วีดีโอ

Good interview. I'm about to start reading her first volume now!

The roles defined by God are spiritual and genderized that is why it is defined "since the beginning" when referring to qualified men leading the church, as well as elders to negate the cultural shifts and bring realization that it's God's church...not mans

Your exegesis is convoluted and pure conjecture..Hezekiah is not an everlasting king...This is a messianic prophecy...It is written in the prophetic perfect tense and fortells Jesus, and devlares him as God!!

Loved this conversation. Listening from Perth western australia

Very plainly

I enjoyed this very much. Thank you.Can you provide the slides of her lecture?

Dei Verbum. Really interesting. So, is this conveying in essence, that tradition (regarding scripture) and scripture alone, are to be weighed equally? Or am I misunderstanding. And does "tradition" in that sense, in Scripture, mean applications of "Rhema"? Btw I really like these guys. Good discussion. God bless :)

fascinating conversation. If it’s true that out of all the thousands of manuscript fragments, no 2 are identical, then we can never really know for sure the “original”. And tradition must play a role, whether we like it or not as protestants.

then why do women go through so much hell? societal views, women can’t do anything without a man views, life threatening child-birth, menstrual cycles, menopause, abortion restrictions, sexual assault prone, last for everything. why us? just why?

here is the name - Vicarius Filii Dei.. google it

Nope this is false teaching !!!! Do not twist the word of God almighty!!! God is not a God of confusion!!! Obey the order of The Almighty !!! 🙏 1 Timothy 2:11-12 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 1 Timothy 3:1-7 Titus 1:5-9 1 Timothy 3:2 Ephesians 5:22-33 1 Peter 3:1 1 Peter 3:5-6 Genesis 3:16 1 John 4:1 Isaiah 3:12 1 Peter 3:1-7

Quran 22:46

Dr. Peeler is an excellent scholar!

Do you make a full video ?

Excellent breakdown

Woman should not be regarded as a symbol of femininity; a woman is fundamentally understood as a wife to man. This notion of womanhood inherently reflects patriarchal structures, which is why the New Testament (NT) can appear anti-woman, as it positions women primarily in the role of a wife. The very concept of a woman limits the female's agency under the male by becoming a wife to him. This make far more sense than thinking the NT is anti female. The NT is pro-female. It is trying to relinquish the authority a man has over his wife through traditional ties. A woman in truth is a daughter of God before a wife for any man.

I’m sure the real God of the universe has nothing to do with humans killing each other over territory or land and claiming being gods favorite. 😂 humans made God maybe

Where is Tom’s theology these days on the reformed understanding of substitutionary atonement and how does his biblical position explain justification by faith if different?

The image is primarily moral. This is what separates us from the other creatures. Intelligence is included in this, but this is not primary. Other creatures are intelligent, even if not as intelligent. The other creatures do not have the law as innate to their being. They don't have the conscience we have. We did not lose this image in the fall, but it was corrupted. Our restoration in Christ is to be conformed to His likeness Who is the express Image of God.

The entire Bible teaches a young flat earth. Nasty indoctrination has taught lies. NASA is fake and people are waking up.

I will never ever ever Ever ever ever recover from our 4th birthday Mind Ark. What happened I still cannot really put into words. Exchanged was I? Do we manifest everything & then it had been everything we knew? What an awesome gift. & we were hit by a comet! Fireworks! Incredible!✍️🤣☄️ Yeah. Sorry about the 666 thing. I think I see a Book Of Revelations plot twist. The beloved, being the wonder, who since protected a long time is then the wonder at the beginning of the prophecy who since doesn't fulfil what she'd come for. Myself, I move quick. I wonder I am the 666 that the writer who went by 'John' although she'd been female wrote about a man doing opposite what I do as may be the consequence of being a slow mover. It's like a morel, & a warning in one. So yep, it's been a fun week. So who's got 666 merchandise? How's that for necessity being mother of invention huh? I write about time travel. Maybe being known about before we know ourselves means a person's reputation can precedes preceding itself. I don't think the woman going by 'John' is myself in a past life necessarily, but rather that she's an edge of myself, or, that I'm an edge of her. I think the the beloved & wonder & 666 are all the one person. Come see what I do. Tell me if you like it. Tell me if you don't.

Exactly!

It seems to me that this would have seismic implications for doctrines such as limited atonement, the Lord’s Supper and more.

Excellent interview, very informative. Blessings from Argentina.

when does it disprove is the Question

Why friends call each other son of man that’s ..

