tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-82272631076828535172024-03-13T20:51:58.689-07:00TheopologeticsKnow what you believe, and why you believe it...and not something else.Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.comBlogger204125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-81477433141767671132012-04-01T19:08:00.000-07:002012-04-01T19:08:25.004-07:00We've Moved!The Theopologetics blog and podcast now share a home at a new web host, at <a href="http://www.theopologetics.com/">http://www.theopologetics.com</a>. I will no longer be posting announcements here, so redirect your bookmarks/favorites!Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-52175017300186713022012-02-18T16:18:00.000-08:002012-02-18T16:18:00.830-08:00Coming Soon: Eastern Orthodoxy / Sola Scriptura DebateAnnouncing what will be the seventh Theopologetics Debate (unless something comes up sooner), this time on Sola Scriptura between a Protestant and an Eastern Orthodox theologian. Rob Bowman, Director of Research at <a href="http://www.irr.org/">The Institute for Religious Research</a> and author of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Putting-Jesus-His-Place-Christ/dp/0825429838/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpt_1"><em>Putting Jesus in His Place: The Case for the Deity of Christ</em></a>, goes toe to toe with Eastern Orthodox Rev. Pr. Laurent Cleenewerck, editor of <a href="http://www.orthodox-church.info/eob/"><em>The Eastern / Greek Orthodox New Testament</em></a> and faculty member at <a href="http://www.euclid.int/">EUCLID</a> and <a href="http://www.humboldt.edu/">Humboldt State University</a>.<br />
<br />
Be sure to email me at <a href="mailto:theopologetics@hotmail.com">theopologetics@hotmail.com</a> if you want to pose a question to either participant! Make sure to tell me to whom you wish the question directed.<br />
<br />
<b><u>Date:</u></b> Tuesday, March 27th, to be published in the podcast feed shortly thereafter.<br />
<br />
<b><u>Resolution:</u></b> "Affirming Sola Scriptura: Scripture is the only infallible rule of doctrine and practice for Christians today."<br />
<br />
<b><u>Participants:</u></b> Rob Bowman affirms. Laurent Cleenewerck denies. Moderated by Chris Date.<br />
<br />
<b><u>Debate format:</u></b><br />
<ul><li>15-minute opening affirmative</li>
<li>15-minute opening negative</li>
<li>10-minute rebuttal affirmative</li>
<li>10-minute rebuttal negative</li>
<li>10-minute cross-examination of affirmative</li>
<li>10-minute cross-examination of negative</li>
<li>5-minute closing negative</li>
<li>5-minute closing affirmative</li>
<li>30-minutes of listener Q&A</li>
</ul><br/>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-57751138393546000142012-02-13T09:21:00.001-08:002012-02-13T09:21:30.251-08:00Episode 77: The World is Young<a href="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/2012/02/13/episode-77-the-world-is-young/">Episode 77</a> of the Theopologetics Podcast is now available! Listeners Cowboy Bob Sorensen and Nathan Schumacher join me to discuss the age of the earth, evolution and the authority of Scripture. This episode contains the 3rd and final part of our discussion; listen to episodes 75 and 76 for parts one and two, respectively.<br/><br/>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-77603916143882106702012-02-10T08:24:00.000-08:002012-02-10T08:24:00.703-08:00Episodes 72 - 76 Now Available!<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/mf/web/t426dm/FeedLogo.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200px" sda="true" src="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/mf/web/t426dm/FeedLogo.jpg" width="200px" /></a></div>I'm not much into writing blog posts anymore, and so I've neglected to keep my blog up to date with published episodes, upcoming shows, etc. I'll try to do a better job of that moving forward, and for now, here are links to the five episodes published since I last updated the blog:<br />
<br />
A discussion with fellow annihilationists and listeners Ronnie and Joey Dear on the debates Ronnie and I participated in, and arguments leveled against us since: <a href="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/2012/01/30/episode-72-drag-me-to-hell/">Ep. 72 (part 1)</a>, <a href="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/2012/02/01/episode-73-exterminate-annihilate-destroy/">ep. 73 (part 2)</a> and <a href="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/2012/02/02/episode-74-house-of-cards/">ep. 74 (part 3)</a>.<br />
<br />
