Catholic convert here... LOVE YOUR CHANNEL.. I have a 10 year old daughter and who loves Minecraft and I'm having her watch your channel to learn about Christianity :) great job.. Creative idea!!
…I hate gaming, but I just found your channel tonight, I love your commentary. I am a Right Divider mainly following Dr Randy White of “Ask the Theologian “ fame on TH-cam. He does chap by chap verse by verses Bible studies on TH-cam. Live show Mon-Fri 12 noon EST
You know I believe in a very different tradition in christian faith but I feel like there is something nostalgic and real about this channel that most channels lack.
I admire the depth of your knowledge for a man of your age. Thank you for blessing the world with your insights. You have inspired me to take another look at the “mainline” churches.
“He’s the vicar of Christ”?! YIKES! That statement reeks sarcasm, but you are right to a point. MacAuthor can say some good, but he also goes off on tangents that are disturbing.
A CCM song goes "amazing love, how can it be, that you my king would die for me" Note that the changed lyrics here could be the source of Sproul's error as well.
The criticisms you gave of John MacArthur are one reason I have more respect for ordinary pastors who just run their churches week in - week out with no care of what the outside world thinks than celebrity pastors who seem to get caught up in their fame, wealth, and influence. My father ran churches in small-town Iowa for ten years.
Hey Zoomer! Just to clarify a few things: I go to MacArthur's church and I do see what you're saying about the whole nestorianism thing and I do believe that MacArthur has a few theological problems as well. Just wanted to clarify that Grace Church does indeed contribute a lot to philanthropy like the whole children's hunger fund association and many more things. MacArthur isn't a specifically wealthy guy but I don't understand why that topic provokes disdain in the first place. Heck, I'd want to be blessed with wealth or at least enough money to live comfortably :)
@@alisatoniian9718That's what I'm always wondering. Obviously, you don't want to tell others about your charitable deeds, for you're not doing them for their approval, but how do lead by example if you must not talk about it, and how do you defend yourself against claims of hypocrisy if you must not show your deeds? It's a tricky question for sure.
@@marystone1526 What I tend to go with as a rule of thumb is don't advertise but don't hide it either. Beyond that, its a lot about the heart reasons for what your doing.
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:00 🔍 *Introduction and background information on John MacArthur* - John MacArthur's impact on Christianity worldwide, - Brief overview of John MacArthur's theological stance, including his identification as a Calvinist and some deviations from traditional Reformed theology. 02:05 💬 *Positive aspects of John MacArthur's ministry* - The personal impact of John MacArthur's teachings on the narrator's faith, - Acknowledgment of John MacArthur's passion for defending Christianity and confidence in biblical truth. 04:19 ⚠️ *Initial concerns and theological differences with John MacArthur* - The narrator's early admiration for John MacArthur despite theological disagreements, - Discussion of John MacArthur's theological stance, including his views on dispensationalism. 06:05 ❌ *Discovery of serious theological errors* - Introduction of the primary criticism: John MacArthur's Nestorian heresy, - Explanation of Nestorianism and its implications for Christology. 09:34 💰 *Critique of John MacArthur's wealth and lack of charitable giving* - Concerns about John MacArthur's financial status and responsibility to give to the poor, - Mention of the absence of substantial donations to the poor from John MacArthur's church. 14:41 🙌 *Cult-like following and celebrity status* - Observation of the cult-like following around John MacArthur, - Encouragement to avoid idolizing celebrity pastors and the importance of constructive criticism. 17:31 📜 *Transition to discussing R.C. Sproul* - Introduction to R.C. Sproul and acknowledgment of his theological differences from John MacArthur, - Mention of the influence of the new Calvinism movement on Presbyterians like R.C. Sproul. 18:52 📜 *Overview of Baptism and Reform Theology* - Baptism in Reform theology is seen as symbolic, not salvific. - RC Sproul's views on christology lean towards Nestorianism. - Sproul's understanding of the Lord's Supper lacks a full embrace of spiritual real presence. 25:21 🧔 *Evaluation of Tim Keller* - Tim Keller is part of the new Calvinism movement, relatively liberal within it. - He focuses on broad Christianity in his sermons, emphasizing salvation by faith alone. - Tim Keller successfully bridges the gap between the Evangelical and Mainline Church, emphasizing the importance of the kingdom of God. 31:40 📖 *Insights on N.T. Wright's Eschatology* - N.T. Wright emphasizes the hope of heaven as the redemption of this world. - His eschatology aligns with being a Kingdom-centered amillennialist. - The new heavens and new earth represent an updated and restored version of the current world. 34:08 🎓 *Understanding Jordan B. Cooper's Perspective* - Jordan B. Cooper, a Lutheran pastor, compares Lutheran and Reformed traditions. - Cooper provides deep theological insights, making complex topics understandable. - Learning about Reformed theology from a Lutheran perspective aids in understanding distinctives. 35:10 🧙♂️ *Appreciating Michael Horton's Truly Reformed Views* - Michael Horton maintains a genuinely Reformed theological stance. - He delves into topics such as the sacraments of Union with Christ. - Horton's perspective includes a concept of "radical two kingdoms," separating the spiritual and earthly realms. Made with HARPA AI
I’m a member of St. Andrew’s in Florida (also getting married there in a few months 😁), but they definitely hold a view of the Lord’s Supper that we truly receive the blood and flesh of Christ, spiritually, not just simply a sign, or kinda spiritual.
To be fair, I don’t believe Nestorius was as Nestorian as we make him out to be. I’ve read a little bit of what he wrote, and his argument against the term “theotokos” is that God is eternal and without a mother, so we should avoid the term to avoid confusion. Others definitely promoted the “Nestorian” view, but I honestly don’t think Nestorius was the heresiarch we make him out to be, he was merely someone who was either concerned or confused about the language being used. It’s also possible that this is the situation MacArthur is in. Other than that, I feel like your criticisms of MacArthur are valid.
That’s with a lot of people who fall into heresy. They’d try to preserve correct doctrine without compromising something else, however they end up falling into a conviction that does, ironically contradict something within Orthodoxy.
What’s kinda funny is that regardless, MacArthur seems to be more Nestorian than Nestorius himself sometimes. I personally don’t think Nestorius was a “true heretic”, but he didn’t realize something. By not affirming Mary as the mother of Jesus, who is God (which is why Theotokos is correct, not because she originated Jesus), he implicitly denied a crucial part of the Incarnation. Jesus was indeed born of a woman, making Him fully man. He was begotten by a human (Mary) in that way. And He preexisted everyone as a divine being, making Him fully God. He was eternally begotten by the Father. It’s not one or the other, and we can’t exclude one for the other. Christotokos is not technically incorrect, but it plays into things like adoptionism. To me it’s more about the exclusion of the term theotokos than the term christotokos.
But He answered them, saying, “Who is My mother, or My brothers?” And He looked around in a circle at those who sat about Him, and said, “Here are My mother and My brothers! For whoever does the will of God is My brother and My sister and mother.”
A rich pastor is kinda like a rich bank clerk. It makes perfect sense for both to handle a lot of money, but when these people actually own a lot of money, that's a concern.
I THOUGHT I KNEW THEOLOGY BUT I'VE HAD A BRICK DROPPED ON MY HEAD!!! I love your channel and have binge watched it tonight. Previously had a low view of sacraments & ecclesiology (new Christian, go to local church, presbaptirian) but this has me seriously considering some of the more "big dog" churches (Lutherans, Episcopal, Presbyterian etc) now that I know that everything outside of Baptist theology isn't some unwashed legalistic horde like some of my main pastoral sources suggest. Still a bit scared about the "sacred beauty/aesthetics" (still subscribe to the notion that things appealing to the eye can gather carnal people and security) but I'd be lying if I said I preferred "Jesus And Me" type services to that of the Lutherans. Btw, how do you reconcile gaming/scientific study to God and ensure the former 2 don't infringe on your duty, devotion and love to Him? Have been having trouble with conscience regarding these 2 and am too scared to resist, lest I be found to be fighting God.
