Podcast appearances and mentions of Justin Martyr

Listen to Fr. Steve's homily from 6/1/26.Thanks for listening! Please leave us a rating and/or review, and share on social media or with a friend! You can email ashley@rootedinthereallyreal.com with any questions or suggestions. God bless.

Join the Movement - click here!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Today's transcript⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. We depend on donations from exceptional listeners like you. To donate, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠click here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠The Daily Rosary Meditations is now an app! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Click here for more info.⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠To find out more about The Movement and enroll: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.schooloffaith.com/membership⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Prayer requests⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Subscribe by email⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Download our app⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Donate⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Today’s Topics: 1, 2, 3, 4) William discusses the incredible Saint Justin Martyr, only one generation removed from the Apostles

St. Justin Martyr's writings reveal what the earliest Christians believed and how they defended the faith before emperors and nations.Morning Offering, June 1, 2026 is brought to you by Catholic Coffee (https://bit.ly/4nXlU6B)Every morning, join Father Brad as he begins the day with prayer and reflection. In a few short minutes, Father Brad guides you in prayer, shares a brief reflection grounding your day in the Church's rhythm of feast days and liturgy, and provides you with the encouragement necessary to go forward with peace and strength. Disclaimer: The ads shown before, during, or after this video have no affiliation with Morning Offering and are controlled by YouTubeLet us do as the saints urge and begin our days in prayer together so as a community of believers we may join the Psalmist in saying, “In the morning, Lord, you hear my voice; in the morning I lay my requests before you and wait expectantly.” (Psalm 5:3-4)________________

ROSARY - JOYFUL MYSTERIES today.  DIVINE MERCY CHAPLET for Monday.

We want God's blessings, but not His authority. We want faith on our terms.

If you enjoy this episode, we're sure you will enjoy more content like this on The Occult Rejects.  In fact, we have curated playlists on occult topics like grimoires, esoteric concepts and phenomena, occult history, analyzing true crime and cults with an occult lens, Para politics, and occultism in music. Whether you enjoy consuming your content visually or via audio, we've got you covered - and it will always be provided free of charge.  So, if you enjoy what we do and want to support our work of providing accessible, free content on various platforms, please consider making a donation to the links provided below.  Thank you and enjoy the episode!Links For The Occult Rejectshttps://linktr.ee/theoccultrejectsOccult Research Institutehttps://www.occultresearchinstitute.org/Cash Apphttps://cash.app/$theoccultrejectsVenmo@TheOccultRejectsBuy Me A Coffeebuymeacoffee.com/TheOccultRejectsPatreonhttps://www.patreon.com/TheOccultRejectsPart 2 — Core Citations / BibliographySecondary Works and Reference SourcesEncyclopaedia Britannica. “Perpetua.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “The Passion of Saints Perpetua and Felicity.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Polycarp.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Christianity: Relations between Christianity and the Roman Government and the Hellenistic Culture.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Decius.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Diocletian.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Christianity: Catechesis: Instructing Candidates for Baptism.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Kerygma and Catechesis.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Exorcism.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Eucharist.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Early Christian Art.”Smarthistory. “Catacomb of Priscilla, Rome.”Vatican Museums. “Jonah Sarcophagus.”Yale News. “House Call: A New Study Rethinks Early Christian Landmark.”Yale News. “Yale Art Gallery Painting Might Be Oldest Known Image of the Virgin Mary.”Yale University Art Gallery. Materials on Dura-Europos and the Christian Building/Baptistery.Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Chi-Rho.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Paschal Controversies.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Melito of Sardis.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Christology: Early History.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Docetism.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Adoptionism.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Cerinthus.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Theodotus the Tanner.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “St. Ignatius of Antioch.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Apologist.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Saint Justin Martyr.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “First Apology.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Dialogue with Trypho.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Celsus.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Christianity: Apologetics: Defending the Faith.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Tertullian.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Athenagoras.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “First Letter of Clement.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “St. Cyprian.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Novatian.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Saint Irenaeus.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Christianity: Aversion of Heresy: The Establishment of Orthodoxy.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “The Process of Canonization.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Late 2nd-Century Canons.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Muratorian Fragment.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Biblical Canon.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Codex.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Christianity: Authority and Dissent.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Christianity: Relations between Christianity and Judaism.”Joshua Ezra Burns. “The Parting of the Ways in Contemporary Perspective.” In The Christian Schism in Jewish History and Jewish Memory. Cambridge University Press.Adam H. Becker and Annette Yoshiko Reed, eds. The Ways That Never Parted: Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages. Fortress Press.Judith Lieu. Neither Jew nor Greek? Constructing Early Christianity. T&T Clark.Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Constantine I.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Arianism.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “First Council of Nicaea.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Saint Athanasius.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Festal Letters.”Encyclopaedia Britannica. “First Council of Constantinople.”Primary Texts UsedThe Martyrdom of Polycarp. Used for the early literary shaping of martyrdom, witness, bishop-martyr memory, and the theological interpretation of death.The Passion of Saints Perpetua and Felicity. Used for imprisonment, trial, visions, martyrdom, and the rare preserved voice of a female Christian martyr.Apostolic Tradition, traditionally associated with Hippolytus. Used for baptismal preparation, catechumenal scrutiny, exorcism, fasting, vigil, renunciation, oil, and immersion.1 John 4. Used for the anti-docetic pressure around confessing Jesus Christ as having “come in the flesh.”Ignatius of Antioch. Letter to the Smyrnaeans. Used for Christ's real flesh, real suffering, Eucharistic theology, and bishop-centered unity.Ignatius of Antioch. Letter to the Philadelphians and related letters. Useful backup for episcopal unity, Eucharistic order, and anti-schismatic arguments.Melito of Sardis. On Pascha. Used for Paschal theology, Christ as Pascha, typology, and Christian interpretation of Passover.Justin Martyr. First Apology. Used for apologetics, public defense, accusations against Christians, Eucharistic misunderstanding, and Christian worship.Justin Martyr. Dialogue with Trypho. Used for Christian-Jewish polemic, scriptural inheritance, fulfillment arguments, and the hardening separation between Christianity and Judaism.Athenagoras. A Plea for the Christians / Embassy for the Christians. Used as a major example of second-century apologetics addressed to imperial authority.Athenagoras. On the Resurrection of the Dead. Used as a philosophical Christian defense of resurrection.Tertullian. Apology. Used for Latin apologetics, Christian defense against Roman accusation, and the combative posture toward pagan criticism.Tertullian. Prescription Against Heretics. Useful backup for rule of faith, public apostolic teaching, and anti-heretical boundary-making.Origen. Against Celsus. Used for Celsus' pagan critique and Origen's major intellectual defense of Christianity.Celsus. The True Word / True Doctrine. Survives mainly through Origen's quotations and refutations; used for educated pagan criticism of Christianity.First Letter of Clement. Used for early ministry order, Roman intervention in Corinth, appointed bishops and deacons, and the emerging logic of succession.Cyprian of Carthage. On the Unity of the Catholic Church. Used for episcopal unity, schism, discipline, and the theological seriousness of the bishop's office.Novatian. De Trinitate. Used as a witness to mid-third-century theological conflict and Roman Latin theology.Irenaeus. Against Heresies. Used for anti-gnostic consolidation, rule of truth, fourfold Gospel authority, apostolic succession, and public apostolic memory.Eusebius. Ecclesiastical History. Used for the Paschal controversy, Polycarp and Anicetus, Victor and Polycrates, Irenaeus' intervention, early church memory, and the broader historical framing.The Didachē. Used as part of the wider early Christian literary world that remained influential outside the final New Testament canon.Letter of Barnabas. Used for anti-Jewish polemic, allegorical reading of Hebrew Scripture, and Christian claims over Israel's inheritance.The Shepherd of Hermas. Used as an example of a beloved early Christian text that was widely read but later excluded from the New Testament canon.Apocalypse of Peter. Used as part of the wider early Christian apocalyptic library that circulated before the canon fully closed.Muratorian Fragment. Used for the late-second-century Roman list of recognized Christian writings and the emerging shape of the New Testament.Cyril of Jerusalem. Mystagogical Catecheses. Used for post-baptismal instruction and the interpretation of initiation after the rite had been received.Ambrose of Milan. On the Mysteries and On the Sacraments. Used for mystagogical teaching, baptismal interpretation, anointing, and sacramental instruction.The Nicene Creed / First Council of Nicaea, 325. Used for creed formation, anti-Arian settlement attempts, and the conciliar compression of Christological conflict.Athanasius. Festal Letter 39. Used for the earliest surviving list matching the 27-book New Testament canon recognized in the mainstream tradition.Constantinopolitan Creed / First Council of Constantinople, 381. Used for the later stabilization and expansion of Nicene theological identity.Also want to remind people about the website, if you're into reading we have tons of information by multiple contributors, and we got t-shirts up on the site if you're interested. Fun fact, the art is all based on the eyeball. A

This episode consists of our opening statements. In my opening statement (slides here), I first briefly explain why a trinitarian should not want to identify Jesus and God. I assume that when my opponent says that “Jesus is God” he means that Jesus is fully divine/has the divine nature. I then explain a terrible problem of the official Christology of the Council of Chalcedon in 451: the implication that the divine nature of Christ is a someone (self, person) and the human nature of Christ is another someone (self, person). They try to fix this by asserting that there is only one someone there, but that’s no real solution. I then explain how later, the fully developed Chalcedonian catholic tradition does solve this problem by saying that Christ’s “complete human nature” (human type of body + human type of soul), is not, because of its “assumption” by the divine nature/eternal Son/Word, a human person. But this clashes with the clear New Testament teaching that Jesus is a man/human person. It is no help to say there there is a “human” person here, meaning a divine person who now bears some mysterious relationship to a human type of soul and a human type of body which don’t compose a human person. The problem is only exacerbated by the sixth ecumenical council in 681 at Constantinople, which seems to make each of Christ’s natures a person/self/someone by saying that each has a will (an ability to choose). Against this messy, catholic Christology I set out the clear New Testament teachings that the one God is (only) the Father himself, and that Jesus, his Messiah/Christ, is a miraculously conceived man, a human person born to Mary who did not have a biological human father. Properly trinitarian (tripersonal-God-involving) ideas seem to have originated in the latter half of the 300s, and so are alien to the thought world of the New Testament. Against various later speculations, the New Testament Jesus is the Messiah (a.k.a. the Son of God), a man, not an additional, lesser god to the one true god (the Father), or the same god as the Father, or a “divine Person” in an imagined triune god. I then explain five qualities which according to the New Testament Jesus has which rule his being fully divine. About Dr. Bird’s claim in his book Jesus Among the Gods that the New Testament Jesus is an ungenerated or unbegotten god, I point at that this is contrary to catholic traditions that say the Father “eternally generates” the Son. He also says there that the New Testament Son is supposed to “a Jewish god,” but, I object, that would make him the Jewish god, and so, the Father/Yahweh. I then lay out four lines of evidence that the New Testament authors did not think Jesus to be fully divine, and rebut Dr. Bird’s claim that early Christian theology should be seen as “incipient trinitarianism.” Dr. Bird says that he holds Jesus to be the second Person of the Trinity because this is what best makes sense of all of Scripture. The Bible teaches monotheism, that there is, strictly speaking, only one god, the creator, Yahweh. He points out that the Alexandrian Jewish philosopher-theologian Philo rejected the possibility of a human becoming a god and the possibility of God becoming a human. He suggests that if Philo had read John 1:1-14 he would have accepted all but the final verse. The author of the Fourth Gospel, Bird says, believes that Jesus in the eternal, divine Son, the Word–not (only) a man attested by God. The one God is known through his actions and is said in the Old Testament to create by his word and by his wisdom. Also, “the angel of the LORD” seems to be both God himself and someone else–a contradiction, or maybe a merely apparent one, a paradox. New Testament authors, he suggests, did not consider Jesus to be only human. In particular, the give him religious worship. They all thought Jesus to be “divine”–the only question was: In what sense? As Thomas said (John 20:28), Jesus is his god. Jesus is worthy of our worship. Paul closely associates together Jesus and God, often mentioning them together. Engaging with Jesus is engaging with the divine. Jesus in the New Testament doesn’t claim to be God, Bird argues, but texts like Mark 1:1-3, where the author applies a Yahweh text to Jesus, imply that he is Yahweh returning to Zion. Again, in Mark 2 we see Jesus forgiving human sins, which only God can do. And in Mark 14, before the high priest, Jesus claims that he will be co-enthroned with Yahweh, so that Jesus has divine authority. And John 1 teaches that God’s Word is one and the same with the man Jesus. Philippians 2 teaches the full deity of Jesus and says Jesus is worthy of worship–and so we see that Jesus participates in the divine identity. In 1 Corinthians 8:4-6, Bird says, Paul gives a revised, duality-including version of the Shema. And in Hebrews 1:3 Jesus is a representation of God’s own being, not a mere man. This Jesus has a unique relationship with the Father, enabling us to have a relationship with him. His opponents understood (John 10:33) that he was claiming ontological equality with God. Thus in Revelation 5 we see the Lamb getting the same worship that was given to God Almighty in the vision of Revelation 4. But Jesus does not deserve that worship unless he is fully divine. It would be blasphemy to worship Jesus if he were a creature. Jesus’s full divinity is also implied by prayer to Jesus. Of course, it took mainstream tradition a few centuries to work it all out. But Bird cites Eusebius the historian, Melito of Sardis, the Sibylline Oracles, Justin Martyr, and Ignatius of Antioch as early recognizers of the deity of Christ. He also mentions two pagan testimonies of the early worship of the Son–yet more support for “early high Christology.” Bird says that he’s not impressed with analytic theology, but at any rate, many analytic theologians are trinitarians, such as Oliver Crisp. He says that he is an exegete, historian, and theologian, suggesting that he is more qualified to answer historical questions about early Christianity. In his view early Christians closely associated Jesus with God and thought Jesus was “from the same source of divinity.” Trinitarian theology, he suggests, is not so much taught in the Bible as it is a hermeneutic, a way of reading it, a way of making sense of what the Bible as a whole affirms and denies. He points out that it does better, for instance, than modalism when it comes to reading the accounts of Jesus’s baptism. Contrary to what I said it my opening, Dr. Bird says we should think and take comfort in the fact that God was and is one of us, mentioning this 1990s song. In this way, he says, God moved from empathy to sympathy. This was far greater, he says, than sending “a super-human Messiah” to help us. Finally, while conceding that some early Christians may have thought something like what I presented, he suggests that the closest analogue to the Christology I presented was the Christology of the pagan Neoplatonist and critic of Christianity Porphyry, who acknowledged Jesus as (only) a pious and wise man. Bird’s Christology, he suggests, far better fits the Bible and the facts of history. Which side put forward the better opening case, and why? Leave us a comment below. Here below is the UCA-produced video. Special thanks to Canterbury Christadelphian Hall for hosting and recording this debate, and to UCA Podcast host Mark Cain for his expert help in producing the audio for this episode and for the video. https://youtu.be/tJKFqF7lYKY?si=KIfP2ez2tekxkztH Links for this episode: Dr. Michael Bird’s YouTube channel Dr. Bird’s blog, Substack Bird, Jesus Among the Gods (interview on Transfigured) Bird, Evangelical Theology, 2nd ed. Ehrman, Bird, and Stewart, When Did Jesus Become God? podcast 270 – Origen's “one God” podcast 348 – Novatian's On the Trinity – Part 2 – Two Thieves and Three Arguments podcast 277 – Was Christ tempted in every way? podcast 391 – Jesus' Temptations and Ours – Part 1 – Luke 4 podcast 392 – Jesus' Temptations and Ours – Part 2 – Things Apologists Say podcast 384 – Mainstream Christian Theologies in the Late 100s – Early 200s and Early Trinitarian “Fool's Gold” podcast 381 – Mainstream Christian Theologies in the year 240: What Trinitarian Apologists Don't Know Tuggy, Nicaea at 1700: Myths vs. Reality podcast 291 – From one God to two gods to three “Gods” – John 1 and early Christian theologies biblicalunitarian.com Catholic Theologian Hans Küng on New Testament theology This week’s thinking music is “Ignite! (instrumental)” by Lemon Knife.

