![Christoph Anderson](/img/default-banner.jpg)
- 11
- 688
Christoph Anderson
เข้าร่วมเมื่อ 7 ก.ย. 2023
วีดีโอ
Christian Ethics - Mortifying Sin pt. 2 | Scriptures
มุมมอง 15วันที่ผ่านมา
To listen as a Podcast, you can find me on: Spotify - open.spotify.com/show/14aBQums8TXA5a7oVtlVM0?si=7174cac2e91e4cf9 Itunes - podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/christian-ethics/id1735373076 Timestamps 00:00 Titlecard 00:13 Preliminary Remarks and Confessions of Faith 16:13 Scriptures on Mortifying Sin 16:33 The Command to Flee Sin 23:09 The Command to Resist the Devil 34:18 The Commands to Be Wat...
Christian Ethics - Mortifying Sin (John Owen's Work)
มุมมอง 722 หลายเดือนก่อน
To listen as a Podcast, you can find me on: Spotify - open.spotify.com/show/1dHcI11BaDfEwkQu248BVm Itunes - podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/christian-ethics/id1735373076 Timestamps 00:00 Titlecard 00:13 Introduction 01:48 My approach to Owen's work 03:39 The basis of mortification 11:42 What mortification is not 15:18 What mortification is 20:53 Preparations for mortification 23:23 How to mortify...
Christian Ethics - Ethics of Glory
มุมมอง 1295 หลายเดือนก่อน
To listen as a Podcast, you can find me on: Spotify - open.spotify.com/show/1dHcI11BaDfEwkQu248BVm Itunes - podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/christian-ethics/id1735373076 A lot packed into this one Timestamps 00:00 Titlecard 00:13 Introduction 00:36 Defining Dualism 06:16 Three Strands of Dualism 09:57 Distinguishing Organicism Christian Knowledge 10:26 Sidenote on Pluralism 11:25 Cont... Distingu...
Christian Ethics - Futility and Meaning
มุมมอง 607 หลายเดือนก่อน
Still working out the aesthetics Timestamps 00:00 Titlecard 00:16 Introduction Recap and Proceeding 00:53 Futility as All Encompassing Reality 02:36 Ethics is Beset with Futility 05:29 Ethical Hope in Futility as Incongruent Proviso 10:59 Futile Realm in Relation to Meaningful Realm 15:04 Some Clarifying Questions 19:48 Summary
Christian Ethics - Metaphysical Frameworks
มุมมอง 948 หลายเดือนก่อน
I fixed John Owen's head Timestamps 00:00 Titlecard 00:17 Recap 01:50 Some Context 02:44 A Defense of Theory Before Practicalities 04:57 Frameworks of Separation Integration or Tension and Harmony 06:29 On Frameworks of Separation Such as Gnosticism 09:04 On Frameworks of Integration Such as Pantheism 11:57 On a Framework of Harmony and Tension 14:20 Ethics and Eschatology in View of Frameworks...
Dismantling Modern Apologetics: Part 4 - Specific to General Hermeneutic
มุมมอง 4510 หลายเดือนก่อน
This video is a response to the potential claim that modern misuses of certain passages such as Rom 10:15, Acts 8:4, and 2 Cor 10:5 for layperson apologetics and evangelism are nothing more than a hermeneutical application from specific to general. In contrast, I posit principles necessary for such an inference and categories of valid inference, none of which are reflected in such misuses. Time...
Dismantling Modern Apologetics: Part 2 - The Method of Apologetics
มุมมอง 4011 หลายเดือนก่อน
This video is meant to be a summary of some key points from the rough draft of an outline for a larger work: www.academia.edu/106369232/An_Outline_of_Reformed_Apologetics Timestamps 00:00 Titlecard 00:26 Introduction 03:59 Apologetic Method: a Broad Perspective 04:50 The Christian Hope 06:24 SKIP PASSAGE READING 09:58 SKIP PASSAGE READING 12:20 Two Aspects of Refutation 13:19 Refutation in Defe...
Dismantling Modern Apologetics: Part 1 - The Task of Apologetics
มุมมอง 3511 หลายเดือนก่อน
This video is meant to be a summary of some key points from the rough draft of an outline for a larger work: www.academia.edu/106369232/An_Outline_of_Reformed_Apologetics Timestamps 00:00 Titlecard 00:16 Introduction 00:58 The Task of Apologetics 3.5 Views 00:58 Classical Apologetics 02:38 Evidential Apologetics 03:23 Presuppositional Apologetics 05:33 Fideist Apologetics 07:44 Scriptures Misap...