Let me tell you this: Scientific study is absolutely glorifying to God and we need more Christians to do it. Science is a gift from God and it's a horrible tragedy that some Christians these days don't like it. So there is NO conflict between doing science and serving the Lord, because we're called to serve the Kingdom of God by doing well in our vocation. Sometimes atheists will pretend that science or evolution contradicts Christianity, and as a result some Christians even believe that, but that is not true at all. Regarding gaming, just make sure it doesn't take up too much time and make sure the content of the game isn't too violent or anything like that.
Science SHOULD begin with the presupposition that God is…from that stance, ‘true’ science can bear fruit…’true’ science being man’s efforts to grasp, via the scientific method, the mechanics (physics, biology, etc) of how God does what He does…’science’ that doesn’t begin with the aforementioned presupposition, especially in recent times, is usually an agenda driven project of statistics to bolster or refute a political policy…
@@bigwinz I don't know what music your Baptist church has, but I find the hymns we sing quite nice, not to mention I feel they glorify God well! I would say, however, that more beauty in Baptist churches would be nice. I also agree that as Christians our goal is to tell others about Christ, even if many who hear about Jesus will never accept it. Take this with a grain of salt, but I also think that the Spirit draws people to salvation at least once in every persons life, even though He knows who will and won't be saved. If He didn't, then some could say "well that's not fair" and it could cause people to disbelieve God's love. An analogy for this: a parent will often give their child a chance to make the right choice even when they know the child won't do what's right, and they then have to punish that child.
I can agree to the fact that Mary is the mother of God, but do you say that to bring importance to Mary? While I don’t think that would be a sin, it can be a slippery slope. Mary has no significant importance out of being a righteous believing human woman, and that’s it.
I don't even know how to explain my belief on this. Clearly Christ is God, and was birthed to Mary, but Christ being God existed before Mary, therefore Mary did not birth God, but she did birth Christ who is God....... Confusing I know... I dislike the Catholic view of Mary and how she was sinless, they do not claim to deify her but it sure looks like it from the outside.
@@FreeSpeechAbsolutist1776 I think what might clarify it is that there are different senses of "birth" being used. Mary did not birth God in the sense that "God originated from her", which is ridiculous, however Mary did give birth to God in the sense that she, being human, gave birth to Christ, who is God--God incarnate. The first sense implies origination, the second sense is more technical and has far less implication, since it simply means literal human childbirth. In the dictionary, you would see it the difference between the verb birth--with to meaning of to originate--and the noun birth, with the biological definition and the verb "give" preceding it.
@@realhighduck yes, you have hit the nail on the head. It honestly just seems like semantics, I wonder if Nestorian just got caught up on the meaning of birth and couldn't articulate.
New to the Channel, (fellow Presby) Keep up the great content! Someone who was a game changer for me personally was Greg Bahnsen (OPC) His life’s work is on Sermon Audio. Really solid stuff. Audio is a bit of a mixed bag being that it was mostly recorded prior to his passing in 1995, but well worth checking out.
WOW, THAT WAS A VERY IBSIGHTFUL VIDEO!!1! THANK YOU FOR GOIJG INTO DETAIL SO THAT NEW CHRISTIANS LIKE ME CAN LEARN MORE ABOUT THEOLOGY FROM DIFFERENT SOURCES WHILE KNOWING WHICH ARE MORE CREDIBLE!!!1!1! (in all caps like you asked)
My understanding of Nestorianism is that it teaches Jesus Christ existed as two separate persons-one divine and one human-rather than being fully unified as one person. But I don't think that's what MacArthur is implying in his sermons.
"I affirm that a literal Jesus Christ who was man in every respect, one hundred percent man yet God incarnate, died on the cross, shed His literal blood as a sacrifice for sin." John MacArthur I don't see any problem there.
@@redeemedzoomer6053 wait so u Catholic or Christian make up your mind. U know McArthur speaks the truth about the bible. "Sola la screptria" but catholics use tradition more than the bible. And praise Mary like she was a Goddess. But she was just a normal human like us that needed Jesus. All I'm saying is John macarthur is a Godly man and very zealous with the word of God. But catholics use there traditions and idols like the "Saints" which is against the the bible and u know that. So yea, catholics are wrong
@@redeemedzoomer6053To my understanding his misconception is that life originates at birth. This made him logically think that Marry gave birth to Jesus’s body but not God. Now if we remember that birth is literally the baby being pushed out of a mothers body then it becomes clear birth is not the origination of life and thus allows for Marry to birth God. Honesty this rises more interesting questions such as when does the soul enter the body, as that’s where life begins.
The christological stuff with John Mcarthur becomes semantic if he clearly affirms Dyophysitism on other occasions. He said some things that aren't consistent with his otherwise orthodox views. Your other concerns about him are pretty valid though.
Hmm I noticed something interesting you mentioned when speaking about John MacArthur that you have an issue with his young earth creationism. Here’s a question, you believe Adam was a real life historical figure?
@@redeemedzoomer6053The bible literally accounts for most of the earths years, not accounting for that which was formed before God started his work on the first day. The bible also his minor time skips unless you use the most orthodox of bibles so young earth creationism is pretty much a given.
@@SaturnVII This isn’t even ignoring the science, majority of evidence which is used to suggests an old earth more accurately suggest that a world flood has happened. Issue is the scientists themselves ignore the details which point to flooding, instead focusing on decay done by flooding thinking that points to age alone when it does not.
To bring a serious question out of a more joke kind of comment I made, I’m curious to know what your ideal christian music looks like (particularly in a worship service but I guess in general too) You say a lot that you don’t like contemporary Christian music, which I can get behind, but in the same breath you called a Charles Wesley hymn CCM (unless I’m mistaken). I want to say I agree with you most CCM is dumpsterfire garbage, but I’m not sure what your definition of that is. I’d really be interested in a video about what you think on this topic, especially with your musical background. For example, what do you think of modern hymn-writers like the Gettys or Matt Boswell and Matt Papa? Or do you think we should just sing psalms?
Lutheran here, maybe I should talk about theology when I show off my Minecraft mods. I do think that the common grounds for dismissing the real presence of Christ and of sacramental union among other protestant groups is heresy because if the finite cannot contain the infinite, then Christ cannot be true man. Thus I ignore Calvin and Zwingli and stick with Luther.
What the thoughts on Paul Washer, I'm new to Christianity learning it deeply anyone and becoming closer to the faith. And he pops up alot on my algorithm
Guess what? I made a part 2 to this where I discuss people like Paul Washer, and it will be released in one week. For now I'll tell you my feelings are mixed at best about him. He greatly misrepresents Reformed theology. He's also REALLY dangerous if you're new to the faith, because he constantly makes people question if you're "truly saved". I would avoid him for now
@redeemedzoomer6053 looking forward to it 👍 Ah okay ill take that on board. I've just started listening to rc sproul on your suggestion and give the other 2 including Horton a listen. I currently go a baptist church as its the one that I enjoy the most with the options around my area (uk) and the knowledge I've got atm. Thanks for the reply. If u have a discord group or anything I'd like to join. And expand my faith
I don't have a problem with calling Christ's blood the blood of God. It does not sound controversial at all. But I am not comfortable calling Mary the mother of God. I guess it is because of the Catholics in my area over-venerating Mary, that the term "Mother of God" sounds like it is elevating Mary to a near divine status like how Ravi and MacArthur got treated. The connotational emotional baggage brought me discomfort. But yeah, Mary is the mother of God, if it is said in a plain way.
