Share This Episode
Outer Brightness  Logo

Exploring Biblical Inerrancy, Pt. 3 (w/ Steve James)

Outer Brightness /
The Truth Network Radio
August 22, 2021 11:41 am

Exploring Biblical Inerrancy, Pt. 3 (w/ Steve James)

Outer Brightness /

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 165 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.

August 22, 2021 11:41 am

In this episode, Matthew the Nuclear Calvinist and the Apostate Paul continue the conversation with Steve James. In this final installment, we continue the dialogue around the definitions of “inspiration” and “revelation,” the idea that the use of Ancient Near Eastern texts by Old Testament writers is “polemical,” the Divine Council Worldview of Dr. Michael S. Heiser. We also begin discussing the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy and questions Steve posed regarding several if it’s articles, and the perspicuity of scripture. Is revelation from God to prophets and apostles needed today? We discuss several ideas that Steve posed as areas where Christianity is adopting views more closely aligned with Mormonism, a common LDS apologetic method.

Here are some resources for listeners to explore more about the topics we discussed in these episodes:

Scripture Alone: The Evangelical Doctrine by R. C. Sproul


Supernatural: What the Bible Teaches About the Unseen World - and Why It Matters by Dr. Michael S. Heiser


The Bible Among the Myths: Unique Revelation or Just Ancient Literature?  by John N. Oswalt

Cross Reference Radio
Pastor Rick Gaston
Connect with Skip Heitzig
Skip Heitzig
The Truth Pulpit
Don Green
The Truth Pulpit
Don Green
Grace To You
John MacArthur

Your right and and firefighters is the final installment of our conversation was to James left off for two hope you enjoy yet think that's one issue, at least that I can about as nasty Christian evangelicals are Protestants talking about inerrancy more of the dictation theory. No mechanistic transcribing of Scripture where you know they see like every single letter is is perfect and so we just have an atomic time robotically writing every character you know it's it's much more organic and I think it's I think in terms of the actual process I think that you doubles not disagree that it's not just like mechanistic you know transcription but it is more organic and you know that it is God working through them, but I think maybe I'm not sure. Maybe we would agree, actually, but like the final product was actually written down entrance. Not given to the saints that is inspired without error and errors could come later to copies of what God inspired through them and what they wrote and gave us is infallible and inerrant, so would you agree with that.

You know that's there is a time when Scripture is inerrant, that's the time it is rigidly given that it was starting your new cases that you know the moment we start to interpret words were bringing our own know you were bringing our moral schema and so regardless if it's written perfectly just reading it sort of makes it in perfect perfection, but there is a time when Scripture is perfect and inerrant and like his style like God was that we could we could talk more about which analyzers I haven't gone through the entire is treated you talked about was so little for this is a this is one week parallel with Egyptian gods time and I can post a link to their special websites to find project Augustine's life has just next to each other and you can read them is clearly word for word, but it's just not close to the point where it's really hard to say that these didn't have a least common source. Now most scholars would say there's a common source of multiple got from you Egyptian influence or that David was using Egyptian writing is way Polemic against that which is our lot from evangelist side anytime similar language becomes polemic which you get into that. Why why I have my reservations. But what is clear is that it seems impossible to campout independently seems almost guaranteed that one came from the other or they both came from a similar source be curious to hear your thoughts on on why you disagree with the concept of becoming polemic all sure that's often just can't read text like the example here is the song you read in so late to Elohim stance missed Elohim stance. Most gospels just unrighteously banishes that and a lot of Protestant heroes able gods actually humans and polemic against that language.

Or another example is Isaiah 4310 which we probably talked about their site.

There is no other which we know find elsewhere in the Bible. That is, this is an expression of supremacy, not an ontological declaration.