1.07 you don't seem to see the position you put yourselves in!! The distinction between Christ and the true God is most clearly seen in the Saviours own words in john 17 v 3 " that they might know thee, the only true God, AND Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent". Much stress is laid on Isaiah 9 v 6, as proving a trinity!! The advocates of that pagan theory will suggest it refers to a trinity because Christ is the everlasting Father. But, for this very reason, I affirm it can have no reference to a triune God. " Is Christ the Father in the trinity? If so, how is he the Son? Or if he is both Father and Son, how can there be a trinity? For a trinity is 3 persons. To recognize a trinity, the distinction between Father and Son must be preserved. Christ is called the " second person in the trinity" ; but if this text proves a trinity, or refers to it at all, it proves that he is not the second, but the first. And if he is first, who is second? It is very plain that this text has NO REFERENCE TO SUCH A DOCTRINE !!! 1 Cor 8 v 6

JESUS CHIRST IS THE ONLY LIVING GOD CALL ISRAEL AND HAIL MARY IS THE MOTHER OF GOD BORN WITHOUT SIN JUST LIKE GOD AND NEVER SIN IN HER LIFE AMEN ❤

But I want to remind you, though you once knew this, that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe. 6 And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day; 7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. 8 Likewise also these dreamers defile the flesh, reject authority, and speak evil of dignitaries. ~ Jude Really? Jude doesn't support your claim. Jude provides 3 examples of sin and list the 3 sins in reverse order. 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; 4 and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables. ~ 2 Timothy 4.

I'm so glad I found your channel, mostly because the atonement is exactly what I've been trying to figure out ... well basically (I think it ties in) ... if it's all in the cross, usually made = 'all in the blood' why is the Euc 2 components? - I'm no academic ... heard many 'interpretations,' but none satisfied - couldn''t resolve their explanations it to The Word' - no academic but I can read (and I've a weird memory - remember almost everything I read and none of the words -- rarely fooled about what is or isn't in the Book but can not memorise - (I've got 3 verses down pat ... try as I might that's it!) ... bonus is every time I re-read it's fresh for (re)interpretation from scratch. I asked one scholar where does it say blood is atonement? ... "Lev17:11-" OK, ... asked back: commas??" and if not why is Euc 2 components' - guess too busy - crickets yeah others told me 'I am the bread of life' ... but nah, doesn't fit the 'Easter' narrative (let alone anything resembling Passover symbology) then! this vid! - first one from CBS I've watched - wow - some sense or at least reverberation to my questions ... starting from Lev: 'sacrifice was not just the blood [then done] ... more happened' - and so perfect sense: J 'sacrifice' - cross only step #1, necessary but it's not all' hey, (let's face it, you guys were geeking out - for mine made it so much better - showed me you guys not only not done with this topic, but actually excited to go further ... woohoo! ... part 2? literally talks to exactly what I was looking at - and good solid answers. (would go on myself but I'm not the academic type - 1st century fathers are absent from my little bookcase.) ... thank you, perfect ... ordering the book.

So they're gonna be good friends because she goes against the Bible. You're passionate about the Bible but disobeying it at the same time. It makes sense. So she is full of pride to go against Timothy and preach even when the Bible says a woman can't preach. YOUR NOT ALLOWED, period. What part of that is confusing. So what she is saying is, I would rather do what I want instead of following the Bible. This is why women aren't to be followed at all. She would rather be a feminist than a good chrisitan.

Yes, this was absolutely fantastic! 🙏🏼♥️👏🏼 I am woefully unschooled at this point , in terms of a theological education. I am not a pastor, but have been prayerfully studying for many years now on my own, and have just entered Bible school at age 44 earlier this year. Anyway, I find Wright to be so refreshing, with a sort of childlike joy concerning the new vistas that have opened up as a result of some of his findings. He's very much like Lewis to me in that way. He strikes me as a "Narrative" guy, and I mean that in the best sense of the term! And even though he mentioned Aquinas in sort of a derogatory way according to the context of part of your conversation, he does ironically remind me of Aquinas, again in the best possible way, as he is not afraid to sort of touch on the theme that "God is not in competition with human flourishing." (I suppose that's probably tied to the under emphasis on reading Jesus' humanity in the scriptures.) In fact, as the early church fathers put it, "The Glory Of God IS a human being fully alive!" (In Christ of course) That's how I read him today anyway. GREAT interview, and thanks so much for posting! God's richest Blessings my friend

??? He is the messiah prophesied about in the OT with no contradiction at all, Jesus's deciple did not live by the sword he USED the sword lol and jesus corrected him and healed the ear, Jesus also IS a warrior, He will come back as a LION , he came as a lamb, but next is a warrior that wipes out evil with a sword coming out of his mouth (possibly just his word that created all things as the sword is the word) It confuses me when these takes are looked at yet... simply reading the bible and actually believing them, there is taking the verses from all angles, and knowing that the NT itself and jesus himself constantly shows and reiterates how jesus is that exact messiah prophesied about