I know. But watched an orthodox teaching and they explained how there were heresies about Jesus not being born of a woman like naturally. So they had to give her the title. It makes sense but in the wrong context it can give goddess vibes
I feel like the problem most people (maybe not MacArthur) have with "Mother of God" is simply in translation. I don't think many people would have issues with the more literal translation "God-Bearer". This issue with "Mother of God" is it kind of sounds like it's saying Mary eternally begat Jesus like the Father did; even though largely that's not what people mean.
I've just checked the Macarthur reference and was surprised to find MacArthur was actually criticising the term God-Bearer; not Mother of God. So clearly that isn't the case with him. This is highly unusual.
Great video. Btw, I know that you are presbyterian and that you have your own beliefs, but I was thinking if there is a possibility for you to do a part 2 of this video with these pastors: • Voddie Baucham • Justin Peters • if there are more pastors and if possible, to add Catholic or Orthodox or maybe Armenian or Assyrian or Coptic priests and your thoughts • Billy Graham • Fulton J. Sheen God bless you and your channel.
Question for you. I personally think your channel has led a lot of people to the Catholic church. It's certainly helped me. Does that bother you? Assuming it's true, of course.
Think about it this way. No study Bible is without theological flaws. I have one too because it was gifted to me by someone who didn’t really know who John MacArthur is. Some of the ways John MacArthur explains things are very helpful to me, but it’s important with any study Bible to pray and ask God for discernment of what is and isn’t true.
@@3master791 there are plenty of mods that allow for a claim system that allows you to regulate player permissions within a chunk, such as preventing them from placing or breaking blocks
Regarding John MacArthur's comment on the blood of Christ, are you referring to the comment at the beginning of the clip you shared (around 1:55)? It seems difficult because he seems to be rejecting the heresy that the blood of Christ is purely divine blood (and not human blood)... Maybe I'm trying too hard to give him the benefit of the doubt, but it seems like he's trying to reject the heresy that Christ's blood was purely divine blood (and not human blood), so I tend to have less of a problem with his comments... It's still wrong to make the comment that Christ's blood wasn't God's blood, but I don't think that's what he's trying to say. Thoughts?
you're right that he was responding to another heresy. Saying that the blood was divine blood. But basically every heresy arises in an overcorrection of another heresy. Jesus's blood isn't divine blood, but it's the blood of God, because the person of Jesus is God.
You should do a video on Pastor Cliffe Knechtle or maybe even have a discussion with him. Both of you are extremely intellectual and I think you two might become good friends.
nobody cares about yom because everyone is ignorant, when i first found this guy he seemed to have pretty decent beliefs, but after he managed to misinterpret sermons like in this video and also state that he believes in an old earth i realized that many of the people we call Christians aren't really Christians, denying Genesis like this is denying the entire bible. i wanna say that "it's sad but true" but it's not sad at all, it's perfectly planned lol
@@lilhoodie15 I wouldn't go so far to call someone who believes in old earth Darwinism a fake Christian. I think that on this point (and many other points) people do hold popular scientific theories, traditions, or political beliefs above God's Word or at the very least try to mold and twist the Bible so that it fits their preconceived notions of things. But while evolution is certainly not compatible with the Bible, even anti-Biblical, RZ's salvation should not be in question over this. If someone denies God's existence or denies Jesus' divinity and resurrection then yeah, they're not Christians. But evolution vs. creation while important, does not determine nor is a good litmus test of salvation.
@@JordanTowner-e i used to think like you do but the more i learned the more i realized how someone cannot be a Christian with an evolutionary worldview
I can type in paragraphs on what I disagree, but that’s pointless. I personally don’t believe it’s my job to criticize God’s servants that he has been using for his kingdom for so long. All that matters as young people is to stay humble and keep learning. Most importantly, study the Bible as the complete, independent source of Truth crucial for living the Christian life. Believers through most of history did not have much knowledge about any of this and yet God sustained them with his revealed word. My knowledge of Church history and theology is pointless if I don’t have a daily relationship with God’s word, but not the other way round.
I am literally the same with you on John MacArther. I had a rough year of college and surrounded by liberal propaganda as the professors would challenge everything I believed in. I would read and listen to all of Mac’s books/sermons during break and when I got back home. As I grew, I noticed his lack of love and humility but what sealed his fate was his statement “taking the mark of the beast is forgivable” because he quoted a different verse from another letter.. despite Revelation saying they are condemned
Pardon me for going out of topic but when you said that Mary is the mother of God then does Mary have the higher authority because she is the mother of God? We got a lot of people talking about this and I always say to them that No, Mary is not the mother of God but the mother of Jesus because God can pick any other woman but He chooses Mary to be the one who will carry the Lord but to say that if Mary is the mother of God then she has the authority of God hence they can also pray for Mary for salvation. I'm a new Christian and I want to study more about the Bible, this argument always comes up when I talk to my church mates about the Bible. Can you Explain it a little bit more or give me a link if you have a video of it already, I've always enjoy listening to you talk and your insights about the Bible.
At the end of the day, does it affect you being a born again Christian? The people who focus on this are focusing on the theology. It has no effect on being a born again Christian and going to heaven. You can have all the knowledge of the work about the Bible but without the Holy Spirit and being born again, it means nothing. Bible knowledge doesn’t make you a Christian.
To Learn about & ask questions about Dispensational Christianity: Listen to Dr Randy White with program “Ask the Theologian, he does chap by chap verses by verse studies on TH-cam also. Hundreds of TH-cam videos
Also helpful for me getting a more balanced view of JMac since I came from a church that followed him in so many ways, even to the point where leaving the church, the pastor told me "unless you can point it out from the bible what we're doing wrong, your critique (reasons for leaving) aren't valid - to the point where they even mentioned some skeletons from my closet as to possible reasons why I'm leaving. That was after trying to fish for a "who hurt you" interaction I had which is very common in church. I didn't take it personally, but my wife was offended so it helped affirm that they were not accurate. === Both Macarthur & Keller have "systems" that the followers propagate which generate unchristlike attitudes, I guess because knowledge puffs up simply? I see value in both just as you have.
If some of these extremely nuanced understandings are stumbling blocks...who can seriously expect to be saved? I'm just reading through the NT, maybe I just haven't gotten far enough to reach my own conclusions, but damn. This just opened a whole new door I wasn't prepared for
Saving always felt like a process but I’m not sold on predestination or eternal security. But seek and ye shall find id say. It’s like anything the deeper you get the more vast it seems.
It isn't necessarily difficult to be a good Christian, and be Godly, it's just that temptation exists. Western culture is struggling right now, but we are miserable because we do know better deep down. People would get a lot farther if they were just more honest and humble.
That’s the thing though. None of these nuanced things matter when it comes to being a born again Christian. This is what happens when you get lost in theology and not a relationship with Jesus.
I've seen some of his stuff, yes. There's dozens of pastors I could have discussed, but this video was mainly about pastors who are either Reformed or considered to be Reformed
19:45 And can it be is a hymn of Charles Wesley (if memory serves), not particularly contemporary. If I've heard it sung in an old dutch reformed church, it's not that contemporary. otherwise very good video though :)
For anyone who generally dislikes modern Christian music, might I recommend a TH-cam channel called the Savan show. I don't agree with him on certain issues, like the Trinity, but his music is both very modern and very respectful and filled with awe.
Savanofsky? I know him (I know him as a Christian music artist). Some of his songs appear on my Instagram search. I haven't listen much to his songs but I think that "KJV Only" song is quite hilarious and entertaining Lol.