Dr. Leslie Baynes returns to the podcast to talk about biblical and literary allusions in (and origins of) The Magician's Nephew! If you haven't already, check out her book, Between Interpretation and Imagination: C.S. Lewis and the Bible. Among other things, we discuss:  1:37 — Introductions Chris introduces Dr. Leslie Baynes — NT scholar, author on CS Lewis and the Bible. 3:30 — Stars, Singing & Job 38 Discussion of how Aslan's creation song echoes Job 38 ("the morning stars sang together"). Lewis loved this verse even as a teenage atheist. 6:07 — Hebrew Poetic Parallelism Leslie explains Hebrew poetic parallelism and the connection between "stars" and "sons of God" in Job. How this idea — that stars are divine beings — was widespread in the ancient world. 9:09 — Stars as Minor Gods in Narnia & Tolkien Voyage of the Dawn Treader's Ramandu as a retired star; comparison to Tolkien's Ainur singing creation into existence in the Silmarillion. 11:58 — E. Nesbit as a Source for Lewis Lewis openly based the Chronicles on E. Nesbit's children's books. The frame story of The Magician's Nephew (sick mother, absent father, magical adventure, happy resolution) follows Nesbit's formula exactly. 18:04 — The Wood Between the Worlds & Charn These sections feel less biblical; Charn likely drawn from Nesbit's The Amulet (children traveling through time to an ancient Near Eastern setting). The Wood Between the Worlds echoes Lewis's Mere Christianity hallway metaphor. 23:03 — Jadis/White Witch & Lilith Luke Mills found a passage in the medieval kabbalistic Alphabet of Ben Sira linking Lilith to a golden bell — possible indirect influence on Lewis's Witch origin story. 26:08 — Narnia's Creation vs. Genesis Aslan creates stars first — Lewis "correcting" the light-before-sun problem in Genesis 1. Frank and Helen as Adam & Eve; their children marrying nymphs and dryads resolves the "who did Cain marry?" puzzle. 31:22 — The Garden of the Hesperides The western garden in The Magician's Nephew blends the Garden of Eden with the Greek Garden of the Hesperides (Atlas's daughters, golden apples, a guardian dragon/serpent). Lewis changed the apples to silver — possibly echoing Yeats's "silver apples of the moon." 34:45 — Milton's Comus & Watchful Dragons Lewis adored Comus as a teenager. His famous "past watchful dragons" metaphor connects to the guardian dragon of the Hesperides (who keeps people away from the apples), inverting the Eden serpent (who tempts people toward the fruit). 39:48 — Joy, West, and the Last Battle The western garden = "Joy" (sehnsucht) for Lewis. In The Last Battle, the characters run west, then turn east to their final home — fulfilling joy rather than endlessly pursuing it. Same arc as The Pilgrim's Regress. 42:25 — Lewis as a "Magpie" Creator Lewis freely borrowed from everything — Nesbit, Milton, Job, the Hesperides — without apology. Discussion of his view (in Mere Christianity) that true originality comes from surrender to God, not self-invention. 45:43 — Pagan vs. Christian — A False Split Lewis (like Justin Martyr) believed all truth is God's truth. Anything good in "pagan" sources can be integrated into a Christian worldview — rejecting the idea that they must be kept entirely separate.

In this video, I'm joined by the Reverend Dr. Matthew S.C. Olver to discuss the origins and evolution of Christian liturgies. We talk about how Christian liturgies relate to Second Temple Judaism, what we learn from St. Justin Martyr, what happened at Vatican 2, and whether the Episcopalian Eucharistic Prayer C is great or cringe-worthy. Pre-order my novel, The Long Road to Holy Island: https://amzn.to/4sISAC9Get access to my book club, show notes, ad-free episodes and more:  https://patreon.com/gospelsimplicity Make a one-time donation: https://paypal.me/gospelsimplicityBook a meeting: https://calendly.com/gospelsimplicity/meet-with-austinRead my writings: https://austinsuggs.substack.comThe Living Church: https://livingchurch.org/About the Guest: Fr. Olver is the Executive Director and Publisher of The Living Church Foundation. A priest for more than eighteen years, he was the assistant rector at Church of the Incarnation, Dallas (2006-2013) and has served widely in the Episcopal Church: as the Ecumenical Officer (2005-2010) and on the Executive Council (2008-2011) in the Episcopal Diocese of Dallas; as a member of the Anglican-Roman Catholic Consultation in the U.S. (ARCUSA), the official dialogue between the Episcopal Church and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (2008-2014); as a member the Task Force on Liturgical and Prayer Book Revision for the Episcopal Church (2018-2021); and as a deputy to General Convention (2022 and 2024). He has also been involved in the Anglican Centre in Rome and regularly teaches a course there on Anglican ecclesiology and ecumenism.Chapters00:00 Introduction to Liturgy and Its Importance03:09 The Evolution of Early Christian Liturgy06:00 Diversity in Early Christian Worship09:10 Key Figures in Liturgical History12:09 The Impact of the Reformation on Liturgy15:09 The Second Vatican Council and Its Reforms31:39 Common Ground in the Gospel34:00 Scholarly Misjudgments in Liturgical History35:20 The Impact of Liturgical Reforms37:25 Eucharistic Prayer C: An Inside Look42:15 The Distinctiveness of Anglican Liturgy53:07 The Relationship Between Liturgy and Belief01:00:15 The Richness of Liturgical ExperienceSupport the show

The earliest Christian biblical interpretations outside the NT are found in the second century Fathers. We will look at the lives, key writings and important contributions of Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, then discuss the first great "School" of interpretation: Alexandria. Music attribution: "Galway" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com) Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/b...

St. Justin Martyr's writings reveal what the earliest Christians believed and how they defended the faith before emperors and nations.Morning Offering, June 1, 2026 is brought to you by Catholic Coffee (https://bit.ly/4nXlU6B)Every morning, join Father Brad as he begins the day with prayer and reflection. In a few short minutes, Father Brad guides you in prayer, shares a brief reflection grounding your day in the Church's rhythm of feast days and liturgy, and provides you with the encouragement necessary to go forward with peace and strength. Disclaimer: The ads shown before, during, or after this video have no affiliation with Morning Offering and are controlled by YouTubeLet us do as the saints urge and begin our days in prayer together so as a community of believers we may join the Psalmist in saying, “In the morning, Lord, you hear my voice; in the morning I lay my requests before you and wait expectantly.” (Psalm 5:3-4)________________

Welcome to Day 2841 of Wisdom-Trek, and thank you for joining me. This is Guthrie Chamberlain, Your Guide to Wisdom – The Marcionism Heresy: When Jesus was Separated from Yahweh. Wisdom-Trek Podcast Script - Day 2841 Welcome to Wisdom-Trek with Gramps!   I am Guthrie Chamberlain, and we are on Day 2841 of our Trek.   The Purpose of Wisdom-Trek is to create a legacy of wisdom, to seek out discernment and insights, and to boldly grow where few have chosen to grow before. Our current series of Theology Thursday lessons is written by theologian and teacher John Daniels. I have found that his lessons are short, easy to understand, doctrinally sound, and applicable to all who desire to learn more of God's Word. John's lessons can be found on his website   theologyinfive.com.   Today's lesson is titled:  The Marcionism Heresy: When Jesus was Separated from Yahweh. In the second century, one of the earliest and most dangerous heresies in Church history took root. It was not a denial of Jesus's divinity, nor was it a misunderstanding of the resurrection. It was something far more subtle and insidious. Marcionism was an attempt to rewrite the very character of God by separating Jesus from the Old Testament and cutting Christianity off from its roots in Israel. This false teaching did not come from paganism. It came from within the Church, and it forced early believers to clarify what they believed about Scripture, salvation, and the God they worshiped. The first segment is: Marcion's Vision of Two Gods. Marcion of Sinope arrived in Rome around 140 AD. He was wealthy, persuasive, and deeply disturbed by what he saw as contradictions between the God of the Old Testament and the teachings of Jesus. In his view, the God of the Hebrew Scriptures was harsh, legalistic, and obsessed with justice and wrath. By contrast, Jesus preached love, forgiveness, and grace. Marcion could not reconcile these two visions. His solution was to claim that the God of the Old Testament was a different being entirely from the Father of Jesus Christ. In Marcion's theology, the Old Testament God was a lesser deity, a creator god who imprisoned people under law and punishment. Jesus, sent by a higher god of pure love, came to rescue humanity from this legalistic tyrant. As a result, Marcion rejected the entire Old Testament and attempted to create a new Christian canon. He kept only an edited version of the Gospel of Luke and ten of Paul's letters, removing any reference to the Hebrew Scriptures or to Jesus fulfilling the Law and the Prophets. This was not just a matter of preference. It was a full rejection of the Jewish roots of the Christian faith, and with it, a rejection of the unity of God's revelation. It fractured the biblical story into competing narratives and turned Jesus into a stranger to Israel rather than her promised Messiah. The Second Segment is: The Church Responds The early Church recognized that Marcionism was not a minor mistake but a full-blown heresy. Church Fathers like Tertullian, Irenaeus, and Justin Martyr wrote extensive refutations. They understood that Marcion's teachings struck at the very heart of Christianity. If Jesus was not the fulfillment of Yahweh's promises to Israel, then the gospel had no foundation. Tertullian famously responded in his work Against Marcion, arguing that the God of Jesus and the God of the Old Testament are one and the same. Jesus did not come to destroy the Law and the Prophets, but to fulfill them. The gospel is not a rejection of Israel's Scriptures but their climax. The justice and mercy of God are not at odds. They are united perfectly in Christ, whose mission is unintelligible apart from the covenant story that began in Genesis. The Church's rejection of Marcionism also had another important consequence. It pushed early Christian leaders to define more clearly which writings were authoritative. Marcion had tried to create his own canon, so the Church responded by affirming the full body of Scripture, both Old and New Testaments. The process of canonization did not begin with Constantine or centuries of debate. It was driven, in part, by the need to defend the faith from distortions like Marcionism and protect the integrity of the gospel message. The third segment is: Jesus Is Not a New God. At the core of Marcion's error was a failure to understand who Jesus is. Jesus is not a new god with a different character than Yahweh. He is Yahweh in the flesh. Every act of grace and healing in the gospels reflects the same God who rescued Israel from Egypt, gave the Law at Sinai, and promised restoration through the prophets. Jesus did not come to save us from the Old Testament God. He came as the embodiment of that God's covenant love. When Jesus calmed the sea, He acted like the storm-tamer of Psalm 107. When He fed the multitudes, He echoed the provision of manna in the wilderness. When He declared the year of the Lord's favor, He was announcing the arrival of Jubilee, rooted in Leviticus. The New Testament makes sense only when read as the fulfillment of the Old. This does not mean that the Father and the Son are the same person. Christianity affirms the Trinity, meaning there is one God who exists in three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. When we say that Jesus is Yahweh, we are affirming that He shares in the same divine identity and essence, not that He replaces or is identical to the Father. The New Testament presents Jesus as distinct from the Father while also fully and truly God, working in perfect unity with Him. Paul, whom Marcion admired, did not reject the Old Testament. He quoted it constantly. He called the Law holy, righteous, and good. He described the Scriptures as pointing to Christ. When he wrote that all Scripture is God-breathed, he was speaking about what we call the Old Testament. Paul's gospel was not detached from the Hebrew Bible. It was built on it, saturated with its symbols, promises, and patterns. The Fourth Segment is: The Old Heresy in New Clothes. Although Marcion was eventually excommunicated and his teachings denounced, his ideas never fully disappeared. They have resurfaced in every generation under new names and new justifications. Whenever a preacher says that the Old Testament no longer matters, Marcionism is speaking again. When someone claims the God of the Old Testament was cruel but Jesus is kind, that is the same heresy in softer tones. When Christians speak as if Israel was completely replaced by the Church and God's promises to the Jewish people are obsolete, they echo Marcion's contempt for the Scriptures Jesus Himself read, taught, and fulfilled. Some modern pastors have openly stated that Christians need to “unhitch” their faith from the Old Testament. They may mean well, often trying to make the faith more accessible, but the result is a gospel with no roots, a Jesus with no backstory, and a Christianity that forgets who Yahweh is. It is not a small shift in emphasis. It is a return to a condemned error. The Fifth segment is: The Danger of Disconnection. What made Marcionism so dangerous was that it offered a version of Christianity that seemed easier to accept. No wrath. No judgment. But in severing Jesus from Yahweh, Marcion also severed Jesus from His mission, His identity, and His authority. A Jesus who is not Yahweh cannot save. A gospel without the Law and the Prophets is no gospel at all. The biblical story begins in Genesis, not Matthew. The covenant made with Abraham is the foundation of the promise fulfilled in Christ. The God who speaks from the burning bush is the same One who says, “Before Abraham was, I am.” To follow Jesus is to follow the God of Israel. To know Christ is to know Yahweh. We must never pit one part of the Bible against another. The story is one. The Author is one. And He does not change. In Conclusion. Marcionism was not just a theological mistake. It was a direct challenge to the identity of God, the authority of Scripture, and the unity of the gospel. By trying to divide Jesus from Yahweh, it created a false Christ and a false message of salvation. The early Church rightly recognized it as heresy, and its legacy serves as a warning for every generation. The temptation to simplify Christianity by cutting ties with the Old Testament still exists today. But a faith without roots will wither. The God of Israel is the God revealed in Jesus Christ. The Law, the Prophets, and the Writings all point to Him. Rejecting them means rejecting the very story that gives the gospel its meaning. If we want to proclaim the true Jesus, we must know the God who spoke at Sinai, who walked with Abraham, who judged Pharaoh, who promised a new covenant, and who came in the flesh to fulfill every word He had spoken. The Church cannot afford to forget that Jesus is Yahweh. Marcionism was wrong then, and its modern echoes are just as dangerous...