A discussion with fellow young-earth creationists and listeners Cowboy Bob Sorensen and Nathan Schumacher, on evolution, the age of the earth and the authority of Scripture: <a href="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/2012/02/08/episode-75-days-of-creation/">Ep. 75 (part 1)</a> and <a href="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/2012/02/10/episode-76-mean-old-world/">ep. 76 (part 2)</a>, with part 3 to be published soon.Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-22654772890396980762012-01-04T17:07:00.000-08:002012-01-04T17:09:40.532-08:00Coming Soon: Eastern Orthodoxy / Infant Baptism DebateAnnouncing what will be the sixth Theopologetics Debate (unless something comes up sooner), this time on infant baptism between a credobaptist Protestant and an Eastern Orthodox theologian. Jamin Hübner, founder of <a href="http://www.blogger.com/www.realapologetics.org">www.RealApologetics.org</a> and author of <em>The Saving Grace of God</em>, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Light-Darkness-Christianity-Calvinism-Coherence/dp/1419682377/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1251861597&sr=8-3"><em>Light Up the Darkness</em></a>, and <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Portable-Presuppositionalist-Biblical-Apologetics-Century/dp/1439219915/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1251861597&sr=8-1"><em>The Portable Presuppositionalist</em></a>, goes toe to toe with Eastern Orthodox Reverend Laurent Cleenewerck, editor of <a href="http://www.orthodox-church.info/eob/"><em>The Eastern / Greek Orthodox New Testament</em></a> and faculty member at <a href="http://www.euclid.int/">EUCLID</a> and <a href="http://www.humboldt.edu/">Humboldt State University</a>.<br />
<br />
Be sure to email me at <a href="mailto:theopologetics@hotmail.com">theopologetics@hotmail.com</a> if you want to pose a question to either participant! Make sure to tell me to whom you wish the question directed.<br />
<br />
<b><u>Date:</u></b> Tuesday, March 20th, to be published in the podcast feed shortly thereafter.<br />
<br />
<b><u>Resolution:</u></b> Infants are not the proper subjects of the ordinance of baptism.<br />
<br />
<b><u>Participants:</u></b> Jamin Hübner affirms. Reverend Laurent Cleenewerck denies. Moderated by Chris Date.<br />
<br />
<b><u>Debate format:</u></b><br />
<ul><li>15-minute opening affirmative</li>
<li>15-minute opening negative</li>
<li>10-minute rebuttal affirmative</li>
<li>10-minute rebuttal negative</li>
<li>10-minute cross-examination of affirmative</li>
<li>10-minute cross-examination of negative</li>
<li>10-minute cross-examination of affirmative</li>
<li>10-minute cross-examination of negative</li>
<li>5-minute closing negative</li>
<li>5-minute closing affirmative</li>
<li>30-minutes of listener Q&A</li>
</ul>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-31292611379267553282012-01-03T09:07:00.000-08:002012-01-03T09:07:52.994-08:00Coming Soon: Interview with Kenneth Gentry<div class="separator" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" height="200px" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgO2efruzzn1pDFCmqO8p3K8DBqO8CLOoYhZH_U9jZ5r3bUpFA3HIkvFYLo1DLwS5IZixAgBFZJdOBDzgaCLBGdDFSNUbO2Uw_EXpR_NoUqVxUCiZq1msY1W08BVSiv1ofh7YLXl_z2ndCH/s200/Gentry.jpg" width="160px" /></div>It's my great pleasure to be able to announce that Kenneth Gentry has agreed to let me interview him on my show on Friday, February 24th. Gentry's contribution in <a href="http://www.kennethgentry.com/products/Great-Tribulation%3A-Past-or-Future%3F-%28Thomas-Ice-v.-Ken-Gentry%29-%28book%29.html"><i>The Great Tribulation--Past or Future?: Two Evangelicals Debate the Question</i></a>, as well as his defense of an early date for the book of Revelation in <a href="http://www.kennethgentry.com/products/Before-Jerusalem-Fell-%28book%29-50%25-off.html"><i>Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation</i></a>, were instrumental in my conversion to preterism from premillennial futurism. He's authored many other books, including <a href="http://www.kennethgentry.com/products/Navigating-Revelation-%28pb-book%29--50%25-off%21.html"><i>Navigating the Book of Revelation</i></a>, whose presentation of preterism's understanding of Revelation he joins me to discuss. Stay tuned!Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-74304283619598876252011-12-21T08:27:00.000-08:002011-12-21T08:27:38.472-08:00Episode 71: Forever the Pain<a href="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/2011/12/21/episode-71-forever-the-pain/">Episode 71</a> of the Theopologetics Podcast is now available! Debate topic: "The punishment of the damned will actually be torment forever and ever." Hiram Diaz, creator of the <a href="http://www.involvingreasons.tk">Involuted Speculations</a> blog and contributor at <a href="http://www.grassrootsapologetics.org/">Grassroots Apologetics</a>, affirms. Chris Date, host of the <a href="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/">Theopologetics Podcast</a>, denies. Moderated by Mike Felker of <a href="http://www.theapologeticfront.com">The Apologetic Front</a>. This episode contains part 2 of the debate, including the second round of cross-examination, listener Q&A and closing statements. Listen to episode 70, "Perish in Fire," for part 1's opening statements, rebuttals and first round of cross-examination.