I've seen your debate on evolution from a theological angle, but I wonder if you've had one from a scientific angle. Because EVERY TIME you bring up evolution/YEC, you seem to speak as though it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt. But, no matter how much you shuffle a deck of cards, no matter how many combinations you hold, you'll never get new cards, numbers, colors, etc. It's a fact that all dogs are related. It's a theory that dogs and bananas are related.
You should watch some content with Grady McMurtry. It might change your mind about young earth creationism. He takes a very scientific view and not the typical stuff you get from stuff like "Answers in Genesis". His presentation of the evidence in the oceans is amazing, IMO.
Given that the error of venerating Mary exists, I'm more hesitant about "Mother of God" than about "Blood of God" or "God died". That said, beyond the question of the divine and human natures of Christ, there is a Trinitarian question: do we risk conflating the persons of the Trinity by using "God" instead of "Christ" or "the Son" in any of these phrases? Is it appropriate to make a statement about "God" that applies to only one person of the Trinity? Therefore, I'm inclined to say that it is as uncharitable to accuse someone of Nestorianism just for rejecting one of these phrases as it would be to accuse them of Unitarianism for accepting any of them.
Jesus is fully the God of the universe. It's hard for us to understand, but Christ is not partially God, He is fully God, and the Father is also fully God, and the Holy Spirit is also fully God. so I would think it is appropriate to say God died on the cross, or Mary is the mother of God without meaning that God stopped existing or that Mary is the mother of God in eternity past which would be wrong.
"Is it appropriate to make a statement about 'God' that applies to only one person of the Trinity?" Yes unless you're a Partialist (i.e. a believer that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are 3 parts of God instead of each being fully God)
Thank you brother for your videos! I did not know of some heresies I have committed until now, I repent and thank God for you. One that was hard for me to understand that was in a different video was along the lines of thinking that we had free will, and sin nature, which is something I believed and something that I am trying to understand better. I believe that we have free will, but also that we have sin nature and that is why we need Christ, we choose to do wrong, and the gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus. Please correct me if that is incorrect because that is my understanding. I wouldn't say I'm a Calvinist, but I believe Jesus is God. I just have a hard time with free will enough to just have the conclusion that I don't know. I know Christ is God, I know salvation is faith alone (thief on the cross), I Know Jesus resurrected, I think we have free will, I know God predestines things but I don't understand to what extent. My opinion of Calvinism is like Mike Wingers, someone that I really respect and look up to. I would be interested for you to do a video on him.
You already have the right opinion about this. Don't get dragged into Calvinism. It's a bottomless pit of circular reasoning and self-contradiction. The theological ideas are good to understand, but if you quit believing in freedom then God becomes scary, distant, and arbitrary. If you try to believe in Calvinism _and_ free will then you have to get used to believing both axioms of a contradiction (doublethink, if you will).
The thing I’ve never understood about the whole Mary is the mother of God argument is that it does not matter one bit at all when it comes to being saved and being a Christian. It’s like arguing about whether there were 3 wise men or more than 3.
Are we not saved by knowing Christ personally and becoming like Him? How can you know Him and become like Him without properly understanding His nature?
Concerning Tim Keller, he was a registered Democrat. He said that he was pro-life, but I question the values of any professing Christian who votes Democrat. They are simply empowering the movement that promotes a lot of evil policies, not abortion alone. Also, his church had this ballet performance using three male ballet dancers that were supposed to be representing the interaction of the three Persons of the Triune God. It was an extremely effeminate performance and definitely not suitable in today's gender-confused environment. Jon Harris on Conversations that Matter did a series of podcasts called "Engaging Tim Keller" on problems with his teachings.
That second thing is quite problematic if it's true. However, being a New Yorker myself, being a registered Democrat makes perfect sense. Being registered as a Democrat doesn't mean you need to vote for a single Democrat. It means you get to vote in Democratic primaries. In New York, the ONLY candidates who ever win ANYTHING are Democrats, so it makes sense to be registered as a Democrat so you can vote for the least insane person in the primaries. Make sense?
Catholic convert here... LOVE YOUR CHANNEL.. I have a 10 year old daughter and who loves Minecraft and I'm having her watch your channel to learn about Christianity :) great job.. Creative idea!!
You are raising her right 👍
…I hate gaming, but I just found your channel tonight, I love your commentary. I am a Right Divider mainly following Dr Randy White of “Ask the Theologian “ fame on TH-cam. He does chap by chap verse by verses Bible studies on TH-cam. Live show Mon-Fri 12 noon EST
You know I believe in a very different tradition in christian faith but I feel like there is something nostalgic and real about this channel that most channels lack.
I admire the depth of your knowledge for a man of your age. Thank you for blessing the world with your insights. You have inspired me to take another look at the “mainline” churches.
How DARE you oppose his Holiness Pope John MacArthur I, he’s the vicar of Christ!
truly, one of the pastors of all time
😂😂
Unironically how MacArthurites view him lol
😆😆😆😆
“He’s the vicar of Christ”?! YIKES! That statement reeks sarcasm, but you are right to a point. MacAuthor can say some good, but he also goes off on tangents that are disturbing.
19:43
My guy really just called a Charles Wesley hymn, written during the First Great Awakening, “contemporary.”
what a nice user
If it's written after 1600 it's contemporary.
A CCM song goes "amazing love, how can it be, that you my king would die for me"
Note that the changed lyrics here could be the source of Sproul's error as well.
He did also say it’s a good hymn
The criticisms you gave of John MacArthur are one reason I have more respect for ordinary pastors who just run their churches week in - week out with no care of what the outside world thinks than celebrity pastors who seem to get caught up in their fame, wealth, and influence. My father ran churches in small-town Iowa for ten years.
Hey Zoomer! Just to clarify a few things: I go to MacArthur's church and I do see what you're saying about the whole nestorianism thing and I do believe that MacArthur has a few theological problems as well. Just wanted to clarify that Grace Church does indeed contribute a lot to philanthropy like the whole children's hunger fund association and many more things. MacArthur isn't a specifically wealthy guy but I don't understand why that topic provokes disdain in the first place. Heck, I'd want to be blessed with wealth or at least enough money to live comfortably :)
well that's actually the first I've heard of Grace Church committing to philanthropy, thank you for telling me!
@@redeemedzoomer6053 Also if McArthur would show he's donating his money, wouldn't it be more strange?
@@alisatoniian9718That's what I'm always wondering. Obviously, you don't want to tell others about your charitable deeds, for you're not doing them for their approval, but how do lead by example if you must not talk about it, and how do you defend yourself against claims of hypocrisy if you must not show your deeds?
It's a tricky question for sure.
@@marystone1526 What I tend to go with as a rule of thumb is don't advertise but don't hide it either. Beyond that, its a lot about the heart reasons for what your doing.
He's a crazy lunatic who calls everything Catholic a heresy.
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation:
00:00 🔍 *Introduction and background information on John MacArthur*
- John MacArthur's impact on Christianity worldwide,
- Brief overview of John MacArthur's theological stance, including his identification as a Calvinist and some deviations from traditional Reformed theology.
02:05 💬 *Positive aspects of John MacArthur's ministry*
- The personal impact of John MacArthur's teachings on the narrator's faith,
- Acknowledgment of John MacArthur's passion for defending Christianity and confidence in biblical truth.
04:19 ⚠️ *Initial concerns and theological differences with John MacArthur*
- The narrator's early admiration for John MacArthur despite theological disagreements,
- Discussion of John MacArthur's theological stance, including his views on dispensationalism.