I had the wonderful opportunity to lead candlelight at a local revival. We spent the evening reflect on the history of communion and Paul's words to the church of Corinth.

Luke 22:7-8 'Then came the day of Unleavened Bread on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed. Jesus sent Peter and John, saying, "Go and make preparations for us to eat the Passover."" What we know about the Passover during the time of Jesus, is that the Passover meal had to be celebrated in Jerusalem itself.  The lambs were killed at the Temple and the priests worked hours and hours to slaughter all the lambs needed for the meals - as many as a quarter million lambs were killed.  The people came to the temple to pick up their lambs. This is where Jesus was sending Peter and John. Let's take a closer look at what the slaughtered lambs were distributed. Joseph Tabory, Ań Israeli scholar wrote in the "Jewish Quarterly Review 86:3-4" (1996): 395-406 and tells us this: "An examination of the rabbinic evidence…seems to show that in Jerusalem the Jewish paschal lamb was offered in a manner which resembled a crucifixion." Justin Martyr, (lived in the early 100's) in "Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, 40: tells us this: "For the lamb, which is roasted, is roasted and dressed up in the form of a cross. For one spit is transfixed right through from the lower parts up to the head and one across the back..." When the lambs were picked up they were handed out via the cross they were dressed on. In the time of Jesus before the destruction of the temple in 70AD, the practice shows us that even the lambs were crucified.  Even the smallest of details declare the glory and plan of God! Remarkable details that come to fulfillment in the life and death of our Lord Jesus Christ. God IS in the details and it all gives glory to HIM! Worthy is the lamb that was slain, our Lord Jesus Christ.   Now What? Learn about God at https://www.awakeusnow.com EVERYTHING we offer is FREE. View live or on demand: https://www.awakeusnow.com/tuesday-bible-class For more check out the series, "What's the Answer"  https://www.awakeusnow.com/whats-the-answer Join us Sundays  https://www.awakeusnow.com/sunday-service Watch via our app. Text HELLO to 888-364-4483 to download our app.

Gavin Ortlund takes you inside a 2nd-century Christian worship service through Justin Martyr's writings, revealing a gathering that feels both strikingly familiar and surprisingly different from church today.Truth Unites (https://truthunites.org) exists to promote gospel assurance through theological depth. Gavin Ortlund (PhD, Fuller Theological Seminary) is President of Truth Unites, Visiting Professor of Historical Theology at Phoenix Seminary, and Theologian-in-Residence at Immanuel Nashville.SUPPORT:Tax Deductible Support: https://truthunites.org/donate/Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/truthunitesFOLLOW:Website: https://truthunites.org/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/truth.unites/X: https://x.com/gavinortlundFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthUnitesPage/

Doug Van Dorn returns to the Blurry Con stage for his third year and delivers what he calls the most important work he's ever presented. Recorded live at Blurry Con 3, Doug walks through a detailed textual case showing how second-century rabbis systematically altered key Old Testament passages to undermine the supernatural worldview of Genesis 6, Psalm 82, Deuteronomy 32, and Psalm 110. He traces how "sons of God" became "sons of the rulers," how "gods" became "the mighty," how 15 words were removed from the Song of Moses, and how the number 70 was strategically swapped for 75 in the genealogies to sever the connection between Melchizedek and Jesus. Every change, Doug argues, was deliberate. And every change targeted the same thing: the deity of Christ.Doug connects the dots between the Septuagint, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Masoretic text, and the Babylonian Talmud to show that the very arguments many Christians use today against the angelic view of Genesis 6 trace back to sources that were created to discredit Jesus. He unpacks Justin Martyr's confrontation with Trifo, the rabbinical curse on anyone who called them "sons of God," and the shocking language the Talmud uses about Jesus himself. This is textual criticism with teeth, and Doug doesn't hold back. If you've ever wondered why your study Bible reads the way it does on these passages, this talk will rearrange your bookshelf.Want to listen to this episode and a whole backlog of members-only episodes? Check out the community and perks of being a Blurry Creatures member at https://blurrycreatures.com/pages/members.Check out Doug's new book, The Battle for the Bible's Truth: Genesis 6, Jesus, and the Second Century Plot to Deny the Messiah. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The episode contrasts historic Christian “fulfillment theology” (supersessionism) with modern dispensational Zionism, arguing the former represents orthodox Christian doctrine across church history while the latter is a recent, heterodox innovation. It centers on Tucker Carlson's interview with Kerry Bowler and her removal from Donald Trump's Religious Liberty Commission after she stated Catholics are anti-Zionist and rejected claims that traditional Christian theology is inherently antisemitic. The hosts claim Trump's decision reflects Zionist influence in his circle, including Paula White, and amounts to sidelining historic Christianity in public policy. They discuss Israel's post–October 7 prominence, critique equating anti-Zionism with antisemitism, and appeal to church fathers (e.g., Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Augustine, Chrysostom) to argue biblical promises to Abraham are fulfilled in Christ and believers, not a modern nation-state.*SPONSORS:*iTrustCapital - Want to diversify your retirement beyond stocks and bonds? iTrustCapital lets you buy and sell Bitcoin, Ethereum, gold, and silver inside a tax-advantaged account.Sign up and fund a new account to receive a $100 funding bonus:https://www.itrustcapital.com/go/nxrstudiosPaleovalley – If you're trying to eat clean but still need something convenient, these 100% grass-fed beef sticks are a solid option. High-protein, gut-friendly, and made without the junk found in most processed snacks.Grab 15% off their Grass-Fed Beef Sticks here: https://paleovalley.com/promos/nxr-studios-multi-product-page?utm_source=youtube&utm_campaign=nxrNicNac - Premium nicotine lozenges made in USA - Use code JOEL20! for 20% off at https://www.nicnac.com/discount/joel20!/*SUPPORT THE SHOW*Content That Conquers. Sign Up At: https://members.nxrstudios.comPurchase The Hyphenated Heresy: Judeo-Christianity on Amazon now: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GDJ7MBHL

March 15, 2026 - Sunday PM Sermon   In this episode, we trace the long cultural fascination with demon possession—from The Exorcist and modern Hollywood hits to early Christian testimony—and then dive into a clear, biblical crash course on demons: their reality, origins, operations, limitations, and ultimate defeat. The host examines historical perspectives (Justin Martyr, Tertullian), explores scriptural references across Deuteronomy, the Psalms, the Gospels, Acts, Paul's epistles, and Revelation, and contrasts popular sensationalism with sober biblical teaching. Topics covered include the reality of demons and how the Bible presents them, competing theories about their origin (including discussions of Genesis 6 and the Nephilim), the ways demons operate—through deception, possession/oppression, and idolatry—and Jesus's distinctive authority over them during his earthly ministry. The episode reviews New Testament examples of demonic encounters, the apostles' ministry of deliverance, and how demonic activity differs today (more mental and doctrinal influence than physical possession). It also outlines the limitations of demonic power, practical spiritual defenses (the armor of God, prayer, faith), and the Christian assurance of final victory over darkness. The episode features scriptural analysis (Ephesians, Colossians, 1 Peter, 1 Timothy, James, Revelation) and pastoral application: how Christians should avoid extremes of skepticism or sensationalism, recognize false teachings and occult practices as demonic influence, and rely on Christ's supremacy and the Holy Spirit's power. Listeners can expect a balanced, Bible-centered perspective aimed at informing faith, strengthening spiritual discernment, and offering hope in Christ's ultimate triumph over evil.   Handout: What the Bible Teaches About Demons— Hiram Kemp    1. The _________________ of _________________ (Mark 5:9)    2. The _________________ of _________________ (Jude 6)    3. The _________________ of ________________ (1 Timothy 4:1)    4. ________________ during the ________________ of Jesus (Mark 1:27)    5. The _______________ of _________________ (James 4:7; 1 Peter 5:9)    6. The ________________ of __________________ today (Ephesians 6:11-13)    7. The _________________ defeat of ________________ (1 John 3:8)   Duration 34:01

In this episode, we explore the life of Justin Martyr, a second-century philosopher who transitioned from a truth-seeker of various schools of thought to a Christian intellectual. We learn about his journey to faith, his defense of Christianity against Roman misconceptions, and his ultimate martyrdom, highlighting how he bridged faith and reason.Chapters00:00 Introduction to Justin Martyr01:48 Justin's Philosophical Journey05:22 Conversion to Christianity and Epiphany08:44 Challenging Roman Misconceptions10:44 Justin's Apology and Legal Defense15:37 Logos and Christian Philosophy17:20 Martyrdom and Enduring Legacy

Welcome back to The Fifth Question Podcast — I'm your host, Daniel Levine. In today's wildly unexpected episode, I sit down with ‪@DavidWilberBlog‬ — a popular Christian writer, teacher, and theologian — who makes a provocative case: Christians should be keeping Jewish (biblical/Mosaic) law.This is Part 1 of a longer conversation, and it focuses on David's framework as a Christian who practices Torah observance through Messianic Judaism — what he describes as a “Jewish form of Christianity” rooted in first-century practice.✅ What We Cover in Part 1In this episode, we unpack:

Romans 13 has been weaponized for years—but what did Paul actually mean?In this episode of the Greater Than Podcast, Elijah Murrell dives into Scripture—not politics—to unpack Romans 13, submission to governing authorities, honoring leaders while upholding conscience, and what it truly means for government to be God's minister for good, not unchecked power.Paul wrote these words during the brutal reign of Nero, yet still urged believers to pray for kings and all in authority (1 Timothy 2:1–2). We explore how Christians can honor authority without compromising truth, resist injustice when it defies God, and live out a faith marked by both order and courage.This conversation also draws from early church history, including Justin Martyr's defense before Roman rulers, and examines how Christian apologetics shaped the church's response to power, persecution, and public life.In This Episode:What biblical submission to authority really meansWhere the limits of government authority are according to ScriptureHow Christians should respond to unjust or tyrannical leadershipWhy Romans 13 does not teach blind obedience.

Part one of three. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe often spoke of a dangerous but invigorating life-force that he christened "the daemonic". In his conversations with Eckermann, and in his autobiography Dichtung und Wahrheit, he describes the daemonic by direct reference to Spinoza, and his pantheist philosophy. In this first episode of our series on Goethe's Daemonic, we're going to look at Goethe's statement of the idea, then go back in time to consider: Plato's Symposium, the daemonion of Socrates, the writings of Philo of Alexandria, Justin Martyr and St. Augustine, and finally, the alleged Spinozism of the playwright Gotthold Lessing and the "pantheism controversy" that emerged over Lessing's legacy, argued by Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi and Moses Mendelssohn.Next week (part two) will involve a closer reading of Goethe's concept of the daemonic and the influence of Herder on Goethe's reception of Spinoza. Episode art: Lessing, pictured in front of some Greek daimones.

