, and then if she wants,

01:12:38

Rich, if she wants to call back and talk to you, then we'd be able to hook you up that way.

01:12:46

Would that be all right? That works. Okay, I'm gonna put you on hold, Art, and then Rich will be able to talk to you, and I think

01:12:53

I've worked there. Okay, I think I got it. All right. Well, that'd be nice if that worked out, but anyway, you know,

01:13:01

I was gonna do that. I was in the shower this morning, and I was thinking about the fact we're gonna open the phones, and for some reason

01:13:11

I have a hard time remembering what all the topics were because I'm just going, I'm pretty focused. I'm trying to,

01:13:17

I mean, I just went from the hypostatic union to Greek syntax, and so I've just got to be focused, and what it does is it sort of blows what the previous topics were sort of out of my mind, and I'm sitting there later on trying to type it.

01:13:28

I was like, what were those? And I don't have a lot of time to going back and re -listening to everything, and so I was going, do a screen capture.

01:13:35

Just go command shift 3 or whatever it is, and just do a screen capture when all the phone calls are up.

01:13:41

I didn't, but at least I've thought of doing it. That's a positive thing.

01:13:47

We'll move in the right direction. Anyway. All right, folks. Let me tell you something. I plan to be here on Monday.

01:13:58

It's possible that we might have to move that, but my plan is to do a program on Monday, and I really hope,

01:14:07

I really hope like we can, that I'll feel comfortable to returning to looking at some stuff in the conclusion of Wilson's dissertation or something.

01:14:16

In other words, that I don't, I hope for a peaceful weekend. I really do.

01:14:22

I hope for a peaceful weekend. I hope, my understanding is that there are some of you who are going to be able to meet for the first time.

01:14:28

It's gonna be a little strange, could be a little weird. I'll be honest with you, I've been completely spoiled throughout this whole thing, because our church just didn't stop meeting.

01:14:44

Same with you. So both Rich and I haven't missed a Lord's Supper, haven't missed a song.

01:14:53

We sing through the Lord's Supper, we preach, and I've never appreciated it more.

01:14:59

And I'm not saying it, oh, we're better than you. That has nothing to do with it at all. I just hope that if your church is opening up this coming

01:15:08

Sunday, that you'll have peace, that you will not have fear, that the

01:15:14

Lord will bless the preaching, that you all will realize the great blessing you have in one another.

01:15:22

And I just hope and pray that it will not be long until we all get to be doing that, and we will never ever ever forget just what a blessing we have in being able to do that.

01:15:35

So I hope it's a great weekend for you all. Thanks for watching the program.