06:05 ❌ *Discovery of serious theological errors*
- Introduction of the primary criticism: John MacArthur's Nestorian heresy,
- Explanation of Nestorianism and its implications for Christology.
09:34 💰 *Critique of John MacArthur's wealth and lack of charitable giving*
- Concerns about John MacArthur's financial status and responsibility to give to the poor,
- Mention of the absence of substantial donations to the poor from John MacArthur's church.
14:41 🙌 *Cult-like following and celebrity status*
- Observation of the cult-like following around John MacArthur,
- Encouragement to avoid idolizing celebrity pastors and the importance of constructive criticism.
17:31 📜 *Transition to discussing R.C. Sproul*
- Introduction to R.C. Sproul and acknowledgment of his theological differences from John MacArthur,
- Mention of the influence of the new Calvinism movement on Presbyterians like R.C. Sproul.
18:52 📜 *Overview of Baptism and Reform Theology*
- Baptism in Reform theology is seen as symbolic, not salvific.
- RC Sproul's views on christology lean towards Nestorianism.
- Sproul's understanding of the Lord's Supper lacks a full embrace of spiritual real presence.
25:21 🧔 *Evaluation of Tim Keller*
- Tim Keller is part of the new Calvinism movement, relatively liberal within it.
- He focuses on broad Christianity in his sermons, emphasizing salvation by faith alone.
- Tim Keller successfully bridges the gap between the Evangelical and Mainline Church, emphasizing the importance of the kingdom of God.
31:40 📖 *Insights on N.T. Wright's Eschatology*
- N.T. Wright emphasizes the hope of heaven as the redemption of this world.
- His eschatology aligns with being a Kingdom-centered amillennialist.
- The new heavens and new earth represent an updated and restored version of the current world.
34:08 🎓 *Understanding Jordan B. Cooper's Perspective*
- Jordan B. Cooper, a Lutheran pastor, compares Lutheran and Reformed traditions.
- Cooper provides deep theological insights, making complex topics understandable.
- Learning about Reformed theology from a Lutheran perspective aids in understanding distinctives.
35:10 🧙♂️ *Appreciating Michael Horton's Truly Reformed Views*
- Michael Horton maintains a genuinely Reformed theological stance.
- He delves into topics such as the sacraments of Union with Christ.
- Horton's perspective includes a concept of "radical two kingdoms," separating the spiritual and earthly realms.
Made with HARPA AI
Good on you for citing that you used AI
AI jumpscare
I’m a member of St. Andrew’s in Florida (also getting married there in a few months 😁), but they definitely hold a view of the Lord’s Supper that we truly receive the blood and flesh of Christ, spiritually, not just simply a sign, or kinda spiritual.
Congratulations
If "And Can It Be" is a contemporary Christian song, Charles Wesley is my favorite contemporary composer.
I was rather surprised to hear a hymn written in 1738 described as 'contemporary'!
To be fair, I don’t believe Nestorius was as Nestorian as we make him out to be. I’ve read a little bit of what he wrote, and his argument against the term “theotokos” is that God is eternal and without a mother, so we should avoid the term to avoid confusion. Others definitely promoted the “Nestorian” view, but I honestly don’t think Nestorius was the heresiarch we make him out to be, he was merely someone who was either concerned or confused about the language being used.
It’s also possible that this is the situation MacArthur is in.
Other than that, I feel like your criticisms of MacArthur are valid.
That’s with a lot of people who fall into heresy. They’d try to preserve correct doctrine without compromising something else, however they end up falling into a conviction that does, ironically contradict something within Orthodoxy.
Herisarch gonna have to remember that
Nah. Nestorious knew exactly what him meant.
What’s kinda funny is that regardless, MacArthur seems to be more Nestorian than Nestorius himself sometimes.
I personally don’t think Nestorius was a “true heretic”, but he didn’t realize something. By not affirming Mary as the mother of Jesus, who is God (which is why Theotokos is correct, not because she originated Jesus), he implicitly denied a crucial part of the Incarnation.
Jesus was indeed born of a woman, making Him fully man. He was begotten by a human (Mary) in that way. And He preexisted everyone as a divine being, making Him fully God. He was eternally begotten by the Father. It’s not one or the other, and we can’t exclude one for the other.
Christotokos is not technically incorrect, but it plays into things like adoptionism. To me it’s more about the exclusion of the term theotokos than the term christotokos.
But He answered them, saying, “Who is My mother, or My brothers?” And He looked around in a circle at those who sat about Him, and said, “Here are My mother and My brothers! For whoever does the will of God is My brother and My sister and mother.”
A rich pastor is kinda like a rich bank clerk. It makes perfect sense for both to handle a lot of money, but when these people actually own a lot of money, that's a concern.
14:25 HE SAID IT!!! I have always thought his following as like that and never heard anyone criticize him for it.
I THOUGHT I KNEW THEOLOGY BUT I'VE HAD A BRICK DROPPED ON MY HEAD!!! I love your channel and have binge watched it tonight. Previously had a low view of sacraments & ecclesiology (new Christian, go to local church, presbaptirian) but this has me seriously considering some of the more "big dog" churches (Lutherans, Episcopal, Presbyterian etc) now that I know that everything outside of Baptist theology isn't some unwashed legalistic horde like some of my main pastoral sources suggest. Still a bit scared about the "sacred beauty/aesthetics" (still subscribe to the notion that things appealing to the eye can gather carnal people and security) but I'd be lying if I said I preferred "Jesus And Me" type services to that of the Lutherans. Btw, how do you reconcile gaming/scientific study to God and ensure the former 2 don't infringe on your duty, devotion and love to Him? Have been having trouble with conscience regarding these 2 and am too scared to resist, lest I be found to be fighting God.
Let me tell you this: Scientific study is absolutely glorifying to God and we need more Christians to do it. Science is a gift from God and it's a horrible tragedy that some Christians these days don't like it. So there is NO conflict between doing science and serving the Lord, because we're called to serve the Kingdom of God by doing well in our vocation. Sometimes atheists will pretend that science or evolution contradicts Christianity, and as a result some Christians even believe that, but that is not true at all. Regarding gaming, just make sure it doesn't take up too much time and make sure the content of the game isn't too violent or anything like that.
Science SHOULD begin with the presupposition that God is…from that stance, ‘true’ science can bear fruit…’true’ science being man’s efforts to grasp, via the scientific method, the mechanics (physics, biology, etc) of how God does what He does…’science’ that doesn’t begin with the aforementioned presupposition, especially in recent times, is usually an agenda driven project of statistics to bolster or refute a political policy…
@@bigwinz I don't know what music your Baptist church has, but I find the hymns we sing quite nice, not to mention I feel they glorify God well! I would say, however, that more beauty in Baptist churches would be nice.
I also agree that as Christians our goal is to tell others about Christ, even if many who hear about Jesus will never accept it. Take this with a grain of salt, but I also think that the Spirit draws people to salvation at least once in every persons life, even though He knows who will and won't be saved. If He didn't, then some could say "well that's not fair" and it could cause people to disbelieve God's love. An analogy for this: a parent will often give their child a chance to make the right choice even when they know the child won't do what's right, and they then have to punish that child.
Whats your opinion on Ray Comfort?
New heavens and new earth as a Minecraft update is a perfect reformed zoomer metaphor if I ever heard one.
If you wait for the attack bar (the bar that shows up when you hit a mob or player) then it will do full damage because of the 1.9 combat update
I can agree to the fact that Mary is the mother of God, but do you say that to bring importance to Mary? While I don’t think that would be a sin, it can be a slippery slope. Mary has no significant importance out of being a righteous believing human woman, and that’s it.