Beauty in Orthodoxy: Architecture I The Beauty of Creation and the Shape of Reality In this class, the first in a series on "Orthodox Beauty in Architecture," Father Anthony explores beauty not as decoration or subjective taste, but as a theological category that reveals God, shapes human perception, and defines humanity's priestly vocation within creation. Drawing extensively on Archbishop Job of Telmessos' work on creation as icon, he traces a single arc from Genesis through Christ to Eucharist and sacred space, showing how the Fall begins with distorted vision and how repentance restores the world to sacrament. The session lays the theological groundwork for Orthodox architecture by arguing that how we build, worship, and inhabit space flows directly from how we see reality itself. --- The Beauty of Creation and the Shape of Reality: Handout Core Thesis: Beauty is not decorative or subjective, but a theological category. Creation is beautiful because it reveals God, forms human perception, and calls humanity to a priestly vocation that culminates in sacrament and sacred space. 1. Creation Is Not Only Good — It Is Beautiful Beauty belongs to the very being of creation. Creation is "very good" (kalá lian), meaning beautiful, revealing God's generosity and love (Gen 1:31). Beauty precedes usefulness; the world is gift before task. 2. Creation Is an Icon That Reveals Its Creator  Creation reveals God without containing Him. The world speaks of God iconographically, inviting contemplation rather than possession (Ps 19:1–2). Right vision requires stillness and purification of attention. 3. Humanity Is the Priest and Guardian of Creation Humanity mediates between God and the world. Created in God's image, humanity is called to offer creation back to God in thanksgiving (Gen 1:26–27; Ps 8). Dominion means stewardship and priesthood, not control. 4. The Fall Is a Loss of Vision Before a Moral Failure Sin begins with distorted perception. The Fall occurs when beauty is grasped rather than received (Gen 3:6). Blindness precedes disobedience; repentance heals vision. 5. True Beauty Is Revealed in Christ Beauty saves because Christ saves. True beauty is cruciform, revealed in self-giving love (Ps 50:2; Rev 5:12). Beauty without goodness becomes destructive. 6. Creation Participates in the Logos Creation is meaningful and oriented toward God. All things exist through the Word and carry divine intention (Ps 33:6). Participation without pantheism; meaning without collapse. 7. The World Is Sacramental Creation is meant to become Eucharist. The world finds fulfillment as an offering of thanksgiving (Ps 24:1; Rev 5:13). Eucharist restores vision and vocation. 8. Beauty Takes Form: Architecture Matters Sacred space forms belief and perception. From Eden to the Church, space mediates communion with God (Gen 2:8; Ps 26:8). Architecture is theology made inhabitable. Final Horizon "Behold, the dwelling of God is with men" (Rev 21:3).How we see shapes how we live. How we worship shapes how we see. How we build is how we worship. --- Lecture note: Beauty in Orthodoxy: Architecture IThe Beauty of Creation and the Shape of Reality When we speak about beauty, we often treat it as something optional—something added after the "real" work of theology is done. Beauty is frequently reduced to personal taste, emotional response, or decoration. But in the Orthodox tradition, beauty is none of those things. Beauty is not accidental. It is not subjective. And it is not peripheral. Tonight, I want to explore a much stronger claim: beauty is a theological category. It tells us something true about God, about the world, and about the human vocation within creation. Following the work of Archbishop Job of Telmessos, I want to trace a single arc—from creation, to Christ, to sacrament, and finally toward architecture. This will not yet be a talk about buildings. It is a talk about why buildings matter at all. Big Idea 1:  Creation Is Not Only Good — It Is Beautiful   (Creation Icon) The biblical story begins not with scarcity or chaos, but with abundance. In Genesis 1 we hear the repeated refrain, "And God saw that it was good." But at the end of creation, Scripture intensifies the claim: "And God saw everything that He had made, and behold, it was very good." (Genesis 1:31) In the Greek of the Septuagint, this is kalá lian—very beautiful. From the beginning, the world is not merely functional or morally acceptable. It is beautiful. Archbishop Job emphasizes this clearly: "According to the biblical account of creation, the world is not only 'good' but 'very good,' that is, beautiful. Beauty belongs to the very being of creation and is not something added later as an aesthetic supplement. The beauty of the created world reveals the generosity and love of the Creator." Pastoral expansion: This vision differs sharply from how we often speak about the world today. We describe reality in terms of efficiency, productivity, or survival. But Scripture begins with beauty because beauty invites love, not control. A beautiful world is not a problem to be solved, but a gift to be received. God creates a world that draws the human heart outward in wonder and gratitude before it ever demands labor or management. Theological lineage: This understanding of creation as beautiful rather than merely useful comes from the Cappadocian Fathers, especially St. Basil the Great and St. Gregory of Nyssa. In Basil's Hexaemeron, creation reflects divine generosity rather than human need. Gregory goes further, insisting that beauty belongs to creation's being because it flows from the goodness of God. Archbishop Job is clearly drawing from this Cappadocian cosmology, where beauty is already a form of revelation. Big Idea 2:  Creation Is an Icon That Reveals Its Creator (Landscape) If creation is beautiful, the next question is why. The Orthodox answer is iconographic. "The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament proclaims His handiwork. Day to day pours forth speech." (Psalm 19:1–2) Creation speaks. It reveals. It points beyond itself. Archbishop Job reminds us: "The Fathers of the Church affirm that the world is a kind of icon of God. Creation reveals the invisible God through visible forms, not by containing Him, but by pointing toward Him. As St. Anthony the Great said, 'My book is the nature of created things.'" Pastoral expansion: This iconographic vision explains why the Fathers insist that spiritual failure is often a failure of attention. Creation does not stop declaring God's glory—but we may stop listening. Beauty does not overpower us; it waits for us. It invites stillness, humility, and patience. These are spiritual disciplines long before they are aesthetic preferences. Theological lineage: This way of reading creation comes from the ascetical tradition of the desert, especially St. Anthony the Great and Evagrius Ponticus. For them, knowledge of God depended on purified vision. Creation could only be read rightly by a healed heart. When Archbishop Job calls creation an icon, he is standing squarely within this early monastic conviction that perception—not analysis—is the primary spiritual faculty. Big Idea 3:  Humanity Is the Priest and Guardian of a Beautiful World (Naming Icon) Genesis tells us: "Then God said, 'Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.'" (Genesis 1:26) And Psalm 8 adds: "You have crowned him with glory and honor. You have given him dominion over the works of Your hands." Human dominion here is priestly, not exploitative. Archbishop Job explains: "Man is created in the image of God in order to lead creation toward its fulfillment. The image is given, but the likeness must be attained through participation in God's life." Pastoral expansion: A priest does not own what he offers. He receives it, blesses it, and returns it. Humanity stands between heaven and earth not as master, but as mediator. When this priestly role is forgotten, creation loses its voice. The world becomes mute—reduced to raw material—because no one is offering it back to God in thanksgiving. Theological lineage: This vision begins with St. Irenaeus of Lyons, who distinguished image and likeness, but it reaches full maturity in St. Maximus the Confessor. Maximus presents humanity as the creature uniquely capable of uniting material and spiritual reality. Archbishop Job's anthropology is unmistakably Maximosian: humanity exists not for itself, but for the reconciliation and offering of all things. Big Idea 4:  The Fall Is a Loss of Vision Before It Is a Moral Failure (Expulsion) Genesis describes the Fall visually: "When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, a delight to the eyes, and desirable to make one wise…" (Genesis 3:6) The problem is not hunger, but distorted sight. Archbishop Job writes: "The fall of man is not simply a moral transgression but a distortion of vision. Creation is no longer perceived as a gift to be received in thanksgiving, but as an object to be possessed." Pastoral expansion: The tragedy of the Fall is not that beauty disappears, but that beauty is misread. What was meant to lead to communion now leads to isolation. Violence and exploitation do not erupt suddenly; they flow from a deeper blindness. How we see determines how we live. Theological lineage: This understanding of sin comes primarily from St. Maximus the Confessor, echoed by St. Ephrem and St. Isaac the Syrian. Sin is a darkening of the nous, a misdirection of desire. Repentance, therefore, is medicinal rather than juridical—it heals vision before correcting behavior.   Big Idea 5:  "Beauty Will Save the World" Means Christ Will Save the World (Pantocrator) The Psalms proclaim: "From Zion, the perfection of beauty, God shines forth." (Psalm 50:2) And Revelation declares: "Worthy is the Lamb who was slain…" (Revelation 5:12) Archbishop Job cautions: "True beauty is revealed in the self-giving love of the Son of God. Detached from goodness and truth, beauty becomes destructive rather than salvific." Pastoral expansion: Without the Cross, beauty becomes sentimental or cruel. The Crucified Christ reveals a beauty that does not protect itself or demand admiration. It gives itself away. Only this kind of beauty can heal the world. Theological lineage: Here Archbishop Job corrects Dostoyevsky with the Fathers—especially St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. Isaac the Syrian. Beauty is Christological and kenotic. Love, not attraction, is the measure of truth. Big Idea 6:  Creation Contains the Seeds of the Logos (Pentecost) The Psalms declare: "By the word of the Lord the heavens were made." (Psalm 33:6) Archbishop Job explains: "The Fathers speak of the logoi of beings, rooted in the divine Logos." Pastoral expansion: Creation is meaningful because it is addressed. Every being carries a call beyond itself. When we encounter creation rightly, we stand before a summons—not an object for consumption. Theological lineage: This doctrine belongs almost entirely to St. Maximus the Confessor, building on St. Justin Martyr's logos spermatikos. Maximus safeguards participation without pantheism, transcendence without abstraction. Big Idea 7:  The World Is Sacramental and Humanity Is Its Priest (Chalice/Eucharist) "The earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof." (Psalm 24:1) "To Him who sits upon the throne and to the Lamb…" (Revelation 5:13) Archbishop Job writes: "The world was created to become a sacrament of communion with God." Pastoral expansion: A sacramental worldview transforms daily life. Work, food, time, and relationships become offerings. Sin becomes forgetfulness. Eucharist heals that forgetfulness by retraining vision. Theological lineage: This language comes explicitly from Fr. Alexander Schmemann, but its roots lie in St. Maximus and St. Nicholas Cabasilas. Archbishop Job retrieves this tradition: Eucharist reveals what the world is meant to be. Big Idea 8:  Beauty Takes Form — Architecture as Consequence and Participant (Church Interior) Genesis begins with sacred space: "The Lord God planted a garden in Eden." (Genesis 2:8) And the Psalms confess: "Lord, I love the habitation of Your house." (Psalm 26:8) Archbishop Job writes: "Architecture expresses in material form the vision of the world as God's dwelling." Pastoral expansion: Architecture teaches before words. Light, movement, and orientation shape the soul. Sacred space does not merely express belief—it forms believers. Long after words are forgotten, space continues to catechize. Theological lineage: This vision draws on St. Dionysius the Areopagite, St. Maximus the Confessor, and St. Germanus of Constantinople. Architecture is theology made inhabitable. Conclusion "Behold, the dwelling of God is with men." (Revelation 21:3) Creation is beautiful. Beauty reveals God. Humanity is its priest. How we build reveals what we believe the world is—and what we believe human beings are becoming.  

Today on Ascend: The Great Books Podcast, host Dcn. Harrison Garlick, along with guests Alec Bianco and Sean Berube, explore St. Basil the Great's letter To Young Men, on the Right Use of Greek Literature, passionately arguing that Christians—especially young men—should actively read pagan classics like Homer, Plato, and Hesiod. Check out thegreatbookspodcast.comCheck out our LIBRARY OF WRITTEN GUIDES to the great books.Drawing on personal testimonies, the trio explains how these pre-Christian texts strengthened their own faith, trained natural virtue, sharpened Scripture reading, and revealed seeds of the Logos planted by divine providence. Through vivid analogies—leaves preparing fruit, bees gathering honey, and despoiling the Egyptians—they, supported by St. Jerome's defense, contend that pagan literature is not a threat but a providential gift that grace perfects, forming the soul, evoking wonder, and equipping believers to engage the world with confidence and love.SummaryThe conversation highlights how pagan texts address universal human questions—virtue, meaning, fate, and the divine—preparing the soul for revelation, much as leaves nourish fruit on a branch or mirrors help the immature soul see itself. St. Basil's analogies are unpacked: pagan literature as a shallow pool for beginners, bees selectively gathering honey from flowers, and the need to discriminate good from harmful elements through the standard of Christ. Examples include Odysseus's restraint with Nausicaa as a model of natural virtue and Socrates's near-Christian insights on non-retaliation. The guests stress that grace perfects nature, so training in natural virtue via pagan examples elevates rather than diminishes the supernatural call, challenging modern sloth and low expectations of human potential.Providence is a recurring theme: Hebrew faith and Greek reason converged under Roman order to prepare the world for Christ; parallels in myths (floods, giants, serpents) and the Hellenization of Scripture (Septuagint, New Testament in Greek) show God working through pagan culture. References to Tolkien, Lewis, and Justin Martyr's logos spermatikos underscore that truth found anywhere belongs to Christians. Music and athletics are explored as parallels—pagan modes and contests can form the soul when approached with discernment, just as Doric tunes sobered revelers in Pythagoras's story.The discussion shifts to St. Jerome's Letter 70, defending the use of secular literature against accusations of defiling the Church. Jerome cites Moses educated in Egyptian wisdom, Paul quoting pagan poets, and analogies like despoiling the Egyptians or David wielding Goliath's sword—Christianity takes the best of pagan thought and conquers paganism with it. His provocative image of shaving the captive woman (Deuteronomy) to make secular wisdom a “matron of the true Israel” illustrates stripping away seductive errors to reveal underlying beauty and truth.Ultimately, the episode frames engagement with pagan literature as an act of love: understanding providence, nurturing what is good, evangelizing by meeting souls where they are, and ascending toward the Logos who permeates all reality. The tone is confident and joyful, rejecting both puritanical fear and uncritical consumption in favor of prudent, Christ-centered discernment.KeywordsChristians read pagans, pagan literature Christians, St Basil pagan literature, St Basil Greek literature, why Christians read Homer, why Christians read Plato, classical education Christianity, great books Christianity, and pagan classics faith. Long-tail keywords to target specific searches are should Christians read pagan literature, why young Christian men read

Today's episode gives a conceptual dealing with the type of persecution of Christians by the Roman Empire at its height. Additionally, the responses of the church to preserve its faith by rightly expressing their beliefs, practices, and dispelling of myths give us a direct window into the early church in the wake of the Apostles' deaths. Title: Persecutions and Defenses of the 2nd Century Date: 100s AD Place: Roman Empire Key Figures and Events: Trajan, Pliny, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Marcus Aurelius Contact: churchhistoryandtheology@proton.me License: Church History and Theology is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. For full license details, please visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ Under this license, you are free to download, copy, share, remix, and translate episodes. You must credit Church History and Theology, link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. These materials may not be used for commercial purposes.