This is the same also rate does not greater than me as thoughI'm just not saying my nature is such that there's nothing like me, and so on. And NBC was used in the surrounding cultures but I hear people say well when he is rarely used it. It was polemic when I don't see how they used it differently makes sense but I think the argument for polemic comes from the weight of the Old Testament prophets are interacting with the literature and the teachings of the religions of the peoples around them. They do so in a polemic way there arguing for like use of the supremacy of Yahweh that that's kind of where scholars argue that it becomes a polemic right that there there arguing for you and you know Heiser Ray Heiser talk to view the so maybe she was talking about other divine beings who are who are divided because they are spiritual beings but they are creative beings of Yahweh is supreme supreme over them right which Psalm itself says no way is taken his place in his counsel he rules the Council. So if you're going to just to keep things short on that that's that's where the idea that this polemical comes from the writings of the Old Testament prophets of polemical against other gods podcasts as well. I'll try to try to drag me into the Michael Heiser train reading is that what you have questions and and he could sometimes interacts with opposite views that that are not how I view the passage so it's hard for me to get on board with what he's saying because he's capturing something that I don't know why don't you mean, it seems like he's like it's e-reader on their side or my side and Esther got a but not scholarly great insight and I do agree that this reporter reading of the text is more persuasive for what he's advocating is yet let's find just like in general, just, is I found that they know when I was questioning and believing in Christianity and like to know a lot of what I thought was like what Chris gave you agree on all the stuff just fusion it only grants a but I'm actually very flexibly stimulating to know that hey there some there's a lot of stuff that we agree on.

But we're not so sure about every disagree on. We can have debates on and I think it's great to do that so sick. While much did you guys have a specific get into next-door cover. So this is the next thing I had was just a few of the songs you got Psalm 29 rigidly to file all Psalm 20 scholars connected to works that preceded them. I don't know how big a deal that is to the argument article for assets the workforce as we further deny the corruption of human culture and language percent has supported Gosport inspiration so I understand that despite cultural and language barriers, we should still be a will to get God's word about the Scripture, that is what what is describing over 20 article 4 read from the God who made mankind in his image is used language as a means of Revelation, we deny that human language is so limited by our creaturely nest that is rendered inadequate as a vehicle for divine revelation. We further deny that the corruption of human culture and language through Sam has thwarted God's work of inspiration yes and this is just not first thoughts and affirmation that that that God uses human language to speak to people right to use the human language of the authors of the Bible to inspire what he would have written that seems kinda straightforward, but sounds like Matthew is pointing out, sometimes people have that Dictaphone type you and how revelation and inspiration come came to the authors, but then there's also the denials here which is denying that that that cultural gap in that time gap that exists between us and the authors of Scripture in the original readers and hearers found that we find in Scripture that is so great as to make it impossible for God to get his word and in his intent to cross to us from Scripture see I die.

Why we deny that is a biblical studies guy think it's important that we we understand that dealing with the Bible were dealing with. We are doing with the cultural gap we are dealing with a time gap what you were saying earlier Steve bring our ideas to it and we start reading it in English you know what the ideas the form in our minds may be completely different than those that would've formed in an ancient Israelites mind reading the trawler someone hearing Jesus preach right from the sermon on the mall so the status. This article just kinda denies that that those those difficulties. While there are difficulties are not so great as to be insurmountable in terms of us gathering what what it is that God would have us know from Scripture that my head when I read that this might be a little curt but why does it take a Masters degree or grad school degree to understand stuff language and culture is not a barrier you know why. Why can't your average Joe's reading any translation get the gist of it. What is it that we need to go and you know all this exegesis always breakdowns in you know we discussed the scheme of the ancient peoples.

Oh well, I think what I will push back a little bit and say that I think any average Joe can read the Bible and and and get the message that God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whoever believes in him shall eternal life, and shall not perish but have eternal life forgotten us of the son into the world to condemn the world, but that through him, the world would be saved right so I don't think it's impossible for anyone to sit down and read the Bible and understand what what God's messages to us. Are there greater insights that can be garnered from high status are the greater insights that can be gained from scholarship.

Absolutely I five love the studying that I've done I don't think that it's necessary to go to seminary decided to to really understand the message of the Bible, but there are certainly ways in which people misinterpret misunderstand the Bible to great error and for that reason I think scholarship is important and it's always been a very important part of the Christian tradition throughout the centuries.