Reformed Apologetics - Some Considerations
มุมมอง 6811 หลายเดือนก่อน
This video is meant to be a summary of some key points from the rough draft of an outline for a larger work: www.academia.edu/106369232/An_Outline_of_Reformed_Apologetics Timestamps 00:00 Titlecard 00:12 Introduction 00:58 Statement of Issues 05:59 Procedure/Roadmap 07:04 Theoretical Issues 08:06 Exegesis of 1 Peter 28:58 Scriptural Example of Apologetics 32:34 Historical Example of Apologetics...
I have been viewing your content. I am also an unbeliever. I seek dialogue and persuasion from knowledgable and qualified christians when possible. Many beliievers seem to lack confidense or interest in attempting to engage arguenents against their beliefs or presuppositions. Generally responses are brief such as " repent and believe". with minimal engagement. Perhaps many of these believers are unsure or lack confidense in their own understanding. So, first do you feel as though you have proper authority to make a defense of your faith? How does apologetics deal or strategies in reaching knowledg!ble and critical unbelievers?
Hi! To the first point, apologetics is more about defending hope but the mixup of hope and faith is understandable. And all believers are called to apologetics but the apologetics of the Bible is different from the dialogue and persuasion that we see in modern “apologetics.” As a defense, apologetics is not so much about reaching people but instead takes place when other people are engaging negatively with the Christian hope. I do believe there should be knowledgeable people trying to engage with unbelievers who are willing to engage in critical dialogue, and every Christian should have a deep knowledge of their faith, but only some are called to go out and preach and dialogue in what is called evangelism. So to answer how evangelism deals or strategizes in reaching knowledgeable and critical unbelievers: an evangelist certainly should aim to have answers for any concerns and arguments that may be brought to him, and he should answer arguments insofar as they aren’t sophistry or a red herring to the real issue that Christianity answers. However, the aim in evangelism is not ultimately to coerce or convince by argumentation but to give the good news that God promises to use by His Spirit to make people believe. The good news that the emptiness of this life, death, our desire for evil and our separation from God were all taken by Christ who lived perfectly and died in our place, and because of His perfect life was raised from the dead. He pours out His Spirit on all who believe in Him, reconciling us to God, bridging the gap cause by our evil and by death, and He will resurrect us in our bodies on the last day. What this means for us today is that we are free from sin, death is no longer something to fear, and we can freely love God and love others without fear of punishment.
@@KolaeClassicoThanks so much for your thoughtful response. Briefly where I am coming from. I believe there to be an absolute source for everything but I do not think it's nature or characteristics can be fully known. I therefore do not consider myself an atheist or materialist and am open to transcendental or supernatural claims. Yet I believe that the Israelite deity and christian god have been harmonized by mostly Platonic philosophy and later theological development. I therefore see the Christian god as a product of human and historical development eventually fitting the needs of primarily educated gentiles interested in a more philosophical god. I.e. Justin Martyr, Origen, Augustine, etc. Like wise I see christian ethics as primarily a merge of the hebrew bible's concern for social justice radically combined with apocalyptic literature and expectations. The new testament writers appear to present a Jesus who is primarily concerned with devotion and obedience to god for the next life rather than enjoying success in this current existence. Therefore, absent an expectation of an imminent return of Jesus/Son of Man, I do not think Christian ethics can be realistically or honestly practiced by any significant number of followers. This has led to a wide amount of dismissal, neglect or competing interpretations concerning what "fruit"a follower of Jesus is expected to produce in order to inherit the kingdom. There is much more I can say in my reasoning for rejecting Christianity that are equally important. To conclude for now, I believe christian apologists must first account for several problems: 1. The Israelite and later described christian god do not share the same philosophical attributes such as complete omniscience and perfection. This brings into serious question the accuracy or reliability of what the biblical writers claim to know concerning this being. 2. The expectations of an imminent first century judgement on the known world as anticipated by the first century New testament writers. This did not happen in any recognized way apart from full preterist type interpretations. Historicists and futurists must project later or current ideas into a text written nearly 2000 years ago. 3. The inability for Christians to agree on or establish ethical obligations from the new testament writings that can be considered objective for modern followers beyond perhaps several basic commandments. Again, I appreciate your time.