On this episode, Shane walks through selections from the first two chapters of Luke's Gospel as he highlights the significance of Jesus' birth and redemptive mission. He also takes time to reflect on the meaning of the numerous Old Testament prophecies and promises that are alluded to throughout Luke's account of the things that have been “fulfilled among us.”SHOW NOTESArticlesDetailed notes for this episode, Shane Rosenthal (coming soon!)Isaiah's Prophecy of the Messiah's Birth, Shane RosenthalThe Bethlehem Prophecy: An Exploration of Micah 5:2, Shane RosenthalJustin Martyr on the Importance of Fulfilled Prophecy, Shane RosenthalProof of the Gospel (PDF), selections from Justin Martyr, Eusebius & AugustineFinding Christ in All of Scripture (PDF), Shane RosenthalWhy Should We Believe The Bible? (PDF), Shane RosenthalIsrael: The Story Behind Jacob's New Name, Shane RosenthalArchaeological Discoveries Related to Nebuchadnezzar II, Shane RosenthalA Pre-70 Date for the Gospels & Acts, Shane RosenthalThe Implications of 70 AD on the Date of the Gospels & Acts, Shane RosenthalThe Date of John's Gospel, Revisited, Shane RosenthalIs Luke a Trustworthy Historian?, Sir William RamsayBooksJesus in the Old Testament, Iain DuguidJourneys with Jesus, Dennis JohnsonEchoes of Exodus: Tracing the Theme of Redemption, Roberts & WilsonThe Angel of the Lord, Matt Foreman & Doug Van DornThe Jewish Gospels, Daniel BoyarinA Handbook on the Jewish Roots of the Gospels, Craig EvansProof of the Gospel, Eusebius of CaesareaLuke's Key Witness, Shane RosenthalAudioChristmas: Legend or History? episode #64The Messiah's Redemptive Mission, episode #72In the Beginning was the Word, episode #75 with John RonningThe Angel of Yahweh, episode #70 with Foreman & Van DornDid The Exodus Ever Happen? episode #69 with David RohlJacob's Ladder, episode #63 with Richard Bauckham and othersBabylon, episode #66 Decoding the Prophecies of Daniel, episode #68 Signs of the Messiah, episode #74 with Andreas KöstenbergerJewish Views of the Messiah, episode #38 with Daniel BoyarinVideoRethinking Luke's Prologue, Shane RosenthalProphecies of The Messiah's Birth, You Can Handle The TruthSupport this Podcast with a Year-End GiftConsider supporting The Humble Skeptic podcast by making a one-time gift or upgrading to a paid subscription via Substack ($5.95 per month, $59 per year). Tax-deductible giving options are also available. Click here for more information. Get full access to The Humble Skeptic at www.humbleskeptic.com/subscribe

The message starts with Matthew 1:18 "This is how the birth of Jesus the Messiah came about: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit."  Pastor explores today's question: "What about the Virgin Birth?" by tackling these 5 questions:     ⁃    Is the "Virgin Birth" really that important?     ⁃    Why do only Matthew and Luke mention it?     ⁃    Couldn't this have been a later development?     ⁃    This seems impossible to the modern mind!     ⁃    Isn't it based on pagan mythology? Importance of the Virgin Birth     ⁃    It is taught by clear Scripture throughout the Bible. Note: Matthew 1:18 (above) and Matthew 1:22-23 "…an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and said, "Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins."     ⁃    It is foreshadowed in Genesis 3:15 - a Messiah from the seed of a woman.     ⁃    It is announced by angelic authority     ⁃    It explains the sinlessness of Christ     ⁃    It confirms Christ's two natures - that Jesus is both fully human - but also fully divine. He is God incarnate, became flesh. His nature shows the Good News, because God loved this world so much He offered up His only Son for each one of us. This is the Good News. Only in Matthew and Luke?     ⁃    Only 2 Gospels (Matthew and Luke) mention the Nativity     ⁃    John (from the Gospel of John) goes back to the beginning, "In the beginning was the Word and the word was made flesh and dwelt among us…"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning…"     ⁃    Mark repeatedly asserts Jesus' deity     ⁃    See Philippians 2:5 & Colossians 1:15-16 - these verse tell us Jesus was in the very form and nature of God and took on human flesh, died and rose. Makes it clear that God has come down to earth in the flesh and that the universe was created by the pre-incarnate Christ. A later development?     ⁃    Early dating of the New Testament - always been a part of the testimony from eye-witnesses     ⁃    Clearly taught by early authors (examples: writings by Ignatius of Antioch, Justin Martyr, and the great scholar Irenaeus,)     ⁃    Testimony of the early Christian Creeds - the virgin birth was from the early teaching of followers. Impossible for modern people to accept this?     ⁃    The ancients weren't gullible! Even Joseph didn't accept it until the angelic visit.      ⁃    The real issue is the miraculous. "If I haven't seen a miracle, then they don't happen!"     ⁃    God is supernatural! He does supernatural things. Pastor shares some miraculous stories.  When we, in our own wisdom, seek to remove and erase the miraculous, we are not proving our brilliance, we are showing, for all the world to see, our folly. Pagan mythology?     ⁃    Note the differences!  Example the "birth" of Athena from Zeus' head Pastor closes with a graphic showing: incarnation, virgin birth and deity of Christ stating that if these are true then that changes everything. And it changes each one of us because God loves us and wants us back.  He calls us to accept Him for who He really is: The Almighty Creator of the Universe who did not spare His own Son, but gave Him up for each on of us that we might live forever with Him! And THAT is the Good News! Now What? Learn about God at https://www.awakeusnow.com EVERYTHING we offer is FREE. Check out this video series from our website: https://www.awakeusnow.com/whats-the-answer Join us Sundays  https://www.awakeusnow.com/sunday-service Watch via our app. Text HELLO to 888-364-4483 to download our app.

Cale continues Genesis 49 and discusses how the name “Jews” comes from Judah. He also talks about St. Justin Martyr’s views on Judah and compares Judah and Jesus. Cale also discusses the writings of St. Ambrose and how they compare to Judah and Jesus. Cale explains who Zebulun is.

A befuddled student asked apologist Wes Huff about how to make sense of the Trinity. Huff’s answer has gone viral (also here and here). Obviously, Christians are enjoying and sharing Huff’s answer. But how helpful of an answer is it? Is this an answer that is going to help a thinking Christian love God with all her mind? Does it point her to the relevant biblical teachings? Unfortunately, as Michael and I explain, for a number of reasons Huff’s answer is not helpful to the informed, Scripture-loving truth-seeker. Just after the 48 minutes mark (52 minutes in the video below) I challenge Wes Huff to a debate on whether the one God in the New Testament or the Father alone. For these reasons, he probably will not debate me. But the Christian public who relies on Huff’s Trinity “answers” needs some better information, and to hear the unitarian Christian side of the case. If he does decide to accept the challenge, here is my recently updated starter pack for understanding my views. As we recorded this video, I thought that perhaps it’s unfair to critique Huff’s Trinity thoughts based on an off-the-cuff answer. So in the next two episodes I’m going to interact with two other videos where he states his views at length and fully rehearsed. Perhaps those will fare better? Here’s the video version: https://www.youtube.com/live/6Ipw3TUSVyE?si=X81aJZpvMt36OmMh Links for this episode: Michael Temperato’s YouTube, Tiktok, Instagram Tuggy, What is the Trinity? Stanford Encyclopedia, “Trinity” What Would It Take To Convert You Back To Trinitarianism? ? R. T. Mullins’s interview of William Lane Craig on his own Trinity theory Gaston, Dynamic Monarchianism: The Earliest Christology? Unitarian Christian Alliance Youtube channel Unitarian Christian Alliance Unitarian Christian Alliance – Conference near Sydney, Australia, March 2026 podcast 137 – Daniel Whitby's “Mystery and Revelation Inconsistent” The Bodies of God and the World of Ancient Israel – Dale Tuggy, Benjamin D. Sommer on Gregory of Nyssa’s On Not Three Gods podcast 302 – The Stages of Trinitarian Commitment podcast 262 – The Trinity before Nicaea? podcast 249 – Tuggy vs. Brown debate – The God of the Bible is the Father alone McIntosh, ed. One God, Three Persons, Four Views podcast 388 – Yes, “the Trinity” is a Problem – Part 2 podcast 387 – Yes, “the Trinity” is a Problem – Part 1 The Standard Opening Move Why I’m Not a Buddhist – Dr. Dale Tuggy podcast 76 – Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho – Part 3 podcast 75 – Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho – Part 2 podcast 74 – Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho – Part 1 This week’s thinking music is “Going Rogue” by Grumplefunk. Other videos in this UCA series: https://www.youtube.com/live/d0nXXVtuU3c?si=gCfoT5pqfw_3_pR9 https://www.youtube.com/live/1lkBSlYRa3E?si=WpCjMtSPndZE4gqm

"Has the doctrine of justification by faith alone really been the faith of the church in every age—or was it invented at the Reformation?In Galatians 2:15–16, Paul declares that “a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ.” Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox critics often claim that the Reformation view of justification is a late, novel interpretation. But the testimony of Scripture and church history shows otherwise.In this sermon, we explore:The Perspicuity of Scripture – why Paul's teaching on justification is clear and authoritativeThe Early Church Fathers – Clement, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Origen, Chrysostom, Basil, Ambrosiaster, and others who spoke of justification by faith aloneAugustine & the Medieval Witnesses – how even in the Middle Ages, voices like Anselm, Bernard, and Wycliffe upheld the truth that salvation is wholly of graceThe Reformation – not a new doctrine, but a return to the biblical and historic gospelFrom Adam to Abraham, from Paul to the Reformers, from the fathers to faithful believers in every century, the church has always confessed the same truth:We are justified by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, to the glory of God alone.#JustificationByFaith #FaithAlone #SolaFide #Galatians #ChurchHistory #ReformedTheology #GospelTruth #ChristAlone #GraceAlone"

ABOUT THE EPISODEA curated survey of ten seminal works in Christian political theology—from Justin Martyr and Augustine to Calvin, Rutherford, and Oliver O'Donovan—highlighting the development of theological reflection on church, state, and authority across the centuries.Resources to Click“Do the Reading: Selections in Political Theology” – Brad GreenTheme of the Month: Do the Reading: Selections in Political TheologyGive to Support the WorkBooks to ReadFrom Irenaeus to Grotius: A Sourcebook in Christian Political Thought – Oliver O'DonovanApostolic Fathers – J.B. Lightfoot ed. Michael HolmesCity of God – Augustine of HippoSumma Theologica – Thomas AquinasThe Divine Comedy: Inferno, Purgatorio, Paradiso – Dante AlighieriLuther: Selected Political Writings – Martin Luther; ed. J.M. PorterInstitutes of the Christian Religion – John Calvin ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford Lewis BattlesVindiciae Contra Tyrannos: A Defense of Liberty Against Tyrants – Stephen Junius BrutusPolitica – Johannes AlthusiusLeviathan – Thomas HobbesLex Rex: The Law is King – Samuel RutherfordThe Emergence of Liberty in the Modern World: The Influence of Calvin on Five Governments from the 16th-18th Centuries – Douglas F. KellyThe Oxford Guide to the Historical Reception of Augustine – eds. Karla Pollman and Willemien OttenThe Desire of the Nations: Rediscovering the Roots of Political Theology – Oliver O'Donovan

This episode argues for a eucharistic reading of "the word became flesh" challenging the common belief that John 1:14 is about Jesus's birth, arguing instead that it establishes the New Covenant's two central rituals: Baptism (New Birth) and the Eucharist (Sustenance). By adopting the Greek translation that the Word "tabernacled in us," we find a shared sacred practice that can be a new center of unity for Christians struggling with theological fracturing.Bill Schegel's video (  @billschlegel1  ) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A87VcXKCWBM&t=1053sMy prologue presentation at the UCA (  @UnitarianChristianAlliance  ) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TL7vQIPGQ14&t=2110sMy extended prologue presentation - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqTlnT-J6rk&t=5337sSean Finnegan on Corinthians - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iiNXMo2KMxk&t=103sSean Finnegan Corinthians (  @restitutio8765  ,  @livinghopelatham  ) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lht8tLge3iUDustin Smith Theme of Misunderstanding (  @BiblicalUnitarianPodcast  ) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUNLO9Zm83o&t=230sFr. John Behr on Origen - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4S4BZJcqF0&t=341sFrancis Chan on Gavin Ortlund (  @TruthUnites  ) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNhqyRiIi9U&t=1669sI mention John MacArthur, Francis Chan, Fr. John Behr, Emperor Justinian I, Bill Schlegel, Sam Tideman, Huldrych Zwingli, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Michael Servetus, Sean Finnegan, Brett Salkeld, Origen of Alexandria, Nicodemus, John the Baptist, Paul, Moses, Mary, Pliny the Younger, Emperor Trajan, Thomas (Apostle), Philip, Nathanael, Jacob (Ancestor), Abraham (Ancestor), Irenaeus of Lyon, Justin Martyr, Raymond Brown and more.

Finish Faithful - https://finishfaithful.org/ @finishfaithful7807  In this episode, my father, Jeff Tideman, and I discuss our spiritual journeys and the complex world of Christian eschatology. We explore Jeff's religious history, including his experience with The Way International, the early church's premillennial beliefs, and the fascinating history of how the doctrine of the "rapture" developed later in the 19th century. The conversation ultimately centers on the nature of the Kingdom of God—whether it is a purely spiritual reality "within you" or a future, literal, geopolitical restoration of Israel and the earth, and why understanding this is crucial for believers today.We mention The Way International, Dr. Victor Paul Wierwille, John Nelson Darby, Dr. E. W. Bullinger, Cyrus Ingerson Scofield, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus of Lyon, Papias of Hierapolis, Hippolytus of Rome, Tertullian, Origen of Alexandria, Clement of Alexandria, Eusebius of Caesarea, Athanasius of Alexandria, Julian the Apostate, Chuck Lamatina, Sir Anthony Buzzard, Sean Finnegan. @restitutio8765  , Dr. Beau Branson, Will Barlow. @compasschurchlou  , Antichrist, Eschatology, Kingdom of God, Dispensationalism, Covenant Theology, Premillennialism, Amillennialism, Preterism, Chiliasm, Supersessionism, The Rapture, Pre-Tribulation Rapture, Pre-Wrath Rapture, Zionism and more.

Send us a textIn the 4th century AD, two Christian friends - Basil and Gregory - travelled from Cappadocia to Athens to go study Greek literature with Libanius, the leading rhetorician of the time. While there, these two young and wealthy Cappadocians befriended a fellow student named Julian, the nephew of the Emperor Constantine. There in Athens, the three young Christians mastered Greek philosophy and rhetoric at Libanius' feet. Later on, Basil went on to become the bishop of Caesarea, one of the architects of orthodoxy's victory over the Arian heresy, and was later named a "Doctor of the Church." His friend Gregory of Nazianzus rose to become one of the foremost preachers and theologians in church history. And their friend Julian became Emperor - and having repudiated the Christian faith, attempted to turn the newly Christian Roman Empire pagan again. Clearly, as the example of Julian the Apostate shows, pagan mythology and literature pose a danger to Christian faith. But can pagan learning serve Christian faith as well? Jonathan and Ryan are joined, once again, by the Rev. Calvin Goligher to discuss St. Basil of Caesarea's "Address to Young Men on the Right Use of Greek Literature," in which he answers heartily in the affirmative, and explains how to use Greek poetry, philosophy, and history for the edification of young Christian students. St. Basil's Address to Young Men on the Right Use of Greek Literature: https://www.tertullian.org/fathers/basil_litterature01.htmFrederick Morgan Padelford's Introduction to St. Basil and the Address to Young Men: https://www.tertullian.org/fathers/basil_litterature00.htmRichard M. Gamble's The Great Tradition: https://amzn.to/3Q4lRnONH episode on Justin Martyr: https://newhumanists.buzzsprout.com/1791279/episodes/10722142-justin-martyr-s-first-apology-feat-calvin-goligher-episode-xxivNH episode on Athanasius: https://newhumanists.buzzsprout.com/1791279/episodes/9827740-athanasius-on-the-incarnation-feat-calvin-goligher-episode-xvRobert Louis Wilken's The Spirit of Early Christian Thought: https://bookshop.org/a/25626/9780300105988New Humanists is brought to you by the Ancient Language Institute: https://ancientlanguage.com/Links may have referral codes, which earn us a commission at no additional cost to you. We encourage you, when possible, to use Bookshop.org for your book purchases, an online bookstore which supports local bookstores.Music: Save Us Now by Shane Ivers - https://www.silvermansound.com

Was Noah's flood just a myth—or a historical reality written in Scripture, remembered by nations, and recorded in the rocks?In this episode of Faith of the Fathers, we explore the overwhelming evidence for a biblical, global flood:

In this episode of Faith of the Fathers, we tackle one of the most debated topics in Christianity: the eternity and conscious torment of hell. Is hell truly eternal, or is it a temporary punishment? We dive into what Scripture really says, examining key Greek and Hebrew terms like αἰώνιος (eternal), κόλασις (punishment), and βασανισμός (torment).We also look to the early church fathers—Justin Martyr, Ignatius of Antioch, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, and Augustine—who consistently affirmed eternal punishment, and explore how their teaching contrasts with modern heresies like annihilationism and universalism.Along the way, we reflect on Jesus' parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19–31), showing the reality of conscious post-death torment.Whether you're a believer seeking clarity or simply curious about what the historic church has always taught, this episode will strengthen your understanding of God's justice, mercy, and the urgency of the gospel.Where Scripture matters, and history is the Lord's.