That's one of the things that draws me to it scholarship ends and study that the faithful men of done throughout the centuries ensures that the deposit of faith that was given the faith once for all delivered to the saints doesn't get corrupted that anyone who's comes along and claims to have another gospel or were interpret things in ways that are accurate when you look at what Scripture say can be countered by those who study so we are faithful shepherds of the flock. I would just add that the reformers they wrestle with this to you because you know they're there all philosophy was at Pontus going to source as a pulpit for centuries.

You know tradition had been seen as as a source of Revelation alongside a source of authority alongside Scripture and so they want to return to the source and see Scripture as the sole infallible rule of faith and practice, and so the guilt of the word that's complicated.

The meeting is not complicated so it's a perspicuity entry that yeah perspicuity of Scripture just means Scripture is needy understand in terms of its basic message but when you get to the fine details and a lot of the stories the parables understanding the context of the historical background of geographical, cultural background, that's all complicated. Matt requires while studying and I think it's also the work of you know, when you say that the church broadly, you know, like the body of believers to dig into this and try to understand it from all these different aspects and try to understand what the original intent. God wants understand and so that's that's hard part. And yet, we all decided to spend their whole lives studying in one particular passage for publishing on and I don't think there's any contradiction there because you don't need to know to study their passage to stand what God wants you to know for your life. Like when Paul the apostle Paul phone number but when the apostle Paul was talking to Timothy in and shepherds are usually magical. Scott versus 1670 but the entire chapter. He's giving instruction. This is its contains word of truth. It's trustworthy you know it's it's it's a leading leading you into the faith and it's what you raised up into as a leader as a child. Even so, that's kind of you know, it's suitable for everybody you know not just scholars nine everybody can find spiritual truths and profit by it. Eddie Scripture is Reagan once.

I don't believe in, find something good in their essential message of most Scripture is apparent that there are doctrinal issues that arise because of some of his unity and I think that's a little problematic in terms of inerrancy, especially for the business of excluding certain people based on those doctrinal views have its own conversation talks about cultural views as well like that that's that's not all had a few women's hair.

What that entailed, with counsel about why she covered even though that's in the Scripture does necessary content description.

Anyway cultural view agree with Kaiser's view on this is interesting. I'm still working through what what the whole thingto talk about Angel saw here is something this horrible death made it easy for us to think selected is so crazy and that is the way someone believe that you know this. Please remember, is not all that long ago that I just call and even just spend time ideas that people today Macias Holcomb were quite commonplace even amongst Christians. Things like dowsing rods, for example, I actually helped because the environment wasn't so negative towards those things that Joseph had made him a little more accepted as an oxidant Nazis killed at least a little more accepted that he would've been today and there is debate as to whether you know the Bible as lot of doctrinal teachings and there's normative descriptions of what happened versus you know you know what is actually prescribed for Christians of all time whether you know that same principle that same idea should be applied to every culture in their own culture like some cited the modern equivalent of covering your hair to signify that you marry back then they would be wearing a wedding ring and also this is a lot of no interpretations. That way there's a moral principle still being taught there but supply different cultural events, like what I scroll what he's described but then he tenable will still believe that women ideally should wear head coverings that we sell quickly so you know it's kind of interesting that you know well done acknowledge that you will still take the view that well you know he says what he says all that he saved, I guess so yeah so there's that passage in particular I just brought that up in a group on said band like the first line you know I like snow you have the right to wear it out yet arousal cultures different norms to stop for Staffordshire okay on covers most of what I was looking out another brief.

We kind of in a roundabout way, and a few things out a few other questions. But no, you guys wrap timewise or there's a topic to talk about. You want to get into it. However, she wanted to go with the stuff we can do that or we can try to schedule a later time to go over more social question I had was progressive revelation five. We affirm that God's revelation was progressive. What does that mean has ended. Yes, so the idea there is that God's revelation of himself and his plan for humanity is progressive right incident.

To me it seems like a self-evident principle. If you look at the Old Testament and then moved to the New Testament.

This lumbar clarity there around the Messiah is and what the intent of the coming of the Messiah was so that's that's the idea of progressive revelation right from something is less clear to something that's more clear and so your question. Why is it stopped for me the answer to that question again is tied to I'm not I'm not coming from a place where I think additional Scripture is impossible right.