I don't even know how to explain my belief on this. Clearly Christ is God, and was birthed to Mary, but Christ being God existed before Mary, therefore Mary did not birth God, but she did birth Christ who is God....... Confusing I know... I dislike the Catholic view of Mary and how she was sinless, they do not claim to deify her but it sure looks like it from the outside.
@@FreeSpeechAbsolutist1776 I think what might clarify it is that there are different senses of "birth" being used. Mary did not birth God in the sense that "God originated from her", which is ridiculous, however Mary did give birth to God in the sense that she, being human, gave birth to Christ, who is God--God incarnate. The first sense implies origination, the second sense is more technical and has far less implication, since it simply means literal human childbirth. In the dictionary, you would see it the difference between the verb birth--with to meaning of to originate--and the noun birth, with the biological definition and the verb "give" preceding it.
@@realhighduck yes, you have hit the nail on the head. It honestly just seems like semantics, I wonder if Nestorian just got caught up on the meaning of birth and couldn't articulate.
Idk that feels biased. She wasn’t any woman but the woman god chose out of any. She was pretty saintly.
@jhoughjr1 def wasn't sinless and a quasi deity though
When it comes to the Mary Theotókos, I think we can easily summarize it as God is not a human, but the Christ Jesus, who is a human, is God.
New to the Channel,
(fellow Presby)
Keep up the great content! Someone who was a game changer for me personally was
Greg Bahnsen (OPC)
His life’s work is on Sermon Audio. Really solid stuff.
Audio is a bit of a mixed bag being that it was mostly recorded prior to his passing in 1995, but well worth checking out.
Billy Graham is my favourite. Great man of God.
I read his book angles gods secret agents at ten. Don’t recall much of it and I was still theologically asleep
WOW, THAT WAS A VERY IBSIGHTFUL VIDEO!!1! THANK YOU FOR GOIJG INTO DETAIL SO THAT NEW CHRISTIANS LIKE ME CAN LEARN MORE ABOUT THEOLOGY FROM DIFFERENT SOURCES WHILE KNOWING WHICH ARE MORE CREDIBLE!!!1!1! (in all caps like you asked)
My understanding of Nestorianism is that it teaches Jesus Christ existed as two separate persons-one divine and one human-rather than being fully unified as one person. But I don't think that's what MacArthur is implying in his sermons.
Bro your channel is the perfect hotspot for christian vs heretic/non christian arguments.
"I affirm that a literal Jesus Christ who was man in every respect, one hundred percent man yet God incarnate, died on the cross, shed His literal blood as a sacrifice for sin." John MacArthur
I don't see any problem there.
Nestorius would not disagree with that statement. Mary is Mother of God, God died on the cross, God's blood was spilled for our sins
@@redeemedzoomer6053 wait so u Catholic or Christian make up your mind. U know McArthur speaks the truth about the bible. "Sola la screptria" but catholics use tradition more than the bible. And praise Mary like she was a Goddess. But she was just a normal human like us that needed Jesus. All I'm saying is John macarthur is a Godly man and very zealous with the word of God. But catholics use there traditions and idols like the "Saints" which is against the the bible and u know that. So yea, catholics are wrong
@@redeemedzoomer6053To my understanding his misconception is that life originates at birth.
This made him logically think that Marry gave birth to Jesus’s body but not God.
Now if we remember that birth is literally the baby being pushed out of a mothers body then it becomes clear birth is not the origination of life and thus allows for Marry to birth God.
Honesty this rises more interesting questions such as when does the soul enter the body, as that’s where life begins.
@@darth3911that’s is a question for sure. Maybe it doesn’t have an answer.
Sproul Gang Unite, the guy wasn't perfect, but I will say that he and his team at Ligonier Ministries also made a really good ESV study Bible.
Can I just say, I built a small pentacostal like church in my minecraft world you built a notre dame like cathedral well done 👏
Nice
The christological stuff with John Mcarthur becomes semantic if he clearly affirms Dyophysitism on other occasions. He said some things that aren't consistent with his otherwise orthodox views. Your other concerns about him are pretty valid though.
And Can it Be is a traditional hymn by Charles Wesley. It may have had a contemporary arrangement when you heard it, but it is a hymn.
Amen ❤
“A little Sproul for your soul!”
What are your thoughts on Paul Washer ?
I say what I think about him in my video about Lordship Salvation
@@redeemedzoomer6053 ah okay, thanks 🙏🏾
What do you think about Doug Wilson?
Hmm I noticed something interesting you mentioned when speaking about John MacArthur that you have an issue with his young earth creationism.
Here’s a question, you believe Adam was a real life historical figure?
Yes, but the purpose of the Bible isn’t to teach us how the world was made. It’s meant to teach us why and by whom it was made
@@redeemedzoomer6053 but is not believing in the fact that He formed us the way genesis describes essential in trusting God and His word 100%?
@@redeemedzoomer6053The bible literally accounts for most of the earths years, not accounting for that which was formed before God started his work on the first day.
The bible also his minor time skips unless you use the most orthodox of bibles so young earth creationism is pretty much a given.
@@darth3911But there's obviously a history to the earth. We can't just blanket ignore the sciences whether religious or secular.
@@SaturnVII This isn’t even ignoring the science, majority of evidence which is used to suggests an old earth more accurately suggest that a world flood has happened.
Issue is the scientists themselves ignore the details which point to flooding, instead focusing on decay done by flooding thinking that points to age alone when it does not.
To bring a serious question out of a more joke kind of comment I made, I’m curious to know what your ideal christian music looks like (particularly in a worship service but I guess in general too)
You say a lot that you don’t like contemporary Christian music, which I can get behind, but in the same breath you called a Charles Wesley hymn CCM (unless I’m mistaken). I want to say I agree with you most CCM is dumpsterfire garbage, but I’m not sure what your definition of that is.
I’d really be interested in a video about what you think on this topic, especially with your musical background. For example, what do you think of modern hymn-writers like the Gettys or Matt Boswell and Matt Papa? Or do you think we should just sing psalms?
What are your thoughts on Tony Evans?
heyo, could you add subtitles on your videos? they really help me know what you're saying, and autogenerated closed captioning is really scuffed.
Lutheran here, maybe I should talk about theology when I show off my Minecraft mods. I do think that the common grounds for dismissing the real presence of Christ and of sacramental union among other protestant groups is heresy because if the finite cannot contain the infinite, then Christ cannot be true man. Thus I ignore Calvin and Zwingli and stick with Luther.
Should be a tier list 😤
It would probably get like 3 times the views that way lol
I am starting to doubt my Christian denomination and I thought i'd go to you since you seem informed
What the thoughts on Paul Washer, I'm new to Christianity learning it deeply anyone and becoming closer to the faith. And he pops up alot on my algorithm
Guess what? I made a part 2 to this where I discuss people like Paul Washer, and it will be released in one week. For now I'll tell you my feelings are mixed at best about him. He greatly misrepresents Reformed theology. He's also REALLY dangerous if you're new to the faith, because he constantly makes people question if you're "truly saved". I would avoid him for now
@redeemedzoomer6053 looking forward to it 👍
Ah okay ill take that on board. I've just started listening to rc sproul on your suggestion and give the other 2 including Horton a listen. I currently go a baptist church as its the one that I enjoy the most with the options around my area (uk) and the knowledge I've got atm. Thanks for the reply. If u have a discord group or anything I'd like to join. And expand my faith
I don't have a problem with calling Christ's blood the blood of God. It does not sound controversial at all.
But I am not comfortable calling Mary the mother of God. I guess it is because of the Catholics in my area over-venerating Mary, that the term "Mother of God" sounds like it is elevating Mary to a near divine status like how Ravi and MacArthur got treated. The connotational emotional baggage brought me discomfort. But yeah, Mary is the mother of God, if it is said in a plain way.