In this episode of the Ascend the Great Books podcast, Deacon Harrison Garlick and Father Justin Brophy, OP, delve into the second part of Plato's Apology, exploring Socrates' defense during his trial. They discuss the significance of Socrates' thoughts on death, virtue, and the role of philosophy in life. The conversation also touches on the influence of Saint Justin Martyr, the relationship between pagans and philosophy, and the concept of the daemon as a guiding force in Socrates' life. Check out thegreatbookspodcast.com for our reading schedule and prior great books!Check out our COLLECTION of written guides on the great books.The episode emphasizes the importance of living a virtuous life and the challenges posed by political life, ultimately highlighting Socrates' role as a gadfly in Athenian society. Keywords: Plato, Socrates, Apology, philosophy, virtue, Justin Martyr, death, polis, daemon, gadfly, Socrates, philosophy, politics, virtue, democracy, Apology, death, unexamined life, hope, justiceFrom the guide: 30. What should we learn from the Apology overall?In Plato's Apology, Socrates delivers a profound defense against charges of impiety and corrupting the youth, presenting himself as a divinely appointed gadfly to awaken Athens to wisdom and virtue, despite the city's resistance to his philosophical mission. He distinguishes his authentic philosophy, driven by a true eros for wisdom and obedience to the God, from sophistry and poetic inspiration, emphasizing that the unexamined life is not worth living. Facing a close guilty verdict and death sentence, Socrates refuses to grovel, asserting that a just man cannot be harmed by a worse one, as only unjust acts can scar the soul. He concludes with hope, urging the jury to trust that “a good man cannot be harmed either in life or in death, and that his affairs are not neglected by the gods,” leaving a legacy that challenges Athens and shapes Western civilization. The Apology thus portrays Socrates' trial as a defense of philosophy itself, highlighting its transformative power and inevitable tension with the democratic polis.