I'm not one times the accusation that will be thrown at the Christians by Latter Day Saints to word commenting on the Christian say why believe in a close canon. The sale will you trying to click on the box. Are you trying to put a muzzle on God. Things like that. My position is as it is, no I'm not. I'm not trying to try to do that.

I believe God could speak to my hotel God that he can't speak if you were to do. So my question is has he spoken right and so much for me the idea that she is spoken to Joseph Smith. It's unbelievable I don't I don't believe that that's what took place there is possible she could speak Scripture is I don't. I I'd I say yes but I don't see a need for because he is New Testament says Jesus. Jesus is the ultimate revelation of God right once he comes in and dies on the cross is the penalty for sin.

Aside from the apostles whom he called to tell that story in that aspect of God's revelation to the world right what what more is needed is a question that I that I have yet we don't have to unity was in Christianity salt. I think that you mimic a history within the Christian worldview is the Bible used to estimate standard. However, we see the people using the Bible have done things that were clearly not Christian you used to justify slavery here is used to justify misogyny. There will not however you want places so clearly Caesar something more music that they were all that was needed was in there everyone who reads it would come to the exact same conclusions and I don't know that that's necessarily the case. You affected this thousands of denominations and things in one book of Revelation is clearly going to be prophets were speaking in his room.

True, some of those last days profit like LBS with your broadcast preaching repentance type of role. It seems that clearly there will be prophets. In effect we receive warnings against false prophets.

Sort of implies that real ones in the future as well. Close account points out Hill had a lot of thoughts focus all yeah great Paul that like especially Hebrews 1 talks about how Christ is the apex of this unit everything is leading up to him and he is kind of the climax of all history, not even Jesus said that in terms of the Old Testament prophets, John the Baptist was the last one so it like you see this this this particular role or prophesying of Messiah you know is completed is all you have like a possible approximate detestable to serve a different role with Air Canada instruments of Revelation and foundational in and Christians also point to Ephesians chapter 221 or talks let me know. It's built on the apostles and prophets are somebody see that their ministry as being a foundational ministry. You know once you build that ministry. That foundation of the church you know we are the spiritual stones. As Peter says built on Christ so that foundation is laid prophets so we are built upon what came before us.

God is building us up to the work of the Holy Spirit in church today, but we don't need to constantly happy to keep going about foundation foundation was laid know Jesus said that the Old Testament prophets finish the work was done and so it's the same with the apostles when their work was done in only lay foundations for the church and the tenant of the Scriptures completed, you know, that was longer needed. So yeah is progressive. In a sense, was 100 progressive wheel believe that you know what comes later replaces what came before know all Scripture is God breathed and so when we talk about the doctrine of the Trinity.

For example, a lot of times people say will rest on in their but when we look at all Scripture from the very beginning God is very clear that there is no other God of any kind of caliber type or kind like he is in other are the Elohim, the Benelux team, but those are subordinate to God clearly in subjection so terms of of Yahweh. You know there's no other daughter anywhere close to what he has my stomach or after him and there's another is interesting past and second Kings should look that up. But this case is any God or did Creek world will be destroyed and that speaking of like the gods of the mange, so he is clearly saying that because God created Yahweh created everything he owns everything. It's all his and in the gods of the other nations worship know they they have no power. So when we look at that there's a foundational God.