I know. But watched an orthodox teaching and they explained how there were heresies about Jesus not being born of a woman like naturally. So they had to give her the title. It makes sense but in the wrong context it can give goddess vibes
It could be just as simple as if Jesus was god and she bore Jesus she also bore god.
Obviously anything taken out of context can be confusing.
@@zeenkosisit could I suppose but given she bore Jesus who was god incarnate she would be special at least I’d think.
I feel like the problem most people (maybe not MacArthur) have with "Mother of God" is simply in translation.
I don't think many people would have issues with the more literal translation "God-Bearer".
This issue with "Mother of God" is it kind of sounds like it's saying Mary eternally begat Jesus like the Father did; even though largely that's not what people mean.
I've just checked the Macarthur reference and was surprised to find MacArthur was actually criticising the term God-Bearer; not Mother of God.
So clearly that isn't the case with him.
This is highly unusual.
Hey Zoomer. I wanted to know, what do you think about Voddie Baucham?
He's my favorite Baptist
So not to highly?
@@ChristianEphraimson high for a baptist, I’d give him B+
@@redeemedzoomer6053 Really? A B for a Baptist? Not going to lie that's funny.
What do you think of Carter Conlon (Times Square Church)?
Opinion of Billy Graham?
Great video.
Btw, I know that you are presbyterian and that you have your own beliefs, but I was thinking if there is a possibility for you to do a part 2 of this video with these pastors:
• Voddie Baucham
• Justin Peters
• if there are more pastors and if possible, to add Catholic or Orthodox or maybe Armenian or Assyrian or Coptic priests and your thoughts
• Billy Graham
• Fulton J. Sheen
God bless you and your channel.
Question for you. I personally think your channel has led a lot of people to the Catholic church. It's certainly helped me. Does that bother you? Assuming it's true, of course.
In your understanding does Covenant Theology believe in “Replacement Theology” absolutely?
Hey I'd love to hear what you think about Dr Tim Stratton's arguments against Calvinism!
Love your vids keep going!
Bro I got the MacArthur study Bible 😭😭😭😭
Think about it this way. No study Bible is without theological flaws. I have one too because it was gifted to me by someone who didn’t really know who John MacArthur is. Some of the ways John MacArthur explains things are very helpful to me, but it’s important with any study Bible to pray and ask God for discernment of what is and isn’t true.
Cool video, but can we make this server public? 😂it’ll make an amazing Christian MC server
I will this summer
@@redeemedzoomer6053 Let's go 💪✝
@@redeemedzoomer6053 Will that allow people to vandalise your church?
@@3master791 People will come up with a way to vandalize his stain glass windows 😂😂
@@3master791 there are plenty of mods that allow for a claim system that allows you to regulate player permissions within a chunk, such as preventing them from placing or breaking blocks
Regarding John MacArthur's comment on the blood of Christ, are you referring to the comment at the beginning of the clip you shared (around 1:55)? It seems difficult because he seems to be rejecting the heresy that the blood of Christ is purely divine blood (and not human blood)... Maybe I'm trying too hard to give him the benefit of the doubt, but it seems like he's trying to reject the heresy that Christ's blood was purely divine blood (and not human blood), so I tend to have less of a problem with his comments... It's still wrong to make the comment that Christ's blood wasn't God's blood, but I don't think that's what he's trying to say. Thoughts?
you're right that he was responding to another heresy. Saying that the blood was divine blood. But basically every heresy arises in an overcorrection of another heresy. Jesus's blood isn't divine blood, but it's the blood of God, because the person of Jesus is God.
You should do a video on Pastor Cliffe Knechtle or maybe even have a discussion with him. Both of you are extremely intellectual and I think you two might become good friends.
Hi is your video you posted on Instagram about MacArthur still up? Could you link me to it please?
HOW DO YOU BELIEVE INERRANCY OF SCRIPTURE AND OLD EARTH / DARWINISM? HEBREW WORD YOM IS USED AS LITERAL DAY. EXPLAIN.
nobody cares about yom because everyone is ignorant, when i first found this guy he seemed to have pretty decent beliefs, but after he managed to misinterpret sermons like in this video and also state that he believes in an old earth i realized that many of the people we call Christians aren't really Christians, denying Genesis like this is denying the entire bible. i wanna say that "it's sad but true" but it's not sad at all, it's perfectly planned lol
@@lilhoodie15 I wouldn't go so far to call someone who believes in old earth Darwinism a fake Christian. I think that on this point (and many other points) people do hold popular scientific theories, traditions, or political beliefs above God's Word or at the very least try to mold and twist the Bible so that it fits their preconceived notions of things. But while evolution is certainly not compatible with the Bible, even anti-Biblical, RZ's salvation should not be in question over this. If someone denies God's existence or denies Jesus' divinity and resurrection then yeah, they're not Christians. But evolution vs. creation while important, does not determine nor is a good litmus test of salvation.
@@JordanTowner-e i used to think like you do but the more i learned the more i realized how someone cannot be a Christian with an evolutionary worldview
@@lilhoodie15 something tells me you’re not as learned as you say you are.
@@elkellenhabla something tells me you're not as learned as you say you are.
1x(10/19/23)……0…..9:00……15:00…23:00…..30:00…..done thank you excellent
What do you think of Mark Driscoll?
I can type in paragraphs on what I disagree, but that’s pointless. I personally don’t believe it’s my job to criticize God’s servants that he has been using for his kingdom for so long. All that matters as young people is to stay humble and keep learning.
Most importantly, study the Bible as the complete, independent source of Truth crucial for living the Christian life. Believers through most of history did not have much knowledge about any of this and yet God sustained them with his revealed word. My knowledge of Church history and theology is pointless if I don’t have a daily relationship with God’s word, but not the other way round.
I am literally the same with you on John MacArther. I had a rough year of college and surrounded by liberal propaganda as the professors would challenge everything I believed in. I would read and listen to all of Mac’s books/sermons during break and when I got back home. As I grew, I noticed his lack of love and humility but what sealed his fate was his statement “taking the mark of the beast is forgivable” because he quoted a different verse from another letter.. despite Revelation saying they are condemned
DO YOU REPLY TO COMMENTS?
Your music reminds me of Ogre Battle.
Good job on all this.
Pardon me for going out of topic but when you said that Mary is the mother of God then does Mary have the higher authority because she is the mother of God? We got a lot of people talking about this and I always say to them that No, Mary is not the mother of God but the mother of Jesus because God can pick any other woman but He chooses Mary to be the one who will carry the Lord but to say that if Mary is the mother of God then she has the authority of God hence they can also pray for Mary for salvation. I'm a new Christian and I want to study more about the Bible, this argument always comes up when I talk to my church mates about the Bible. Can you Explain it a little bit more or give me a link if you have a video of it already, I've always enjoy listening to you talk and your insights about the Bible.
At the end of the day, does it affect you being a born again Christian? The people who focus on this are focusing on the theology. It has no effect on being a born again Christian and going to heaven. You can have all the knowledge of the work about the Bible but without the Holy Spirit and being born again, it means nothing. Bible knowledge doesn’t make you a Christian.
To Learn about & ask questions about Dispensational Christianity: Listen to Dr Randy White with program “Ask the Theologian, he does chap by chap verses by verse studies on TH-cam also. Hundreds of TH-cam videos
Wait, isn't saying "God died at calvery" patripassionism, also a non Nicene heresy?