No.... not only does the bible not say this outright but their are many names that this number fits to and it is in revelation, It is a future book, and even if it references the old the bible always does that and yet the prophecy still is fulfilled LATER in a way that makes perfect sense when it occurs even if it was confusing when it was written down, The number of the beast says its the number of a MAN , not an empire, and not just any man, A MAN that will actually do things in the future during the end times, lead people astray, etc so it can't be just abaout an empire, If we see that the beast does things, that he goes as far as being a public figure, etc leads people astray etc. We can conclude its not simply a comparison to an empire it is A MAN with a NAME that will match the numbers when calculated and not JUST be an empire but rather one of 3 figures bringing this empire in, not to mentions his mark that we cannot buy nor sell, Its this MANS object, his fake gift to the world under a system (yes empire) this does connect but its not Nero, It is the number of a yet to be named man, but you can follow biblical ways of prophecy and learn two thigns can be true at once, Nero can point to how this future man and empire will operate but it is not that man because the beast, the antichrist, and the false prophet are NOT yet

Bought her book! Praise God!

Yes, it is wisdom generally but it does not guarantee to work 100% because there will always be perception. It shows us how to live in Gods will and how to use wisdom generally

I’d like to know more about this. Is there a full interview somewhere?

You guys are just plain wrong. You are using the bible to suite your needs and not as the text is written. Women are not to hold power or teach men. PERIOD.

I have been hearing things like this more and more. Christians contemplating a futuristic interpretation of the new covenant/creation. Once Greek verbal aspect theory brings the strong tower of English past tense based interpretation down we will ironically be freed from being in bondage to this old covenant age by calling it the new covenant and put hope in the future promises. Where the spirit of the Lord is there is freedom.

I was so impressed I went and bought Dr Heilig’s ‘The Apostle and the Empire’. I found this fascinating. I’m a great fan of Tom Wright and he has inspired me to want to explore Paul within his Roman political and social context. Thanks very much. I shall be looking with interest at your other videos.

Because he wanted them to shut up and be silent in the church, that’s why

Can we moot the significance of the historical reliability of the gospels on the grounds that nobody can make the case that anything Jesus said applies to 21st century people? Why should I worry about Jesus' statements about hell and judgment day, when nobody can show those stories were intended for me in the first place?

Mark 70CE, Matthew 85-90CE, Luke 110CE+, John possibly as late as the early 3rd century. Not really within the lifetime of eyewitnesses.

This was a great discussion! You mentioned primary sources for understanding Revelation. What primary sources do you recommend people read for a better understanding of Revelation?

In the past few days I've watched videos from NT Wright, David Diga Hernandez, Mike Winger, Alisa Childers, John Crowder (!), Chuck Smith, Greg Hershberg, Bill Johnson, Jason Sobel, Josiah Trenham, Gavin Ortland, and others. I'm wondering which one is telling me the complete truth? One TH-camr says at the intro of his podcast, "the real talk doesn't come from me but directly from God's word" to which I insist that it comes from his *interpretation* of God's word and thus fallible. So I wonder, again, whom should I trust if it's a matter of another's person's personal interpretation? It can be very tiring at least, and very prone to give up at worst. There's a lot of division and going back and forth with some groups pronouncing damnation/anathema upon others of a different understanding. It's certainly not what Jesus prayed for.

I liked the panel discussion! I wish there were more pushbacks from the audience on some of the reasons & defenses given to make the conversation more robust. But I still like the element of hearing multiple voices and taking Q&A.

If I understand Dr Moffitt to say that Jesus' death alone was not enough, then I would agree because that is exactly what Paul states in 1 Cor 15:17. "If Christ has not been raised ...then you are still in your sins". Paul indirectly shows that Jesus' sacrificial death was not enough to deliver us, but that He had to be raised for our freedom. Paul says "if Christ isn't raised, ain't nobody getting raised". He could have stopped there, but he added "...you would still be dead in your sins". So even Jesus' death and then some kind of "spiritual" resurrection and appearance before the Father is not enough. We are raised in Christ (as in Adam all die...even so in Christ shall all be made alive) so there is no life outside of the resurrected Christ. In the relative here it's just God taking His own sweet time, as frustrating as it can be, but it is a glorious process to watch the watch against such increasing darkness.

22:49 Discussion on book begins.

This was a great watch. thanks guys. Especially appreciated the daniel and Book of Wisdom references ❤

How do you deal with Psalm 49: 7-9, where it seems a ransom is being paid to God for a life?