And then when in their saints and shadows of I think you mentioned, you know, like the second power meter we also see to an early return with a really talk about or mention that's worship you know as God not just a messenger of God is his God in their past is the Old Testament where no destruction of something tomorrow or Thursday that the fire yeah right so there are there are hints and shadows. There you know that God is not absent, absently simple in terms of being given a personal so there there are multiple personalities in God and that's even that's shown most clearly in the New Testament. See the God has revealed himself as father son and Spirit and so we take all of that together. The Trinity and all the doctrines you know, like falling, but even she's a biblical guy. I more. I think more systematically so we can but had sometimes. We look at sex. That's why cannot I know about that. All I can just earlier about the sinkings. I can understand how a person could assume Trinity's house is still spreading to them. That's my view. I think that CC plurality of AC unity of multiple persons in the Magnuson Trinity says God is one that must be Trinity. Not the best case I think it's more because means one but doesn't have to be this you know I philosophize ontological distinction is super unclear and unknowable, like could be just a simple as the LDS view of the Godhead is like a social Trinity three separate beings united in purpose and will Mason God, but I can also understand people seeing that throughout Scripture. So throw something in here so you can imagine that we don't have unity in Christianity and that suggests the need for additional Scripture pushed back a little bit, you know, suggest that there's not unity within the latter-day St. faith tradition either, even though there's additional Scripture there. Maybe unity on on the various groups believing in the book of Mormon, but there's not unity and belief on the document covenants or the book of Abraham. More over the rest the pearl of great price, so there's certainly not unity on on topics such as polygamy and some other aspects of the same faith traditions that none of the truth claims where the traditional Christian's results needed. Where is saying we need Scriptures not saying we need all that.

Plus we need prophets plus the actual organization.

So without saying a bar that you with the book of Mormon complete whenever complete and so I think that it's kind of apples and oranges comparison.

Although I think it is in comparison to point out that the circuit with the experience I had in my mission and I got me thinking on this because it is an often used critique by latter-day Saints of of Protestants, especially although some so as I was doing some strict contacting of my mission collected by bottom that's the Western train station on the pesticide of the river and those were his great place to strict contacting because you had the trains coming in from various parts of the country and then there was a Metro station and subway station just underneath so there was lots of people traveling at about this was a good place to strict contacting and I stop a guy talking to him and I'm sharing with Daniel.

Hey, I like to share message with you about Jesus Christ and talking to him. Would you be interested. He stops sure. So first thing you started on to give you what you want to make sure you're getting distinguishing yourself from from an city starting with Joe Smith pamphlet right in his testimony is his history so read passages from the Jews was instrumental to this gentleman is following the old all all the way long cycle yeah young seeker you know Grace know which church to join me to the point where it's like you know the answer is none of them you know and then she asked this will happen next.

So we started our church is like wait a minute. So young boys computers that there's so many churches too much computing and too much disunity and praise to God and then the answer is start another church just walked away. So I would just that my point.

There is really just that we have we have latter-day Saints claiming additional Scripture and kinda seeking to be a corrective to that but it certainly hasn't created unities so to the ultimate question though is is the Bible and often and why don't we see unity.

I would say that is as I moved out of the LDS faith and into broader Christianity Mention I attended seminary.

There were people there from all different denominations that the church of the seminary attended our part of the broader American restoration movement select Alexander Campbell that movement and not every people from many different denominations studying at Cincinnati Christian University because just for locality right close proximity to their homes and so what I found there is his Christian brotherhood and sisterhood and fellowship among people who maybe held some different doctrinal views.

We discussed those in classes, but ultimately there's the unity of the faith of Christ crucified and and I found that within the broader Christian world, generally LDS to weekly leaders. Chris yeah I mean yes. There are some some very thorny doctrinal differences that I think exist right in the nature of God is is is chief among them to note that the lectures on Faith you know and then Joe Smith what he talked about in understanding the nature of God is kinda like the first step right just let you now, I think you need any systematic theologian would begin their writing the same way right. You begin with the doctrine of God and latter-day St. theology says some very different things than Christian theology about the nature of God and so if if if latter-day St. faith is revealed religion from God. Progressive revelation.

In addition, to clarify what has come before then those doctrinal differences are really important and what I what I see some latter-day Saints to recently more just to try to downplay those to which I say, you know that some that's inconsistent with the weight at least the Joe Smith is that the writer of the lectures on Faith unit so yeah but I I'm just about there still are some very significant doctrinal differences. No maybe just ask you the question right like do you think Trinitarian's worship a different God than you worship, you know, I can understand conceptually, but I like it because it puts God just the ideas you know that it does exist this moment God exists.