Also helpful for me getting a more balanced view of JMac since I came from a church that followed him in so many ways, even to the point where leaving the church, the pastor told me "unless you can point it out from the bible what we're doing wrong, your critique (reasons for leaving) aren't valid - to the point where they even mentioned some skeletons from my closet as to possible reasons why I'm leaving. That was after trying to fish for a "who hurt you" interaction I had which is very common in church.
I didn't take it personally, but my wife was offended so it helped affirm that they were not accurate.
===
Both Macarthur & Keller have "systems" that the followers propagate which generate unchristlike attitudes, I guess because knowledge puffs up simply? I see value in both just as you have.
If some of these extremely nuanced understandings are stumbling blocks...who can seriously expect to be saved? I'm just reading through the NT, maybe I just haven't gotten far enough to reach my own conclusions, but damn. This just opened a whole new door I wasn't prepared for
Saving always felt like a process but I’m not sold on predestination or eternal security.
But seek and ye shall find id say.
It’s like anything the deeper you get the more vast it seems.
It isn't necessarily difficult to be a good Christian, and be Godly, it's just that temptation exists. Western culture is struggling right now, but we are miserable because we do know better deep down. People would get a lot farther if they were just more honest and humble.
That’s the thing though. None of these nuanced things matter when it comes to being a born again Christian. This is what happens when you get lost in theology and not a relationship with Jesus.
I have a brief question for you: do you believe in Transubstantiation? I was a little confused by your phrasing in the video
I think u are brilliant!
AWESOME VIDEO
Note there is. part 2 video
Could you direct me to Michael Horton disagreeing with Calvinism? So far all I see is him defending it
Hold on did I say he disagreed with Calvinism? If so, I misspoke. Where did I say that
You watch Mike Winger?
I've seen some of his stuff, yes. There's dozens of pastors I could have discussed, but this video was mainly about pastors who are either Reformed or considered to be Reformed
What do you think of Paul Washer
not a good representative for Calvinism, not the best style of preaching. If you wanna know why, look at my video on Lordship Salvation
19:45 And can it be is a hymn of Charles Wesley (if memory serves), not particularly contemporary. If I've heard it sung in an old dutch reformed church, it's not that contemporary.
otherwise very good video though :)
Cool
Hello There Have you heard of Paul David Washer, I am a Brother in the way Let me know what you think about his message
What is your view on john piper?
what about Scott Hahn?
17:26 R. C. Sproul
For anyone who generally dislikes modern Christian music, might I recommend a TH-cam channel called the Savan show. I don't agree with him on certain issues, like the Trinity, but his music is both very modern and very respectful and filled with awe.
I am subscribed to him I don't know his views on the trinity
Savanofsky? I know him (I know him as a Christian music artist). Some of his songs appear on my Instagram search. I haven't listen much to his songs but I think that "KJV Only" song is quite hilarious and entertaining Lol.
You might not see this comment, but what's the music at the end called?
I made it. It's on my SoundCloud (Redeemed Zoomer)
I've seen your debate on evolution from a theological angle, but I wonder if you've had one from a scientific angle.
Because EVERY TIME you bring up evolution/YEC, you seem to speak as though it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
But, no matter how much you shuffle a deck of cards, no matter how many combinations you hold, you'll never get new cards, numbers, colors, etc.
It's a fact that all dogs are related.
It's a theory that dogs and bananas are related.
You should do father Mike Schmitz
You should watch some content with Grady McMurtry. It might change your mind about young earth creationism. He takes a very scientific view and not the typical stuff you get from stuff like "Answers in Genesis". His presentation of the evidence in the oceans is amazing, IMO.
RC Sproul does believe in efficacious baptism for the elect. I recommend his exposition of the Westminster Confession. It is Sproul at his best.
Given that the error of venerating Mary exists, I'm more hesitant about "Mother of God" than about "Blood of God" or "God died". That said, beyond the question of the divine and human natures of Christ, there is a Trinitarian question: do we risk conflating the persons of the Trinity by using "God" instead of "Christ" or "the Son" in any of these phrases? Is it appropriate to make a statement about "God" that applies to only one person of the Trinity?
Therefore, I'm inclined to say that it is as uncharitable to accuse someone of Nestorianism just for rejecting one of these phrases as it would be to accuse them of Unitarianism for accepting any of them.
Jesus is fully the God of the universe. It's hard for us to understand, but Christ is not partially God, He is fully God, and the Father is also fully God, and the Holy Spirit is also fully God. so I would think it is appropriate to say God died on the cross, or Mary is the mother of God without meaning that God stopped existing or that Mary is the mother of God in eternity past which would be wrong.
"Is it appropriate to make a statement about 'God' that applies to only one person of the Trinity?" Yes unless you're a Partialist (i.e. a believer that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are 3 parts of God instead of each being fully God)
So do you believe in replacement theology?
I believe in what others label as that, yes
What is the gospel? What is the effect of the gospel?
Thank you brother for your videos! I did not know of some heresies I have committed until now, I repent and thank God for you. One that was hard for me to understand that was in a different video was along the lines of thinking that we had free will, and sin nature, which is something I believed and something that I am trying to understand better. I believe that we have free will, but also that we have sin nature and that is why we need Christ, we choose to do wrong, and the gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus. Please correct me if that is incorrect because that is my understanding. I wouldn't say I'm a Calvinist, but I believe Jesus is God. I just have a hard time with free will enough to just have the conclusion that I don't know. I know Christ is God, I know salvation is faith alone (thief on the cross), I Know Jesus resurrected, I think we have free will, I know God predestines things but I don't understand to what extent. My opinion of Calvinism is like Mike Wingers, someone that I really respect and look up to. I would be interested for you to do a video on him.
You already have the right opinion about this. Don't get dragged into Calvinism. It's a bottomless pit of circular reasoning and self-contradiction.
The theological ideas are good to understand, but if you quit believing in freedom then God becomes scary, distant, and arbitrary. If you try to believe in Calvinism _and_ free will then you have to get used to believing both axioms of a contradiction (doublethink, if you will).
The thing I’ve never understood about the whole Mary is the mother of God argument is that it does not matter one bit at all when it comes to being saved and being a Christian. It’s like arguing about whether there were 3 wise men or more than 3.
The doctrine of Theotokos itself might not be necessary, but it does safeguard against a lot of christological errors.
Are we not saved by knowing Christ personally and becoming like Him? How can you know Him and become like Him without properly understanding His nature?
How does anyone know they are saved?
Todd Friel once called MacArthur the pope of evangelicals.
You should really do a video on televangelist.
You should do an intro to Minecraft for us older people 😅 I really wanna play
Concerning Tim Keller, he was a registered Democrat. He said that he was pro-life, but I question the values of any professing Christian who votes Democrat. They are simply empowering the movement that promotes a lot of evil policies, not abortion alone.
Also, his church had this ballet performance using three male ballet dancers that were supposed to be representing the interaction of the three Persons of the Triune God. It was an extremely effeminate performance and definitely not suitable in today's gender-confused environment. Jon Harris on Conversations that Matter did a series of podcasts called "Engaging Tim Keller" on problems with his teachings.
That second thing is quite problematic if it's true. However, being a New Yorker myself, being a registered Democrat makes perfect sense. Being registered as a Democrat doesn't mean you need to vote for a single Democrat. It means you get to vote in Democratic primaries. In New York, the ONLY candidates who ever win ANYTHING are Democrats, so it makes sense to be registered as a Democrat so you can vote for the least insane person in the primaries. Make sense?
Why are you still in the PCUSA? I'm Brazilian so I only heard the heretical stuff.
There are still true churches in the PCUSA, and Zoomer is a part of one.
My thoughts on various famous pastors… proceeds to spend 30 minutes absolutely ROASTING John MacArthur
27:00 his theology
awesome invitation FOR ALL CAPS LOL
Discord?