In this solo episode of The Reformed Brotherhood, Tony Arsenal tackles the concerning theological trend of "Divine Council Theology" and its recent resurgence within Reformed circles. He offers a critical analysis of Michael Heiser's influential work and its problematic popularization by Reformed figures like Doug Van Dorn and John Moffitt. Tony demonstrates how redefining the biblical term "Elohim" to include both God and created spiritual beings in the same ontological category fundamentally undermines the creator-creature distinction essential to Christian orthodoxy. Through careful examination of systematic theological categories, communicable and incommunicable attributes, and implications for Christology, he reveals why this seemingly academic redefinition poses serious threats to biblical monotheism and classical Reformed theology. Key Takeaways Divine Council Theology, popularized by Michael Heiser and now being promoted within Reformed circles, attempts to redefine "Elohim" as a functional category that includes both God and created spiritual beings. This theological trend commits an etymological fallacy by redefining the predominant usage of "Elohim" (which refers to the God of Israel in ~2,300 of 2,600 occurrences) based on minority usages. The approach dangerously blurs the fundamental creator-creature distinction that is essential to Christian monotheism and orthodox theology. Proponents incorrectly classify divine power as a communicable attribute rather than recognizing omnipotence as an incommunicable attribute that cannot be shared with creatures. The theological system makes problematic analogies to the incarnation, showing a confused understanding of the hypostatic union and potentially opening the door to Arian implications. This theology represents a concerning return to concepts the early church fathers fought against when confronting pagan Greek thought, rather than a retrieval of biblical teaching. Departing from the "pattern of sound words" handed down through church history in favor of novel interpretations should raise significant warning flags. Key Concepts The Creator-Creature Distinction The most fundamental division in Christian theology is not between spiritual and material beings, but between the uncreated Creator and everything else that exists. Divine Council Theology dangerously undermines this distinction by placing God and created spiritual beings in the same category of "Elohim." While proponents acknowledge God as the uncreated Creator, they nevertheless insist on categorizing Him alongside angels, demons, and other spiritual entities based on shared attributes of power or function. This categorization system parallels pagan worldviews more than biblical theology, where God exists in a class of one. By defining "Elohim" as a functional category related to spiritual power rather than an ontological one, this approach inadvertently returns to a hierarchical view of spiritual beings with God merely at the "top of the totem pole" rather than in an entirely separate and unique category of existence. This framework subtly but significantly undermines biblical monotheism by suggesting God shares a fundamental nature with His creatures. Communicable vs. Incommunicable Attributes Divine Council Theology mishandles the traditional theological distinction between God's communicable and incommunicable attributes. In classical Reformed theology, communicable attributes (like love or wisdom) can be shared with creatures in a limited, analogical way, while incommunicable attributes (like omnipotence, eternality, or divine simplicity) belong exclusively to God and cannot be shared without making the creature into God. Proponents of Divine Council Theology erroneously suggest that the power denoted by "Elohim" is a communicable attribute that God shares with spiritual beings, rather than recognizing omnipotence as properly incommunicable. This misclassification creates theological incoherence: if God could truly share His omnipotence with creatures, those creatures would effectively become equal to God in power, creating the logical impossibility of multiple omnipotent beings. This confusion of categories demonstrates how this theological system fails to maintain proper distinctions that are essential for preserving the uniqueness and transcendence of God in Christian theology. Memorable Quotes "Christianity and biblical Judaism—the primary distinction is not between spiritual and matter... The primary distinction when we're talking about the most absolute line is the distinction between the uncreated creator and his creation." "Rather than rely on the safe time-tested words and concepts that have been proven and validated, and attacked and defended and have been victorious for hundreds and thousands of years... Moffitt and Van Dorn think it is smarter and safer to depart from the pattern of sound words rather than to keep the pattern of sound words because they think that they are able to look at the Bible the way basically no one ever has in the 2000 years of the church and find something they haven't." "These teachings are pagan. This is talking about returning to a world populated by spiritual beings, and God is kind of just on the highest part of the totem pole... We're just returning to something that the early church fought hard to get rid of when they came out of their pagan culture." Resources Mentioned Reformed Arsenal article series on Divine Council Theology Full Transcript [00:00:24] Introduction and Episode Setup Tony Arsenal: Welcome to episode 461 of the Reformed Brotherhood. I am Tony, and today it's just me. Hey, brothers and sisters. We had a little bit of a scheduling conflict this week, so Jesse is taking the week off and uh, it gives me an opportunity to talk about something that I've been doing a little bit of research on. [00:00:47] Affirmations and Denials Tony Arsenal: Hopefully the listener has noticed that Jesse and I have been trying to keep our affirmations and denials a little bit tighter so we can get into the meat of the episode a little bit quicker. But occasionally we do run into a denial, usually a denial, but we run into a denial that, uh, we often say this could be an episode of its own. And so today is one of those episodes. So I'm not gonna give you my normal affirmation or denial. I'm just gonna jump into it. Now this is gonna be a little bit off the cuff. I've been doing some research, so I may not have as much of the receipts as the kids say, um, as I normally would. But I am writing a series of articles on this issue over@reformedarsenal.com. I'll make sure to put the link to the first article in the show notes. All of the receipts are there, all of the timestamps for the podcast episodes that I'll be. Discussing your critiquing. Are there citations for research work that I'm doing? All that stuff is there. So if you're interested in digging into the meet and you're the kind of guy who, or girl who likes to nerd out in the footnotes, then head over to uh reformed arsenal.com. You'll find the series pretty quick. [00:01:56] Introduction to Divine Counsel Theology Tony Arsenal: What I wanted to talk about today, and I'm glad we have kind of a whole episode, uh, to talk about it, is a movement, uh, that has some foothold in reformed theology. Uh, it's not new, uh, it didn't start in reformed theology, but for some reason, uh, those who are within our orbits tend to be a little bit enamored by this kind of theology. I'm not exactly sure why. [00:02:19] Michael Heiser's Influence Tony Arsenal: This theology is often called Divine Counsel Theology, and it was really, um, you know, it's not entirely new even with, with this figure, but it was really made popular and sort of, um, spread about and made accessible by the late Michael Heiser. Um, part of this is because he was just a very winsome, uh, guy. He took. Sort of highfalutin academic concepts and was able to bring them down to, uh, to an understandable level, including things like ancient near Eastern context, biblical, you know, ex of Jesus Hebrew language, other ancient near Eastern languages, which of course, that's that kind of stuff is what this podcast is all about, taking difficult, sometimes technical concepts. Talking about them, translating them into kind of the language that everybody else speaks. So that project was fine. The issue is the direction that he goes with a lot of the theology. So Michael Heiser writes a book called Unseen Realms, which is seen as kind of a retrieval of the supernatural mindset and worldview of the Bible. Uh, there's a lot to be commended about that, uh, enterprise, about that intention. I do agree with part of what he has to say when he says that we've lost a lot of the supernatural context of the Bible. Um, but I think where he goes with it is a direction that we really ought not go and we'll dig into it. [00:03:43] Critique of Reformed Fringe Podcast Tony Arsenal: The reason this is coming up now is because recently there's been a series of articles and podcasts put out by a show called The Reformed Fringe. Uh, some if you're in the Telegram chat, which you can join at, uh, t Me slash Reformed Brotherhood. You've already seen some of this stuff. We've already talked about it a little bit. But the Reformed Fringe is a podcast that sort of tries to fill a space that's something like Haunted Cosmos, which we've talked about before. Um, fills sort of looking at the weird fringe kind of things in the world. Ghosts, paranormal activity, trying to explain it through a biblical, uh, lens or worldview. Again, that's a commendable. Effort. There are strange things that happen in our world that are not easily explainable or at all explainable by natural, uh, naturalistic means. And so coming to those things with the Bible as our, uh, rubric to instruct us on how the world works is a commendable thing. But again, this project, which is by and large, um, and we'll get into maybe, but by and large is just an extension of, um, Heiser's project really goes in directions that cause all sorts of problems down the road. So the podcast is, uh, run by a guy named Doug Van Dorn, who most of the audience probably hasn't heard of. I have had run-ins with Doug over the years. Um, the last time I ran into him actually was revolving around similar kinds of issues that I'm gonna be calling out today. Um, and it, it ended up with him kind of having to depart from the reform pub, uh, maybe to put it a little bit politely and, um. You know, he has, he has taken, he's theology, which was not explicitly reformed. Heiser was not a reformed guy. He had no claims to be a Calvinist in many ways. Uh, he was sort of anticon confessional in, in that he opposed not the idea of a faith statement, but he sort of purported to come to the Bible with no biases, with no tradition. He wanted to approach what he called the Naked Bible. That was actually the name of his podcast before he died a few years ago. And so what Doug Van Dorn is, has done who, uh, Doug is a claims to be a 1689 Reformed Baptist. He's a pastor in Colorado, I believe. Um, he has tried to take this divine counsel theology and bring it into the reformed world. So he comes at it with a, a slightly different angle, but for the most part, his conclusions are the same. And in many cases he just straight up steals ER's work and doesn't cite it, doesn't do much to, uh, articulate that this is not his original research. Um, so he's taken that and he's trying to bring it into the reformed world. And Heiser himself was actually quite influential when I was a, an admin in the reform pub. We would run into lots of, lots of young reformed guys. Who were really enamored with this and they really saw, he's project as sort of a return to a pure form of exo Jesus that really got at what the Hebrew was saying. And it tickled, I think, kind of an intellectual, uh, an intellectual itch that a lot of those guys had combined with sort of this desire for the new and novel, um, which is in itself can be pretty dangerous. To sort of make things a little bit more pressing, Heiser has teamed up with John Moffitt, who many of our listeners may know. Uh, he's one of the co-hosts and founders of the podcast, Theo Cast, uh, which otherwise is a perfectly fine podcast. Um, he's also a 1680 or claims to be a 1689 Reform Baptist. He's a pastor. Um, their podcast is sort of what you would get if you had, uh, and I don't mean this to be pejorative, although maybe it is a little pejorative. Theo cast is what you would get if you took r Scott Clark. Uh, you made it much less intellectual and careful, and then made it Baptist. And what I mean by that is Scott's whole project. In large part is to recover and to emphasize the law gospel distinction. Theo cast has taken that and sort of cranked it up to 11. Uh, and they have um, they have sort of moved away from a lot of the classical reform distinctions of the law itself, so they don't full on deny the third use of the law. But in practice they would say that, um, good works is no kind of evidence whatsoever for your, um, for your faith. It's no kind of evidence of your, your salvation, which of course are confessions themselves. Um, say that there is a kind of evidential value to assessing our good works within certain reason and con. So the show is otherwise orthodox. You know, I I, I recall hearing episodes where they were refuting things like EFS, um, but because of that, Moffitt brings with him sort of an air of credibility and an error in orthodoxy that, um, the show itself probably hasn't merited. If Doug just recorded, pushed, play and put it on the. I don't think there would've been too much, uh, too much of a following. He would've probably, you know, grabbed a couple people who heard it and thought it was interesting. But because Moffitt has such a following on Theo cast, he brings with him a large audience, and that makes it particularly dangerous because his name attached to it makes it more widespread. It makes it feel like it's safer. And so I think a lot of people, uh, assume that what he's saying is orthodox and good. And I think what we'll find out is, is that it's not. So I think that's enough ProGo. [00:09:10] Elohim and Its Implications Tony Arsenal: I'm gonna go ahead and, and jump into explaining kind of what the theology that we're talking about is and, and what the problems are. So this all started kicked off, uh, with a series of podcast episodes and the first episode, and again, I don't have the specific titles here. I'll put a bibliography in the show notes on this one just so you have links to all the relevant episodes. Um, this all kind of kicked off with a podcast episode called something like The History of the Word God, or something like that. And, um, basically what Moffitt and Van Dorn want to do is they wanna look at the word Elohim in the Bible, which of course is a plural noun. Uh, in Hebrew, the, the suffix, just like in English, we might add an S or an ES, um, to a word to make it plural. Or in Greek, it's usually, if it's a masculine, uh, noun, it's, it's an oi or an omicron iota that sort of always sound at the end. Um, or when we, we talk about Latin, you have, you have like, um, you add the I at the end, so we say octopi instead of octopuses or something like that. Cacti instead of cactus. Although both of those are kind of pig Latins, um, in, in Hebrew for, uh, for masculine nouns. The suffix that you add to make it plural, is that eam sound. It's a, it's an Im if you transliterate in English. So the word Elohim is a plural of the original noun El which is a proper name for a eury deity. But it came to just be the singular word for, for God. Um, and, and in non-biblical language, we would say in a God. Um, and we do see in English, there are in, in Hebrew, in the Bible, there are places where we see the singular of this. It's kind of an older form, so it doesn't show up as much. Um, but by and large when we see the word Elohim in the Bible. Something like, uh, outta 2,600 references or more than 2,600 references in the Bible. Um, the word Elohim is associated with a single, a singular noun, and it only refers to the God of Israel. What Moffitt and Van Dorn want to do is they want to take this word and they wanna define it based on the abnormal. Uh, use of it. So the vast minority, minority of cases in the Old Testament, the word Elohim refers to the gods or to a non, like what we might say is lower G God, either like the God, Baal, or some sort of collective reference to the gods, the gods of the nation, or something like that. They wanna take the fact that there is this variation in the way the word is used and sort of radically redefine how the Bible uses it. And this, this is what I call and what a lot of people would call an etymological fallacy. So what they're doing is, instead of, uh, looking at the word and defining it based on how it's used in an, in an overwhelming fashion, they're looking at sort of the etymology of the word. And then they're using the fact that there are, uh, some pretty Dr. Dramatically minority cases where the word is used in a different way and they wanna redefine it and say, in, in all or most cases in the Bible actually. This is what the word means. So they look at the word L, which from its root has something to do probably with the, with the word for power or something like that. Um, they wanna look at it. And, you know, if you read someone like Vos in Reformed dogmatics in his volume one, he talks about how when we see the name Elohim for God, it denotes or, or refers to his sort of power, his omnipotence, which is all good and fine, just like we would say Yahweh. Uh, as a proper name refers to God sort of in his covenant role. It's his covenant name, his, his intimate, familial name that he shares, uh, with his people or he reveals to his people. Elohim is a more abstract name and it refers to God's power. Usually we see it in relation to his cre creation. So in Genesis one, um, when it's God created, it's Elohim created, which is also important and relevant for, for later. So what they wanna do is they want to say that Elohim actually. What Act Elohim actually means is it's a reference to a class of beings, spiritual beings, and that that it means sort of any spiritual being that has some type of supernatural power or enhanced power, some sort of spiritual power. They do this by saying that the noun is not an ontological noun, it's actually like a noun of function. Um, so like we would say a, a good example in English would be a painter that's a noun of function. It's a title of function. It any person could be called a painter if they engage in the verbal action of painting. And so what they're saying is that any being that engages in the action of having power. Is, uh, is an Elohim. And so that would include, in narrating at least, it would include angels, demons. Uh, I, you know, I don't know that they've said this explicitly, but I, I think Heiser would've included things like ghosts, disembodied spirits, um, humans in sort of the intermediary state might be considered Elohim humans in the, in the, um, this. Life are called Elohim, uh, in some instances. So, so this is where the Divine Council theology comes from, and that comes from Psalm 82, I think, where there's this council of Elohim that, that Yahweh seems to be speaking to and deliberating with. Or you look at Joe, where the sons of God come and they sort of pulled court in God's heavenly presence. So he would say those are examples where the, the collected Elohim. God being one of the Elohim are somehow gathered in this heavenly divine counsel. Now what this does is just devastating to Christian theology is it takes God who exists in a class of one. The, the, the God of the universe is, is the only uncreated entity in all of of the world. And so when we start to talk, and this is ironic, when we start to talk about the ways to divide up the world, the ancient world, the, the pagan world tended to divide the world between, um. Between spiritual and material. So think of g Gnostics where matter was bad and spirit was good. Or even think of something like, um, the Greek pantheons, the Greek, um, Greek religion, like ancient Greek mythology. You have sort of the spirits and the spiritual world and the gods inhabit a spiritual, have a spiritual existence for the most part. And then you have the physical world where kind of people live, uh, at least while they're alive. Christianity and, and Judaism, at least Biblical Judaism. On the other hand, the, the primary distinction is not between spiritual and matter. There is of course that distinction. There are humans, which are spiritual and material. There are animals which are entirely material, and then there are angels which are entirely spiritual. And so we would say that God is spiritual. So that is a distinction in the world. But the primary distinction when we're talking about the most absolute line is the distinction between the, the uncreated creator and his creation. So what Moffitt, Moffitt and Van Dorn do is instead of observing that biblical distinction, which really all of Christian theology and Christian monotheism rests on, they wanna say that instead, the distinction is between the. Um, is between the Elohim as the sort of spiritual beings and then sort of everything else of the created world, and so they wouldn't deny that God, that Yahweh is. The uncreated creator of all things, but they would say he's an uncreated Elohim and that there is a class of created Elohim. So I don't, I don't think you have to go too far down this road to see what this does. It puts God on the same level as his creatures in at least one way. Um, and I think we'll find out later, uh, as we talk through this, actually it does it in a couple ways that are really, uh, really can be problematic as we go. And so, uh, just let me be clear if all that, if all that Moffitt and Van Dorn were saying, if, if all they said was, um, we can use the word Elohim to describe any creature. Or God that doesn't have a body. Elohim is a synonym for the word spirit. Um, that wouldn't be the wisest way to speak, I don't think. It wouldn't be the, the most, um, felicitous or safe way to talk about the distinction. But it wouldn't be controversial. There'd be nothing wrong with that. It'd just be using a different word. It'd be like if I said, well, instead of the word spirit, I'm gonna use the word bibly bop, you know? So we have. We have God who is bibly bop, and we have the angels who is bibly bop, and humans are biblio bop. And also material, again, not the safest way to talk. There's no reason to use that alternative language when the Bible gives us perfectly legitimate language. Um, but it wouldn't be a problem. But Moffit and Van Dorn go. Way past this and maybe they don't realize it. I've asked them on Twitter, I asked them to clarify. I didn't get a response. So if they are hearing this, which maybe they will, maybe they won't. If they're hearing this, I would really love to get some clarification on some of these questions because I would love nothing more than to be able to say that this was all a big misunderstanding and that actually all they're saying is that there is this spiritual existence. That, um, we can put all things that are spirit without a body or spirit with a body. We can put all those in the same category and call that category Elohim. Again, I don't think that's safe, but if that's all they were doing, that would be fine. But we see in their episodes, and I'm gonna try to grab some quotes, um, from, from some of the articles I've written. But again, go read the articles because this goes way more in depth. It's got timestamps of it. It's got links to their episodes. Don't take my word for it. Go listen to their. Words and, and check, you know, check my math on this. But what they do is they actually start to, in, in an attempt to justify why it's okay to put God in the same category as his creatures. Um, and in at least one way, they start to make some weird statements that have a lot of systematic theology, um, implications that are, are just really, really risky. So, for example, one of the ways that they try to kind of explain this, I'm gonna pull, pull the article that I wrote up here. So, great podcasting. [00:19:34] Communicable vs. Incommunicable Attributes Tony Arsenal: Um, one of the ways they start to try to do this is again, they, they wanna say they use this distinction between incommunicable and communicable attributes, right? So in, in Christian theology, classically speaking, a communicable attribute of God is an attribute that he shares or could share with. A creature and primarily we're talking, you know, we're talking about attributes that he shares with his image bearers. So something like, um, love. Love is a communicable attribute. Our love is different than God's love, but when we say love, we're talking about the same basic category of things God loves differently than we do. But love and in a human sense, and love in a, in a divine sense, are still talking about the same thing. There's a point of contact there. Um, an incommunicable attribute would be something like, um, something like eternity. Right. Eternity is not just an extended infinite sequence of time. If it was, he could share that with us. Um, but eternity or infinity is an entirely different way of existing than a creature could ever, could ever exist in divine Simplicity is another example. Um, God could not make humans simple because simplicity entails all sorts of things like infinity. Um, eternality. Um, you know, omnipresence, omni, potent, all of these things are entailed by simplicity. So God could not make a creature infinite because in order for it to be infinite, it would have to be God. Uh, God could not make a creature simple, uh, in the, in the sense of no composition of parts. Uh, because that would mean that that creature is actually God and has no composer. So, so those would be the classic, uh, incommunicable attributes and omnipotence. Is considered, although it's a little bit weird, it sort of crosses the line in some ways. But omnipotence is considered. An incommunicable attribute. God cannot share his omnipotence with a creature because you can't have two omnipotence. Um, if you have two omnipotence, then those two omnipotence cancel each other out in some sense. If God, and, and, and he has a will, God wills one thing, and then I as a creature, if he shared his omnipotence with me, somehow willed a different thing, then we would no longer be, neither of us would be omnipotent. Where this goes sideways with Moffitt and Vandorn is rather than respect omnipotence as a an incommunicable attribute, they say that the attribute or the word Elohim denotes power or might, and that is a communicable attribute. So God does give us a certain level of power. He allows us a certain level of agency. He grants that to us. Again, I'm not even sure that we would call that an an. A communicable attribute. Um, but in a sense, I guess it is. And so they say here, um, Elohim does not mean omnipotent. It means power. It's not an incommunicable attribute. It's a communicable attribute that all kinds of entities could possess. So they're saying that the word, um, the word Elohim, uh, in the Bible denotes that a. A, an entity possesses a certain kind of power or acts in a certain role of executing a certain kind of power. And that doesn't mean omnipotence. It means it means potence. It means some sort of power. And so that that wielding power attribute that. Uh, being a, being that wields power, that attribute, whatever we want to call it, however we want to phrase it, that is a communicable attribute that God shares. He communicates that attribute to all other beings in the class of Elohim. Now, let's just back that up for a second. Um, this still would mean that God has to be the creator and they don't deny that, but it would still mean that God, prior to creation. Was an Elohim in a category of one, and then somehow he created a class and because he's extended. This attribute of wielding power, say power wielder, to try to make it actually more of an attribute. He's extended this attribute of power wielder to uncreate or to created angels, demons, human spirits, whatever other spiritual entities there might be. They would bring in things like principalities, powers, they have a whole, in other, other contexts, they'll talk about this whole different bifurcation of types of spiritual beings that I think is a little speculative, but not a big deal. He extends this power wielder attribute to these created categories. And instead of this now creating a separate category of power wields who are not God, it now is uh, he expands this category of one to now include all sorts of other things, which again, as you can, you can imagine, just runs into problems. And so the, again, this, this word Elohim appears over 2,600 times, and of these instances, 230 of them refer to the God of Israel. So the idea that that. This word is not used specifically as a reference to the God of Israel, or should not be thought of as uniquely titling or almost exclusively titling God. The God of Israel just doesn't really match the data, but it's also just really poor Exogenic method. So rather than take the predominant usage and look at the context. Understanding that the predominant usage is the predominant usage. Instead, we're gonna go back and say, well, these, these minority, these 300 or so cases outside, and not even all 300 of them are used the same way, but these 300 or so cases of them not referring to the God of Israel, we're gonna use that to redefine the word. Its entirety. It's just poor. It's just poor scholarship. It's overly speculative. Um, I haven't read much of. He's work on this in the primary sources. Um, I, I would venture a guess that Heiser makes a much more robust argument than this. And this is part of the problem. When you take an already speculative, already dangerous theology and you try to pop popularize it when you just don't have the same chops that he did, uh, you end up really making some crass, simplistic arguments that just make you look a little silly. To think we can take 200 or 2,600 instances and redefine 2 20, 300 of them. By the way, it's used 300 of the times Just doesn't make any sense. So it again, if, if all we are saying is that God is spiritual and angels are spiritual and so there is some point of affinity between the two, then that would be okay. That wouldn't be a problem. Again, there's some risk in using the word Elohim in that. Sort of placeholder, but, um, that would be a semantic discussion. What they're doing is far, far deeper and far more problematic than that. [00:26:30] Systematic Theology Concerns Tony Arsenal: And so the, the other thing they do, um, that I think is really dangerous, and I don't have all of the, I haven't finished this article yet, so I don't have all of the timestamps in front of me to, to, to get there, is in attempting to justify this Moffitt, uh, in, in one of the other episodes, he turns to the incarnation as a sort of model. And so he'll say that, you know, the son of God is divine, but he's also human. And the fact that he's human, uh, doesn't therefore mean he's not also uniquely the uncreated creator. I would assume everyone hearing this who listens to this show, uh, which has done many, many episodes on Christology, it's one of our pet projects, is just throwing their listening device across the room because what Moffitt seems to miss entirely is that Christ is not, the sun is not in the category of human. Uh, sort of in a simple sense, Christ is in the category of human because he assumes to himself a second created nature. So what, what the, the analogy he's trying to draw is if the sun can be human without ceasing to be the unique one, uncreated God, then so also can, the whole trinity, I guess, can also be Elohim without ceasing to be the one uncreated God. He even goes so far as to say that there is Uncreated Elohim, and then there is created Elohim, and they're all in the category of Elohim, but because there's this commonality, we should still consider that class. And he draws that distinction or he draws the implication that. Um, there's somehow uncreated humanity in Christ, which is a whole different ball of worms that we won't get into. But in, in drawing this analogy, he sort of shows that he really doesn't understand the hypostatic union. He doesn't understand the incarnation, or if he does, he's really making a poor comparison because in the hypostatic union it's not as though the son, uh, as divinity, the son, as the one uncreated. God simply adds to himself in a raw sense and merges. Uh, he doesn't become part of the category of human without taking on a second nature. And then now we are even getting into some inconsistencies. Is human an ontological category or is that a category of function? Are there other categories of function, uh, other creatures in existence that the category of function human might fit? So I think you can see that this just is not a self consistent. Um, a self-consistent system and it leads to all these weird implications. Um, you know, and then they'll even go on to talk about how the Son is the angel of the Lord. I'm not gonna get into a lot of it here, and I agree with that thesis that the, when we see the angel of the Lord in the Old Testament, in the vast majority of cases, we're probably seeing a pre-incarnate appearance of, um, of the second person of the Trinity. They go so far as to say that this is actually a sort of. Incarnation or a sort of hypostatic union of the Elohim nature. So they, they, they draw this distinction, or they draw this parallel between created Elohim and Uncreated Elohim, and they, they argue again, I think implicitly, but in some instances it's almost, it's almost explicit that the son in, in being the angel of the Lord, takes on the uncreated or takes on the created Elohim nature. It's, it's really, um, it's really problematic. So now we have the son who is, uh, sort of hypostatic united to the unc, to the created Elohim nature, and then also is hypostatic united to the human nature. Um, it, it really just gets messy and it confuses categories in a way that is not helpful. And if I'm just being frank, a lot of the younger reformed guys. And when I say younger, I'm talking, maybe I'm projecting back to when I was a younger reform guy, um, I'm talking about people in their mid twenties to maybe early thirties, right? The, the people who were maybe the second or third generation of the young restless reform guys, they didn't necessarily learn, uh, ref young restless reform theology directly from RC Sproul. You know, they weren't the first generation. Um, and, and maybe their pastors weren't the first generation, but, but maybe their pastors were the second generation and now they're learning it from their pastors. So you might think of 'em as like the third generation, to be frank, they don't usually have a great grasp on some of these systematic theology categories as part of why. Jesse and I do this podcast, and part of why we cover the same topic over and over again, part of why we're gonna go through this parable series. But when we're done, we're probably gonna go back and start over with systematic theology. We're gonna go back, we're gonna go through another confession. That's why we spent, we spent like six years going through systematic theology. And almost immediately went back to the Scott's confession and did most of it all over again because these truths need to be taught again and again and again. This is part of what Jude is talking about when he says, we have to contend for the faith. It's not just fighting with people online. It's not just polemics or apologetics. It is reteaching and handing down the faith that was once delivered to the saints. Again, and this is perhaps, and this is the last point I'll make. This is perhaps the most. Telling a reason we should be weary and suspicious of this theology. Paul, in, uh, one of the letters to Timothy, second Timothy, maybe he says, follow the pattern of the sound words that you heard from me. He's not talking about the scriptures. He doesn't say follow the sound words that I'm writing to you. He's referring to a body of doctrine sometimes. The Bible calls it the faith, right? Jude says to contend for the faith. There's this body of doctrine that is the teaching of the apostles, and it is encapsulated in this sort of set pattern of words. Erin A is called it the rule of faith or the regular fide, right? This is where we get things like the Nicean Creed or the Hanian Creed. Why we have creeds and confessions is because we don't need to reinvent the wheel and rather than rely on the safe time-tested words and concepts that have been proven and validated, and attacked and defended and, and um, have been victorious for hundreds and thousands of years, rather than rely on those. Moffitt and Van Doran think it is smarter and safer to depart from the pattern of sound words rather than to keep the pattern of sound words because they think that they are able to look at the Bible the way basically no one ever has in the 2000 years of the church and find something they haven't. I don't wanna be too bombastic. Um, I don't, I don't know either of them. Well, um, from what I can tell, what I've heard of their professions of faith, uh, they're, they're Christian believers. They love the Lord and are very confused. But these teachings are pagan. This is, we're talking about returning to a world of, of populated by spiritual beings. And God is kind of just on the highest part of the totem pole, and maybe there's a firm line between his place on the totem pole and the, the next level down. Maybe there is, um, gets a little bit less firm of a line when we're talking about Jesus, right? So there's some potential Arian implications there that the son, uh, is not the highest deity he is. He's like the father in some ways, but he, you know, in his sort of original form is like creatures in other ways. Um, we're just returning to something that the early church fought hard to get rid of when they came out of their pagan culture. When we started to see Greeks convert to Christianity, they had to figure out how do we come out of our polytheistic culture, and this is where we get the best defenses of monotheism. Jewish Christians didn't have to argue for monotheism because all the Jewish Christians already were monotheists in a biblical sense. The Greek Christians had to fight this stuff. Justin Martyr had to fight this stuff. Athanasius and the Cappadocian fathers had to fight this stuff constantly pushing back against the background Greek culture. And Moffitt and Van Dorn wanna point to that and say, see, really, they're just Greeks in disguise and in the reality is Athanasius and the cap oceans, were fighting against the theology that is making a resurgence in this divine council theory. [00:34:55] Conclusion and Call to Action Tony Arsenal: So I think that's enough for now. Please. Again, I'm writing a long series on this. I don't know how long it's gonna take. I think it's gonna be probably 10 or 13, 10 to 13 articles. It's, it's gonna be a pretty extensive project. But go read them. Go look at them, listen to their episodes, read their articles, and then you compare that to the word of God, has what I said made more sense or does what they make more sense. So I'll leave you with that. The dog is losing her mind. And uh, with that honor, everyone love the brotherhood.