There's two different gods when in reality there's one Jesus Christ as a matter solve a certain no more accurate than others and how we view that's is what it is, in terms of the differences I think most of its metaphysical think that if Joseph Smith taught the same theology, but never claimed to be a prophet and claimed he was doing. Mr. exegesis, or whatever other means. I think Christianity would be very different. It would've accepted anyone until we see a lot of things that Joseph taught there, coming back in Christianity today. One example is the suffering savior made for centuries. The idea of God's essay the sort of precluded him from suffering God because he Moved upon by anything else that makes is immutable. So the other terms and possible gods and possibly Have you raised, Joseph taught the opposite. God was extremely possible that God's essay did not prevent him from that type of suffering and be seen Christianity suck around you now but the time just dropped it. It was just insane out of the park to see a lot more of that kind of stuff the whole another topic for another David is a great video if you go to LDS truth claims.

This YouTube channel. This is the lesson class that the professor gives.

He displaces a lot of these so it's called criticism from theology is a lot of things that Joseph and from the theological side resolve some of the paradoxes we find in traditional Christianity answer some of the questions of traditional Christianity really clearly answered, and I think that that's where the distinction, lies because I believe Jesus is the Messiah Jesus the Messiah. Belief that makes all of us Christians, but there are like you say differences.

I just had a more metaphysical than they are scriptural than this instance. So do you think that different views of the nature of God affect how we worship for sure.

I think that it would be hard for me to worship. If I didn't think God is knowable.

If I didn't think almost tangible. I didn't think God has been in my shoes. It would be really hard worship taxes would be more like you know an idea. I guess more like a concept it's out of reach deftly affect my worship and I think you look at the Baptist person Methodist versus Protestant versus Catholic college there's different types that there are slightly different. Jesus is being taught how to bowl where the line is drawn between voyages is too different from ours to be excluded from the group that makes any sense. Thoughts yeah I mean like, I think that the difference is we well most of Protestant history they've accepted at least the first six ecumenical councils and a set of this kind of up in the air. This cable it does. That that's on the use of icons.

I think I lack personally but anyways yeah the first exec medical councils. Historically deposits all performed Lutherans, Catholics all agreed on no, those fundamental doctrines like unity of the set essence of God and of the tri-personality of God union where Jesus is divine person that he is has both divine and human natures united to his person inseparably but you know without confusion, without mixture. So all these different things about God and Christ were basically agreed upon across the board, started changing later. You know you have one. This have Justinian, Zambia, various different people and groups that have started crop up as he centuries are kind of just repackaged for lack of better term heresies from the early church. So subordination is known Arianism so yeah it's so you know, and I would personally consider those who embrace a lot of those really aberrant teachings to be in all really in danger because I think when you start picking up picking apart a lot of those early and on those beliefs about God knowing making them separate beings that it really causes vision in God, like burying controversy was that they believe that there is a time when the sun was not created being subordinate to God the father, but they saw that is making Jesus not truly divine because divinity is not something that can be conferred. You know like you're either divine by nature or you're not we believe is become participants in the divine nature, but they're not by nature divine. So when you say that Jesus was there's a time when Jesus was not over there was a time when Jesus was not God that they saw as being all that that means he's not truly God so so there's a there's a lot of these issues are important because it was kind of gone far astray from the text of Scripture but but I think that's those early councils going back to that they appeal to Scripture for these things can't find hellos Diaz in Scripture, but I think you can clearly teach doctrine always just in Scripture. So there it's it's it's when it came later. You know, I think like a likeness of the seven technical counsel start talking icons being Windows and heaven means of grace. I don't see that in Scripture. And that's that's More appealing to tradition.

Either way, subjects are taught many many Seymour additions to, you know, like indulgences and things like that that's that's what the reformers want to get back Scripture is also other stuff that out back to what was court of faith and they re-examine everything and they said well his first councils there there pretty good enough we can we can find so I guess, you really reiterating the and I just I will push back just a little bit on Steve like when you say that another there seem to be a lot of things that are coming around for Christianity is coming around LDS views. That's very common, though this apologetic tactic that I see a lot when I was LDS and yes, it's really the reason why I personally dug into Michael Heiser's scholarship because I saw a lot of a lot of Latter Day Saints thing. See divine counsel is just like our counsel in heaven when you really dig into the details.