<br/><br/>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-36246047125028156852011-12-21T08:26:00.000-08:002011-12-21T08:26:27.361-08:00Episode 70: Perish in Fire<a href="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/2011/12/21/episode-70-perish-in-fire/">Episode 70</a> of the Theopologetics Podcast is now available! Debate topic: "The punishment of the damned will actually be torment forever and ever." Hiram Diaz, creator of the <a href="http://www.involvingreasons.tk">Involuted Speculations</a> blog and contributor at <a href="http://www.grassrootsapologetics.org/">Grassroots Apologetics</a>, affirms. Chris Date, host of the <a href="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/">Theopologetics Podcast</a>, denies. Moderated by Mike Felker of <a href="http://www.theapologeticfront.com">The Apologetic Front</a>. This episode contains part 1 of the debate, including opening statements, rebuttals and the first round of cross-examination. Listen to episode 71, "Wailing and Gnashing," for part 2's second round of cross-examination, listener Q&A and closing statements.<br/><br/>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-76439299627290317262011-12-07T09:47:00.001-08:002011-12-07T09:47:42.682-08:00Episode 69: When The Saints Go Marching In<a href="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/2011/12/07/episode-69-when-the-saints-go-marching-in/">Episode 69</a> of the Theopologetics Podcast is now available! Dr. Mike Licona from Risen Jesus Ministries joins me to discuss the resurrection of Jesus and the recent controversy over his interpretation of Matthew 27:51-53.<br/><br/>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-89449872301286469052011-11-25T21:59:00.000-08:002011-11-25T21:59:04.213-08:00Episode 68: The Great I Am<a href="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/2011/11/26/episode-68-the-great-i-am/">Episode 68</a> of the Theopologetics Podcast is now available! Debate topic: "The deity of Christ is taught in the following texts or families of texts: John 12:41 (cf. Isa. 6 and 53), 1 Cor. 8:5-6, Heb. 1, Col. 1:15-17, and the "I am" statements of Jesus (John 8:24/58, 13:19, 18:5-6)." Dr. James White, Director of <a href="http://www.aomin.org/">Alpha and Omega Ministries</a> and author of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Forgotten-Trinity-James-R-White/dp/1556617259/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1321902781&sr=8-1"><em>The Forgotten Trinity</em></a>, affirms. Patrick Navas, author of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Divine-Truth-Human-Tradition-Patrick/dp/1463415214/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1321902665&sr=8-3"><em>Divine Truth or Human Tradition?: A Reconsideration of the Orthodox Doctrine of the Trinity in Light of the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures</em></a>, denies. This episode is part 2 of their debate, including their interaction with Heb. 1, Col. 1:15-17, and the "I am statements" of Jesus (John 8:24/58, 13:19, 18:5-6). Listen to episode 67, "Firstborn of Creation," for part 1's opening statements and interaction with John 12:41 and 1 Cor. 8:5-6.<br/><br/>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-41400049742524160982011-11-25T21:57:00.001-08:002011-11-25T21:57:55.965-08:00Episode 67: Firstborn of Creation<a href="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/2011/11/26/episode-67-firstborn-of-creation/">Episode 67</a> of the Theopologetics Podcast is now available! Debate topic: "The deity of Christ is taught in the following texts or families of texts: John 12:41 (cf. Isa. 6 and 53), 1 Cor. 8:5-6, Heb. 1, Col. 1:15-17, and the "I am" statements of Jesus (John 8:24/58, 13:19, 18:5-6)." Dr. James White, Director of <a href="http://www.aomin.org/">Alpha and Omega Ministries</a> and author of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Forgotten-Trinity-James-R-White/dp/1556617259/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1321902781&sr=8-1"><i>The Forgotten Trinity</i></a>, affirms. Patrick Navas, author of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Divine-Truth-Human-Tradition-Patrick/dp/1463415214/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1321902665&sr=8-3"><i>Divine Truth or Human Tradition?: A Reconsideration of the Orthodox Doctrine of the Trinity in Light of the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures</i></a>, denies. This episode is part 1 of their debate, including their opening statements and interaction with John 12:41 and 1 Cor. 8:5-6. Listen to episode 68, "The Great I Am," for part 2's interaction with Heb. 1, Col. 1:15-17, and the "I am statements" of Jesus (John 8:24/58, 13:19, 18:5-6).Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-89483948678890701422011-11-21T11:45:00.000-08:002011-11-25T09:42:28.748-08:00Theopologetics Debate: Deity of ChristAnnouncing what will be the fourth Theopologetics Debate, this time on whether or not the deity of Christ is taught in five specific texts or families of texts, between Dr. James White, Director of <a href="http://www.aomin.org/">Alpha and Omega Ministries</a> and author of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Forgotten-Trinity-James-R-White/dp/1556617259/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1321902781&sr=8-1"><i>The Forgotten Trinity</i></a>, and Patrick Navas, author of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Divine-Truth-Human-Tradition-Patrick/dp/1463415214/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1321902665&sr=8-3"><i>Divine Truth or Human Tradition?: A Reconsideration of the Orthodox Doctrine of the Trinity in Light of the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures.</i></a>.<br />