CULTIVATING SAINTS, SAGES, AND STATESMEN THROUGH THE GREAT TRADITION OF CHRISTENDOMIn this episode, we cover an astounding discovery we made in the writings of the Church Fathers, particularly St. Justin Martyr: his description of Christian worship and belief about the Eucharist continues to match Catholic practice and theology to this very day.VISIT OUR WEBSITEhttps://eternalchristendom.com/BECOME A PATRON OF THE GREAT TRADITIONWe are a non-profit, and all gifts are tax-deductible. Help us continue to dig into the Great Tradition; produce beautiful, substantive content; and gift these treasures to cultural orphans around the world for free:https://eternalchristendom.com/become-a-patron/EXCLUSIVE DISCOUNTS AT ETERNAL CHRISTENDOM BOOKSTOREhttps://eternalchristendom.com/bookstore/CONNECT ON SOCIAL MEDIAX: https://twitter.com/JoshuaTCharlesFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/joshuatcharles/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/joshuatcharles/DIVE DEEPERCheck out Eternal Christendom's "Becoming Catholic," where you'll find more than 1 million words of free content (bigger than the Bible!) in the form of Articles, Quote Archives, and Study Banks to help you become, remain, and deepen your life as a Catholic:https://eternalchristendom.com/becoming-catholic/EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00 - Intro04:55 - Help us Build05:42 - St. Justin Martyr's "First Apology"11:27 - St. Justin Martyr's "Dialogue with Trypho"25:24 - ConclusionLISTEN ON APPLEhttps://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/eternal-christendom-podcast/id1725000526LISTEN ON SPOTIFYhttps://open.spotify.com/show/3HoTTco6oJtApc21ggVevu

Love to hear from you; “Send us a Text Message”Bishop Athanasius Schneider delivers a powerful message of hope and clarity for Catholics navigating the complexities of modern faith. Drawing from his deep knowledge of Church history and tradition, he illuminates the unbroken chain of teaching that connects today's believers directly to the apostles through the early Church Fathers."There is only one truth," Bishop Schneider declares with conviction, explaining that what makes Catholic faith distinct is its remarkable continuity across the centuries. He illustrates this through the example of St. Irenaeus, a second-century bishop who could trace his spiritual lineage directly to the Apostle John. This living connection between the apostolic age and our own time offers profound reassurance that authentic Catholic teaching remains unchanged despite cultural shifts and contemporary confusion.For those troubled by apparent contradictions or ambiguities they encounter in today's Church, Bishop Schneider offers practical wisdom: "When we are confused, please read the old catechisms. There is the crystal clear Catholic faith." Also, the Early Church Fathers, including St. Ignatius of Antioch's seven letters, St. Augustine's Confessions, and works by St. Justin Martyr and St. Basil on the Holy Spirit. The conversation explores Bishop Schneider's book "Matins with the Fathers," which provides commentary from Church Fathers on daily Scripture readings. Visit and Learn From Bishop Athanasius Schneider Here!: GloriaDei.ioReady to join the 20% who actively build a civilization of love? Download the Claymore Battle Plan at jp2renew.org and subscribe Jack's SubStack for access to our weekly formation materials. Your heart was made for more than anxiety—it was made for truth.Follow us on X! Contact us info@jp2renew.orgKeep Charlie Kirk and his family in your prayers!Support the show

Have you ever wondered what happened between the time of the early church and figures like Paul and later Christianity as represented by Augustine? Second-Century Christianity is an often-neglected time period but full of exciting changes in biblical theology, heresiology, and more. Ignatius, Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, and Polycarp are just a few of the prominenttheologians of this time period. In this episode, Claire is joined by Mike Bird and Scott Harrower editors of A Handbook to Second-Century Christianity a forthcoming book from Baylor University Press. Michael Bird is an Australian biblical scholar and Anglicanpriest who writes about the history of early Christianity, theology, and contemporary issues. He is Deputy Principal and Lecturer in Theology at Ridley College in Melbourne, Australia. He is the author of over thirty books including Evangelical Theology, Seven Things I Wish Christians Knew About the Bible, Romans (SGBC), The Gospel of the Lord: How the Early Church Wrote the Story of Jesus, What Christians Ought To Believe, and with N.T. Wright, The NewTestament in its World.Scott Harrower is a lecturer in Christian Thought at RidleyCollege in Melbourne, Australia and an ordained Anglican minister. He was brought up by missionary parents in Argentina and has wide-ranging ministry experience in several countries. He has published articles on SyrianChristianity, comparative hagiography, and Augustine of Hippo, as well as books on women in the early church and the Trinity. Scott is also a former nurse and has written extensively on how we can relate psychological science and theology for the sake of human flourishing in our churches, including Dawn of Sunday: The Trinity and Trauma-Safe Churches, and God of All Comfort: A Trinitarian Response to the Horrors of this World.

The Thinking Fellows explore the life and significance of Justin Martyr, an early Christian apologist. They focus on the challenges Justin faced, and his example for contemporary apologetics. Justin's work also highlights the distinction between apologetics and polemics, emphasizing defending the Christian faith against external criticisms and internal heresies. Show Notes: Support 1517 Podcast Network 1517 Podcasts 1517 on Youtube 1517 Podcast Network on Apple Podcasts 1517 Events Schedule 1517 Academy - Free Theological Education What's New from 1517: Sinner Saint by Luke Kjolhaug The Impossible Prize: A Theology of Addiction by Donavan Riley Ditching the Checklist by Mark Mattes Broken Bonds: A Novel of the Reformation, Book 1 of 2 by Amy Mantravadi More from the hosts: Caleb Keith Scott Keith Adam Francisco Bruce Hilman  

On today's Bible Answer Man broadcast (08/06/25), we pick up where we ended on our previous broadcast and present more of an episode of the Hank Unplugged podcast. Hank is talking with Dr. Marcellino D'Ambrosio, author of When the Church Was Young: Voices of the Early Fathers. Hank and Dr. D'Ambrosio discuss the First Apology of Justin Martyr, Irenaeus and a defense against the heresy of Gnosticism, the coextensive nature between tradition and scripture, the teachings of Clement of Alexandria equipping Christians to evangelize the Gospel, and Origen of Alexandria and the transformative nature of union with Christ.

On today's Bible Answer Man broadcast (08/05/25), we pick up where we ended on our previous broadcast and present more of an episode of the Hank Unplugged podcast. Hank is talking with Dr. Marcellino D'Ambrosio, author of When the Church Was Young: Voices of the Early Fathers. Hank and Dr. D'Ambrosio discuss the importance of holy tradition, understanding that the early church did not have the Bible as we do today, the centrality of the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist as argued by Ignatius of Antioch, the martyrdom of Polycarp of Smyrna, the significance of relics, The Didache, and apologetics and the First Apology of Justin Martyr.

A teaching by Brian Carter. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.ruahchurch.com

Celebrating the sacrament of the Eucharist has been part of the Tradition of the Catholic Church for 2,000 years. Fr. Mike unpacks the citation from St. Justin Martyr's First Apology, which beautifully describes the structure of the Mass in AD 155 and captures how the Early Church had the same understanding of the Eucharist as we do today. Today's readings are Catechism paragraphs 1341-1347. This episode has been found to be in conformity with the Catechism by the Institute on the Catechism, under the Subcommittee on the Catechism, USCCB. For the complete reading plan, visit ascensionpress.com/ciy Please note: The Catechism of the Catholic Church contains adult themes that may not be suitable for children - parental discretion is advised.

In this Easter special, we explore the profound teachings about the Savior's suffering in Gethsemane and its eternal implications. We discuss how early Latter-day Saints grappled with the concepts of repentance, eternal punishment, and the infinite nature of Christ's atonement. We also explore the radical truths in D&C 19 that challenge the prevailing 19th-century Protestant beliefs by emphasizing a Savior who deeply desires us to avoid suffering through sincere repentance. Gerrit also draws on connections between biblical texts and early Christian writings, including Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Hippolytus. Most importantly, this episode underscores the Savior's desperate plea for repentance, not out of wrath, but from a profound desire to spare His children from unimaginable suffering. This message of compassion and redemption is especially powerful during the Easter season, and a reminder of the incredible depth of Christ's love and the hopeful promise of forgiveness and spiritual renewal.    Sweetwater Rescue Temple Project: Helping the Saints of Lithuania get to the Helsinki, Finland Temple https://www.sweetwaterrescue.org/current If you would like to donate, please click on the link: https://www.sweetwaterrescue.org/donate   Sign up for our free monthly email: ⁠ ⁠https://standardoftruthpodcast.substack.com⁠   If you have any questions or possible topics of discussion for upcoming podcasts, please email us at: ⁠⁠questions@standardoftruthpodcast.com