Is this really nothing like the latter-day St. counseling is pretty well different places is Trinitarian but I look at when I was Mormon Wyman. It is very different to counsel in heaven and of LDS view and then they'll be a scriptural abuse is all about fruit getting in free agency right and that's that's not at all a part of the Council of having heaven as you see it in the Old Testament, and so there I think Latter Day Saints often want to see some similarities since I see that that's Christianity coming around like a sailing when you dig into the detailsnot really the same like those that want to say wiser. Heiser says that there these other divine beings.

So that supports our view of no intelligences in the preexistence internally existing as Joseph Smith taught but that's not really at all what you see in the Old Testament with regards to the Binet Elohim and Angels and Demons even when you see it out outside of ancient near Eastern literature in a first unit that will inform so much of Heiser scholarship and so it just I just suspect that that will be my gentle pushback is, is there may be some similarities but what Joseph is teaching is very very different than them, when used in Christian scholarship. This goes but I joined the church. He's not completely sold on the way he's finding is chassis restoration. I don't know he's really familiar with the trip. Frankly, he's one article that addresses the style of my best work was good.

Not as much attention to detail. I think he could but anyway, Heiser Heiser thread in our group and to discuss our discussion on board usually cover most of what I've got. And you guys think Greg is three hours is any final things to do. I guess you could coordinate later on. Another time, perhaps yeah so I guess I just ask you what what what's stopping you from accepting the true biblical Jesus and being saved. I'm a true biblical Jesus just talk past each other when we look at that way. It keeps me from being a Protestant. I don't want to say this the wrong way. I pushed pretty hard. Just away from Protestants in general is Protestant people the way that they did they treat me with the treat of the latter-day Saints always exceptions that you seen in the group. Some of the behavior these people and I think okay that's what their religion is the opposite of that because I want to end up like that then you say the same about St. Stewart's on the same all Protestant people but I think it's it's it's a product of that diversity within Protestant meanness a lot of people who will really extreme views for: social Protestants were really kind insulated from the larger academic community of evangelicals and yet they seem to Be driving the boat a lot of time recently in terms of theology, I can't believe because it's unknowable. I can't believe in a God that's incomprehensible. I Believe in a God who is logically coherent and I am completely forced to believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God. That has to be an actual not just a title, not just a description of his position but a real thing and that I get that because of the way he speaks of the father where he speaks about the father and so yeah I don't know of any traditional Christianity that really accepts Jesus as the son of God, that's that subordination is heresy.

As far as I understand I know some will say he's the son of God, title, or maybe one of his hypostatic union in one of his natures is not for me to gallop the relapse. This is so is the book of Mormon says son of God because of the flesh on talk about that Mormon talks not Jesus being the father of your salvation, and is clearly a list option. You know, I think that is not one passage of point talk about dates. I speak as though it's been a very criticism of the book itself needs more literary criticism where very very beginning front end of that thing you that Jesus Christ of the restored gospel is the son of God and that that's why believing and if you can find a traditional Christian church that believes that I may be intrigued to more intrigue will be sent to take a look. I can't I can't with anything less than you know it's actually interesting because recently have been diving historical historical view of the Trinity and it seems like in modern Protestantism. We kind of got away even since reformers because they looked in the past and they said and actually like that, historically, the church saw Jesus as truly being begotten of the father, but we have to understand the fact that God's eternal you know he's uncreated and unchanging past. So we talk about Jesus.

Jesus being begotten of the father, we have to understand it somewhat analogically because he has eternally existed as the sun and if he's eternally existed, the son he internally begotten son so you he really is begotten by the father is generated by the father, but it's eternal generation, eternal begotten us so there's not a specific moment in time. Are you saying he was unbegotten, came to got so he's begotten in eternity past and it's always happened is always being generated by the father and his his divine essence is being generated by the essence of the father, but they're not too essence is the one asks been diving at Thomas Aquinas. Really good stuff and it's like my blowing, especially analogically compared to the intellect. So it is not too far afield from what Scripture says Jesus is the word is or anything of the word, but the Lada cycle where it is something that represents an idea or concept is Jesus is a perfect representation of a father, and Aquinas compared it to a spot in your mind, so the intellect. So if you have a thought about yourself, about who you are and what you what you look like you know how you act that that's a concept in your mind. Perfect concept, but it's a concept unless it is something distinct from you but it's also so Aquinas made this comparison reset the father you know he is a false but by nature XP has a concept of self. But it's a perfect concept, and it's a generated concept that's also what is a major that is being generated with the same as well so they are distinct persons. But there still within the singing essence of God can't get graded but and then you had to re-evaluate what I thought. Because yeah I kind of thought of father and son is more like in terms of just love between them. You know the father loves us on the custom in the sum of the father in the end, you know, but there's not an actual beginning, but historically based Monaghan asked Osterman a monotonous Yost begotten son based they saw that his eternal so it's begotteneternal because we know were creatures we we create a son, there's a moment time and you can say I have no son but I think God there's no time with God.