<br />
<b><u>Date:</u></b> Friday, November 25th, to be published in the podcast feed shortly thereafter.<br />
<br />
<b><u>Resolution:</u></b> The deity of Christ is taught in the following texts or families of texts: 1 Cor. 8:5-6, Col. 1:15-17, Heb. 1, John 12:41 (cf. Isa. 6 and 53) and the "I am" statements of Jesus (John 8:24/58, 13:19, 18:5-6).<br />
<br />
<b><u>Participants:</u></b> Dr. James White affirms. Patrick Navas denies.<br />
<br />
<b><u>Debate format:</u></b><br />
<ul><li>10 minutes opening negative</li>
<li>10 minutes opening affirmative</li>
<li>28 minutes per each of the five texts/subjects, as follows:<br />
<ul><li>7-minute opening presentations (x2)</li>
<li>3-minute rebuttals (x2)</li>
<li>3-minute cross-examinations (x2)</li>
<li>1-minute closing statements (x2)</li>
</ul></li>
<li>(For a grand total of 2 hours 40 minutes.)</li>
</ul>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com12tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-91761797877897444022011-10-31T19:03:00.000-07:002011-11-01T07:27:18.423-07:00Theopologetics Debate: Conditionalism (Again)Well I've moderated three debates, now it's time to participate in one myself. I've wanted to try my hand at it and get some practice, and have come in recent months to find the case for annihilationism quite compelling. Friends of the show, www.grassrootsapologetics.org, have accepted my invitation to debate the topic.<br />
<br />
<strong><u>Date:</u></strong> Tuesday, December 20th (or Thursday, December 22nd if unforeseen circumstances rule out Tuesday), to be published in the podcast feed shortly thereafter.<br />
<br />
<strong><u>Resolution:</u></strong> The punishment of the damned will be actual torment forever and ever.<br />
<br />
<strong><u>Participants:</u></strong> Hiram Diaz from <a href="http://www.grassrootsapologetics.org/">Grassroots Apologetics</a> affirms. Chris Date, host of the <a href="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/">Theopologetics Podcast</a>, denies.<br />
<br />
<strong><u>Moderating:</u></strong> Michael Burgos, also from <a href="http://www.grassrootsapologetics.org/">Grassroots Apologetics</a>, will moderate. If he is unavailable, Mike Felker of <a href="http://www.theapologeticfront.com/">The Apologetic Front</a> will moderate.<br />
<br />
<strong><u>Audience Questions:</u></strong> To submit a question to be posed to either participant, please email the moderators at <a href="mailto:voluntaryenslavement@gmail.com">voluntaryenslavement@gmail.com</a> and <a href="mailto:mike@theapologeticfront.com">mike@theapologeticfront.com</a> with your question and the participant to which you would like it posed.<br />
<br />
<strong><u>Debate format:</u></strong><br />
<ul><li>20 minutes opening affirmative</li>
<li>20 minutes opening negative</li>
<li>10 minutes rebuttal affirmative</li>
<li>10 minutes rebuttal negative</li>
<li>10 minutes cross-examination of affirmative</li>
<li>10 minutes cross-examination of negative</li>
<li>10 minutes cross-examination of affirmative</li>
<li>10 minutes cross-examination of negative</li>
<li>30 minutes "audience" Q&A, alternating</li>
<li>10 minutes closing negative</li>
<li>10 minutes closing affirmative</li>
</ul>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-47009227671730326272011-10-27T08:17:00.001-07:002011-10-27T08:17:22.740-07:00Episode 65: Immortal<a href="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/2011/10/26/episode-65-immortal/">Episode 65</a> of the Theopologetics Podcast is now available! Debate topic: "Unsaved humans will suffer everlasting conscious torment." Pseudonymous blogger TurretinFan affirms, whereas Ronnie from the Consuming Fire blog denies. This episode is part 2 of their debate, including cross-examination, Q&A and closing arguments. Listen to episode 64, "Consuming Fire," for part 1's opening statements and rebuttals.<br/><br/>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-19484486134704699402011-10-27T08:16:00.001-07:002011-10-27T08:16:38.303-07:00Episode 64: Consuming Fire<a href="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/2011/10/26/episode-64-consuming-fire/">Episode 64</a> of the Theopologetics Podcast is now available! Debate topic: "Unsaved humans will suffer everlasting conscious torment." Pseudonymous blogger TurretinFan affirms, whereas Ronnie from the Consuming Fire blog denies. This episode is part 1 of their debate, including their opening statements and rebuttals. Listen to episode 65, "Immortal," for part 2's cross-examination, Q&A and closing arguments.<br/><br/>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-29414901640523197962011-10-21T11:33:00.001-07:002011-10-21T11:33:49.856-07:00Episode 63: Lake of Fire<a href="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/2011/10/21/episode-63-lake-of-fire/">Episode 63</a> of the Theopologetics Podcast is now available! Dr. Larry Dixon, author of The Other Side of the Good News, joins me to discuss why he believes the traditional view of hell, and not annihilationism, is the biblical teaching concerning the fate of the wicked. This episode is part 2 of the interview; for part 1, listen to episode 62, "The Other Side."<br/><br/>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-46827304019679996842011-10-21T11:17:00.003-07:002011-10-21T11:17:57.177-07:00Episode 62: The Other Side<a href="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/2011/10/20/episode-62-the-other-side/">Episode 62</a> of the Theopologetics Podcast is now available! Dr. Larry Dixon, author of The Other Side of the Good News, joins me to discuss why he believes the traditional view of hell, and not annihilationism, is the biblical teaching concerning the fate of the wicked. This episode is part 1 of the interview; for part 2, listen to episode 63, "Lake of Fire."Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-75082209774957148002011-10-21T11:17:00.001-07:002011-10-21T11:17:20.871-07:00Episode 61: Lost Forever<a href="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/2011/10/17/episode-61-lost-forever/">Episode 61</a> of the Theopologetics Podcast is now available! Debate topic: "Some people will not be saved from their sins according to the following passages and their contexts: 2 Thess. 1:9, Matt. 25:41/46, Matt. 18:8, Romans 9:22 and Jude 1:6." Pseudonymous blogger TurretinFan affirms, whereas Jason Pratt from The Evangelical Universalist Forum denies. This episode is part 3 of their debate, including Q&A and their closing arguments. Listen to episode 59, "God Save Us All," for part 1's opening statements and rebuttals, and listen to episode 60, "No More One More Chance," for part 2's cross-examination.Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-2949234747255248462011-10-21T11:16:00.001-07:002011-10-21T11:16:45.801-07:00Episode 60: No More One More Chance<a href="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/2011/10/17/episode-60-no-more-one-more-chance/">Episode 60</a> of the Theopologetics Podcast is now available! Debate topic: "Some people will not be saved from their sins according to the following passages and their contexts: 2 Thess. 1:9, Matt. 25:41/46, Matt. 18:8, Romans 9:22 and Jude 1:6." Pseudonymous blogger TurretinFan affirms, whereas Jason Pratt from The Evangelical Universalist Forum denies. This episode is part 2 of their debate, including cross-examination. Listen to episode 59, "God Save Us All," for part 1's opening statements and rebuttals, and listen to episode 61, "Lost Forever," for part 3's Q&A and closing arguments.Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-42544480238661107152011-10-21T11:15:00.001-07:002011-10-21T11:15:54.331-07:00Episode 59: God Save Us All<a href="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/2011/10/17/episode-59-god-save-us-all/">Episode 59</a> of the Theopologetics Podcast is now available! Debate topic: "Some people will not be saved from their sins according to the following passages and their contexts: 2 Thess. 1:9, Matt. 25:41/46, Matt. 18:8, Romans 9:22 and Jude 1:6." Pseudonymous blogger TurretinFan affirms, whereas Jason Pratt from The Evangelical Universalist Forum denies. This episode is part 1 of their debate, including their opening statements and rebuttals. Listen to episode 60, "No More One More Chance," for part 2's cross-examination, and listen to episode 61, "Lost Forever," for part 3's Q&A and closing arguments.<br/><br/>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-74899494712174760732011-09-23T21:29:00.000-07:002011-09-23T21:29:59.042-07:00Once Enlightened--A Study of Hebrews 6:4-6A friend of mine texted me asking that I do a blog post exegeting Hebrews 6:4-6, which reads,<br />
<br />
<blockquote>4 For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame.</blockquote><br />
In this series I will exegete the passage to the best of my ability, explaining what I think it means and what it does not mean. And I'll do so without isolating it from the rest of Scripture as so many often do, while not simply saying it can't mean what my friend thinks it means because of such and such other passages. So with that introduction, let's begin with the first clause of the passage.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><strong>ONCE BEEN ENLIGHTENED</strong><br />
<br />
<blockquote>"For in the case of those who have once been enlightened..."</blockquote><br />
The word "enlightened" is φωτίζω (<i>phōtizō</i>) and its form here means to be given light, to be shined upon, or to be imbued with knowledge. In Luke 11:36 it's used to describe what happens when an oil lamp casts its rays on something. In 1 Corinthians 4:5 Paul uses it to say Christ will illuminate the things hidden in darkness. John uses it in Revelation 18:1 to say he saw the earth illuminated by the Lord's glory.<br />
<br />
Many people have assumed that what the author of Hebrews means when he refers to this kind of person as having once been "enlightened" is that such a one has been saved, has come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. One of Thayer's definitions is, for example, "to enlighten spiritually, imbue with saving knowledge." Thayer bases this definition on John 1:9 where Jesus, the true light, is said to "enlighten (<em>phōtizō</em>) every man." One might object on the grounds that obviously not every man has been saved. Of course, perhaps John means "all kinds of men," though it is worth pointing out that he just got done saying the Lord shone in the darkness but the darkness didn't comprehend it. One might ask, How could the darkness fail to comprehend a light they did not see? I'll leave that debate for another day.<br />
<br />
However, what one discovers is that this salvific idea of being "enlightened" is <em>not </em>how the word is typically used. When Paul wrote to the Ephesians, in verse 15 he said to them, "I too [have] heard of the faith in the Lord Jesus which exists among you and your love for all the saints." Yet, having just spoken of their faith, he nevertheless goes on to pray this:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>17 that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of Him. 18 I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened (<i>phōtizō</i>), so that you will know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, 19 and what is the surpassing greatness of His power toward us who believe.</blockquote><br />
So although Paul's readers already have saving faith, Paul nevertheless prays that they would be enlightened, that is, to have knowledge of what is in store for them. Clearly we can't assume that to be "enlightened" (<em>phōtizō</em>) must mean "to be saved."<br />
<br />
What's more, in Ephesians 3:9-10 Paul says his mission is to "bring to light (<em>phōtizō</em>) what is the administration of the mystery which for ages has been hidden in God who created all things; so that the manifold wisdom of God might now be made konwn through the church to the rulers and the authorities in the heavenly places." Paul is not talking about "enlightenment" in the sense of coming to saving faith; he's talking about revealing--bringing to light--something that was in times past hidden.<br />
<br />
Consider also 2 Timothy 1:10, in which Paul says that the gospel "now has been revealed by the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought to light (<em>phōtizō</em>) life and immortality through the gospel." Paul isn't saying that life and immortality <em>equal </em>being enlightened; he's saying life and immortality were <em>revealed</em>, having been planned "from all eternity" (v. 9).<br />
<br />
So there really is no warrant for assuming that the author of Hebrews uses "enlightened" to mean imbued with saving faith. More consistent with how the word is used elsewhere would be that the people to whom he refers have been made aware of the gospel, have had it <em>revealed </em>to them. They have been taught it. Perhaps the rest of the passage will tell us that he means something more; time will tell as I continue in the next posts in this series. Before we look at the rest of the passage, however, let's see if there's anything more we can gleam from the author's use of the word "enlightened."<br />
<br />
<strong>RECEIVING THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE TRUTH</strong><br />
<br />
Perhaps the word's use again in Hebrews 10:32 can tell us something, where the author tells his readers, "remember the former days, when, after being enlightened (<em>phōtizō</em>), you endured a great conflict of sufferings." By itself, this doesn't really tell us whether or not their enlightenment is equal to their salvation. It does, however, seem to hearken back to verse 26 where he says, "if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins."<br />
<br />
"See," one might say, "there <em>no longer </em>remains a sacrifice for sins, so that means there once <em>was </em>a sacrifice for those who received the knowledge of truth, but they lost it." <em>Au contraire</em>. For one thing, I think this is a strained understanding of the text. It's not as if Jesus' sacrifice for sins <em>no longer exists </em>when one who receives the truth goes on sinning. It's just something which they can no longer claim for themselves. What's more, the author doesn't say there no longer remains a sacrifice for <em>their </em>sins, he says "a sacrifice for sins"--period. So I don't really think it's even reasonable to read the passage this way.<br />
<br />
What makes more sense is, because Jesus is the final sacrifice, and because no one will be forgiven apart from faith in Him, one who rejects Him has no alternate recourse, no other means by which he or she can be forgiven. If one rejects the only atonement for sin, <em>there remains no other sacrifice for sins</em>. There's nothing else, no one else, to turn to. So this really doesn't say anything about whether or not someone who "receives the truth" has been saved.<br />
<br />
<strong>IF YOU RECEIVE A DIFFERENT GOSPEL</strong><br />
<br />
But what of the word "receive" with regards to this "knowledge of the truth?" Does it mean to "believe" it? Not necessarily. In 2 Corinthians 11:4 Paul says, "if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached, or if you <em>receive</em>...a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it easily enough" (NIV). Paul would have much harsher words (his words are, nevertheless, a criticism) were he saying his readers were believing a different gospel, but he's not. In saying they receive a different gospel, he means that they give ear to it. They listen to it preached. They put up with it. <em>They hear it</em>.<br />
<br />
In Colossians 4:10 Paul speaks of Barnabas' cousin Mark, "about whom you <em>received</em> instructions." Here, their receiving instructions has nothing to do with accepting or believing. Rather, they literally received instructions. They were <em>given</em> instructions. Similarly, John says in 2 John 1:4, "I was very glad to find some of your children walking in truth, just as we have <em>received</em> commandment to do from the Father." Again, receiving here says nothing of John's response to the commandment. It simply means that they were commanded. They were <em>given</em> a command.<br />
<br />
So being "enlightened" seems to be equivalent to "receiving the knowledge of the truth," and receiving the truth appears to mean little more than being told about it, listening to it, being taught about it. Whether or not they <em>believed it</em>, whethere or not the truly trusted in Christ alone as the sacrifice for their sins, is another question. But the context might give us a clue as to how to answer that question.<br />
<br />
<strong>BY THIS TIME YOU OUGHT TO BE TEACHERS</strong><br />
<br />
I've seen Hebrews 6:4-6 appealed to frequently, but rarely have I seen someone actually put these verses in their context. Of course, the context is Hebrews as a whole, but I think the immediate context is enough to demonstrate what "enlightened" here means, beginning with verse 11 of the previous chapter:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>5:11 Concerning him we have much to say, and it is hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing. 5:12 <strong>For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you have need again for someone to teach you the elementary principles of the oracles of God</strong>, and you have come to need milk and not solid food. 5:13 For everyone who partakes only of milk is not accustomed to the word of righteousness, for he is an infant. 5:14 But solid food is for the mature, who because of practice have their senses trained to discern good and evil. 6:1 Therefore <strong>leaving the elementary teaching about the Christ, let us press on to maturity</strong>, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, 6:2 of instruction about washings and laying on of hands, and the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment. 6:3 And this we will do, if God permits. 6:4 <strong>For in the case of those who have once been enlightened</strong>...</blockquote><br />
We're going to look at verses 4 through 6 in greater depth later in this series, but for now, consider the author's opening point. He tells his readers that they have had long enough to develop a mature understanding of the gospel. So long, in fact, that they should be teachers by now. Yet, they "have need again" to be taught "the elementary principles." What is the author saying? He's saying they've once been taught the basics of the gospel<em>, but need to be taught it again because they haven't matured</em>.<br />
<br />
So there's nothing in the context that suggests that what's being discussed is the sort of person who, once saved, then falls away. Rather, what's being discussed is the sort of person <em>who has been taught the basics of the gospel, but has not matured</em>. And this is consistent with how the words "enlightened" in verse 4, and "receive" in chapter 10, are used. They were taught the gospel. It was revealed to them. The context suggests nothing beyond that.<br />
<br />
<strong>CONVINCED OF BETTER THINGS CONCERNING YOU</strong><br />
<br />
I'm about to wrap up, and in the next post in this series we'll look at what is meant by "tasted of the heavenly gift." For now, however, we have no reason to believe "enlightened" means anything more than simply having heard the truth. Indeed, the context suggests that's <em>all </em>it means. In fact--and I'll end on this--consider what the author says very shortly thereafter:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>9 Even though we speak like this, dear friends, we are convinced of better things in your case—the things that have to do with salvation.</blockquote><br />
So, even though the author had just finished admonishing his readers for their lack of maturity, and had just gotten done talking about people like them but who go on to fall away ("even though we speak like this"), he is "convinced of better things in [their] case." That is, their lack of maturity <em>would </em>concern him, but he doesn't believe his warnings apply to them because he is convinced that "better things" apply to them.<br />
<br />
Better things than being "enlightened," better things than "tasting of the heavenly gift." Better things than being made "partakers with the Holy Spirit." Better things than having experienced all of this but "yielding thorns and thistles" (v. 8). What sorts of things? "The things that have to do with salvation."<br />
<br />
You see, all those things he had just said of his readers are true both of them and those who might later fall away, but the author is convinced that "better things," "things that have to do with salvation," are true of his readers. It follows, then, that all those things he just finished talking about, while true of those who are saved, nevertheless aren't enough to tell us someone is saved.Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com29tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-78078475567453301282011-09-22T20:10:00.000-07:002011-09-23T08:40:59.409-07:00Theopologetics Debate: ConditionalismAnnouncing what will be the third Theopologetics debate! This time on the topic of annihilationism or conditional immortality. Participants have agreed to field questions from you, my listeners, so send them my way at <a href="mailto:theopologetics@hotmail.com">theopologetics@hotmail.com</a>. Stay tuned!<br />
<br />
<strong><u>Date:</u></strong> Friday, October 21st (or Tuesday, October 25th if unforeseen circumstances rule out Friday), to be published in the podcast feed shortly thereafter.<br />
<br />
<strong><u>Resolution:</u></strong> Unsaved humans will suffer everlasting conscious torment.<br />
<br />
Pseudonymous blogger TurretinFan of <a href="http://turretinfan.blogspot.com/">http://turretinfan.blogspot.com/</a> affirms. Ronnie, creator of the <a href="http://conditionalism.net/blog/">Consuming Fire</a> blog, denies.<br />
<br />
Debate format:<br />
<ul><li>20 minutes opening affirmative</li>
<li>20 minutes opening negative</li>
<li>15 minutes rebuttal affirmative</li>
<li>15 minutes rebuttal negative</li>
<li>10 minutes cross-examination of affirmative</li>
<li>10 minutes cross-examination of negative</li>
<li>10 minutes cross-examination of affirmative</li>
<li>10 minutes cross-examination of negative</li>
<li>20 minutes "audience" Q&A, alternating</li>
<li>10 minutes closing negative</li>
<li>10 minutes closing affirmative</li>
</ul>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com12tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-45178127475204779572011-09-14T17:20:00.000-07:002011-09-16T14:47:53.323-07:00Theopologetics Debates: Evangelical UniversalismAnnouncing the second ever Theopologetics debate! This time on the topic of "evangelical universalism." Participants have agreed to field questions from you, my listeners, so send them my way at <a href="mailto:theopologetics@hotmail.com">theopologetics@hotmail.com</a>. Stay tuned!<br />
<br />
<strong><u>Date:</u></strong> Friday, October 7th (or Tuesday, October 11th if unforeseen circumstances rule out Friday), to be published in the podcast feed shortly thereafter.<br />
<br />
<strong><u>Resolution:</u></strong> Some people will not be saved from their sins according to the following passages and their contexts: 2 Thess. 1:9, Matt. 25:41/46, Matt. 18:8, Romans 9:22 and Jude 1:6.<br />
<br />
Pseudonymous blogger TurretinFan of <a href="http://turretinfan.blogspot.com/">http://turretinfan.blogspot.com/</a> affirms. Jason Pratt, contributor to <a href="http://www.evangelicaluniversalist.com/">The Evangelical Universalist</a>, denies.<br />
<br />
Debate format:<br />
<ul><li>30 minutes opening affirmative</li>
<li>30 minutes opening negative</li>
<li>15 minutes rebuttal affirmative</li>
<li>15 minutes rebuttal negative</li>
<li>10 minutes cross-examination of affirmative*</li>
<li>10 minutes cross-examination of negative</li>
<li>10 minutes cross-examination of affirmative</li>
<li>10 minutes cross-examination of negative</li>
<li>10 minutes cross-examination of affirmative</li>
<li>10 minutes cross-examination of negative</li>
<li>20 minutes "audience" Q&A, alternating</li>
<li>15 minutes closing negative</li>
<li>15 minutes closing affirmative</li>
</ul><span style="font-size: x-small;">* Negative has offered to be cross-examined first if the affirmative so chooses.</span>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-66831751351693977672011-09-12T08:29:00.001-07:002011-09-12T08:29:40.707-07:00Episode 58: God Is in the House<a href="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/2011/09/12/episode-58-god-is-in-the-house/">Episode 58</a> of the Theopologetics Podcast is now available! Stephen Atkerson from the New Testament Reformation Fellowship joins me to discuss house churches and New Testament patterns of church practice. This episode contains part 2 of the interview. Listen to episode 57, "God is in the House," for part 1.<br/><br/>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8227263107682853517.post-39746097528480458202011-09-06T19:20:00.001-07:002011-09-06T19:20:35.608-07:00Episode 57: Our House<a href="http://theopologetics.podbean.com/2011/09/06/episode-57-our-house/">Episode 57</a> of the Theopologetics Podcast is now available! Stephen Atkerson from the New Testament Reformation Fellowship joins me to discuss house churches and New Testament patterns of church practice. This episode contains part 1 of the interview. Stay tuned for episode 58, "God is in the House," for part 2.<br/><br/>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00041718051509830155noreply@blogger.com16