I have always had a son.

So it's a begotten, but but without changing without you know coming into existence crazy. If you want your audiobooks simply Trinity by Matthew Barrett and he talks about this.

How like you know that the modern church is concept of the Trinity is kind of water down a little bit you know, make it more about social issues likely adapt the Trinity to combat you know feminism or whatever like going to going to the sources and fathers expect say I gather they read Understands rather than trying to take a trading say how can I use as a battering ram versus the social group or list just is a really great but I think it's like 12 hours I listened to Pastor so audible, but I really recommend that Jared Anderson before what context I mentioned, you have to forgive memo I'm old and it will have to see what you will remember to gather names emotions color that is referenced so I think so much again this is Steve, thanks for coming on.

We appreciate it. You know, as I said we we try to be a place where Latter Day Saints would feel comfortable coming on, but it is comfortable listening to us. No can certainly appreciate when you pushed back gently on me and hope you know is that everything when I asked you about coming to the Jesus was good-natured I took. I certainly can appreciate what that feels like dog I like you asked her about the accident I grew up in a period of time when the when the so this way side.

I left on my mission the same year that the Southern Baptist convention held their big meeting in Salt Lake City and they were going door-to-door in Lake City and Latter Day Saints were cut up in arms about it. Who are they to come here and knock on our doors and I'm going out on splits with exactly so that I married into a Southern Baptist family so they certainly certainly been through that that journey of feeling like you. The broader Christian world didn't accept it, is Latter Day Saints but hope you can appreciate also that the we feel there are important differences in important theological aspects of obvious teaching that that that are problematic from a from a historical standpoint. From a theological standpoint I think it's a broader conversation about the question I asked you know does deserve our view of the nature of God affect our worship.

You think it does in important ways.

I think it is important to know the one true God's eternal life is Jesus said so appreciate you coming on you to pitch this to you earlier in the week cut out of the blue and you're going to come on and have a conversation and I hope I hope this is another example of us modeling what it is to have respectful conversation and dialogue. I really enjoyed great job, being respectful, making me think.

Ask questions. I feel like you Chris, I got a lot out of this conversation. Hopefully contribute something as well, and three hours long so we just get out of it and enjoy your company and I think you very much appreciated. Love you guys take care likewise to the Blessed is encouragement and insight of Mormonism to explore new faith home workshops and exhibitors and individual interactions sources and this year, just the folks from Adams with ministry? Jesus Christ song in testimony as members of Mormons saving relationship with Jesus the grace of God's church on September 10 in the South when church trip to these events and share that information. Thank you for tuning into this episode of the outer brightness podcast. We'd love to hear from you. Please visit the Audi brightness podcast page on Facebook.

Feel free to send us a message there with comments or questions by clicking send a message at the top of the page.

We would appreciate it if you give the page alike. We also have an outer brightness group on Facebook can join and interact with us and others. As we discussed the podcast past episodes and suggestions for future etc. you can also send this email outer brightness Hope to hear from you soon. You can subscribe to outer brightness wherever you listen to podcasts benefiting from a content please write a review to help us spread the word subscribe to our YouTube channel and music for outer brightness is graciously provided by the talented Breanna Flournoy and Adams Road. You can learn more about Adams Road. By visiting their ministry. Page Adams Road is the Jesus now. Jesus is the and and and and she a is the a and a and E

Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime