Podcasts about pelagian

Title: Chains and Afflictions Text: Acts 21:27-36 FCF: We often struggle responding well to slander and persecution for Christ's sake. Prop: Because of the offense of the gospel we will be slandered and reviled, so we must be ready to give a defense for the hope we have in us. Scripture Intro: [Slide 1] Turn in your bible to Acts chapter 21. In a moment we will read beginning in verse 27 from the Legacy Standard Bible. You can follow along in the pew bible or in whatever version you prefer. Last week we saw the powder keg situation that Paul and his 8 gentile companions walked into as they brought a gift for the Jerusalem church from several churches in gentile lands. Tension between Jews and the Romans continues to mount and along with that the pernicious rumor that Paul is anti-Mosaic law and advising new Jewish believers to forsake circumcising their children and the laws and customs of Moses. The Elders wisely advised Paul to demonstrate that he is not against the law of Moses by submitting to purity rituals with 4 other men who are doing so. Paul humbly discarded any liberty he may have assumed and willingly submitted to help ease tensions between Jewish Christians and the non-believing Jews. But we know the future. It has been confirmed by many witnesses. Paul will suffer with chains and afflictions in Jerusalem. Although it was wise advice and although Paul humbly submitted, we know that things will implode quickly. But even in this difficult situation, we will find vital lessons for we who claim Christ and face uncertain days. Please stand with me to give honor to and to focus on the reading of the Word of God. Invocation: Mighty God and Lord of Hosts. You are holy, holy, holy. You have sent the Son to claim Your people for Your Kingdom and You have sent Your Spirit to dwell in us and seal us and preserve us until the Day of Judgment. As You are Alpha and Omega, You have written and decreed the end from the beginning. No one can tell You “no” and no one can slap away Your mighty hand from doing as You please. In these truths Lord, we must rest, especially when we are slandered, maligned, ridiculed, reviled, and persecuted for Your name. Without the truth that all this is according to Your Immutable Will, we would surely flounder and fall. Impress upon us, Your Children, the greater truth that when these days of trouble come upon us, we must rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for when we suffer for Your name, we have a great reward in the Kingdom which we will share with a great cloud of witnesses. Help us to see this and be encouraged in this text this morning. And use this encouragement to turn us away from despairing in trouble. Turn us instead to being ready to give a defense for the hope we have in us. We pray this in Jesus' name… Amen. Transition: Let us once again dive right into the text this morning. I.) Because of the offense of the gospel, men will falsely accuse us of evil things, so we must be ready to give a defense for the hope we have in us. (27-30) a. [Slide 2] 27 - Now when the seven days were almost over, the Jews from Asia, upon noticing him in the temple, began to throw all the crowd into confusion and laid hands on him, i. Ok, so right off the bat there are some contextual clues we need to unravel to understand what is happening here. ii. First, the seven days here is referring to the general process of purification that would need to be endured for these men and for Paul. 1. We aren't exactly sure why these men performing the Nazarite vow were going through purification, because that isn't normally part of it, but the process itself took a week. 2. In that week's time, any seeking purification would have to be ritually washed on the third and the seventh day. No doubt Paul is in the temple on the seventh and final day of his purification. 3. This means that generally speaking, people who had ill intentions toward Paul would know on which day he would be in the temple next. iii. Second, we see that there are Jews from Asia present here in Jerusalem. Well, who are these folks and what are they doing here? 1. We might be tempted to think that these Jews have followed Paul to Jerusalem to harm him. This is possible, but there is a far simpler explanation for why these folks are here. Do you remember? 2. Yep! It is Pentecost, the Jewish feast commemorating the harvest. Shavuot (Sha-voo-ot) is one of the three pilgrimage feasts that are required for Jewish males to attend. 3. Anyone who was a Jew that took seriously the law of Moses would have made every effort to be in Jerusalem for this festival. 4. So, it shouldn't be a big surprise for us to find Jews from Asia in Jerusalem at this time. iv. Third, how would they recognize Paul and what had Paul done that infuriated them so much? 1. Although Luke only mentions the province in which they are from, the capital city of the province of Asia was the great city of Ephesus. A city in which Paul spent three years ministering. 2. Later, we find out that these people recognized one of Paul's companions who was from the city of Ephesus. This almost certainly confirms that these Jews were from or at least very familiar with the city of Ephesus and Paul's 3 year ministry there. 3. So why are they so opposed to Paul? 4. Well Paul preached in Ephesus and many Jews became disciples of Christ. He actually lead them out of the synagogue and took them to the hall of Tyrannus where he continued to teach and preach the gospel. 5. Needless to say, the Jews from Asia were not big fans of Paul. v. In Ephesus and in other cities around the empire, it has been clear thus far that the Jews were not always trusted, liked, or respected by the gentile communities in which they lived. vi. Although their faith was granted a special status as being allowed to be practiced within the empire, it still did not mean that the pagans around them respected them. vii. But here, the non-believing Jews clearly had numerical and ideological superiority over the Jewish Christians. viii. If there was ever a chance to stamp out Paul and his teachings – this is it. ix. So, these Asian Jews take this chance, grab hold of Paul and stir up the crowd against him. x. How? b. [Slide 3] 28 - crying out, “Men of Israel, help! This is the man who teaches to everyone everywhere against our people and the Law and this place; and besides, he has even brought Greeks into the temple and has defiled this holy place.” 29 - For they had previously seen Trophimus the Ephesian in the city with him, and they supposed that Paul had brought him into the temple. i. These Asian Jews bring two charges against Paul. ii. The second charge is far more inflammatory to the crowd than the first. iii. The first charge is the accusation that Paul teaches against the Jewish people, against the law of Moses and against the temple of Yahweh, and he does so throughout the Roman Empire. iv. Ironically, this was the same charge levied against Stephen which led to his execution by stoning. Paul once saw things the same way these folks did. But for the grace of God yes? v. Such an accusation could be easily explained away. In fact, Paul's very presence in the temple that day going about his sacrifices and the end of his purity rituals would actually serve to counter their claim. vi. But the second charge is what gets the crowd stirred. vii. They claim that Paul has brought Trophimus, a man they would know to be a gentile, into the temple with him. viii. [Slide 4] As we know the temple mount could be entered by Gentiles. They could actually get fairly close to the temple itself. But Gentiles could not pass into the court of women or the court of the Israelites. ix. [Slide 5] Many scholars make much of the archeological evidence, like the sign on the screen, that warned gentiles with death if they entered into the temple grounds. And we even have speeches from Roman officials which seem to have allowed for the Jews to execute people who did violate such laws. x. But as I studied this, my mind wondered what Old Testament teaching or law is in view with the prohibition of gentiles entering the temple grounds. xi. Especially since they are under the impression that doing so would defile it. xii. What Old Testament law do they base this on? 1. [Slide 6] The closest thing I could find is Ezekiel 44:6-9 a. In reading this text, we can see very clearly that God judges Israel for allowing worshippers to come into the temple and even serve as priests who were neither circumcised in heart nor circumcised in flesh. b. God issues a command that no one shall enter His temple who is uncircumcised in heart and uncircumcised in flesh. 2. [Slide 7] But what do we do with the 5th gospel of Isaiah, who says in Isaiah 56:6-8… a. Here we see… explicitly… that Gentiles should not be strictly forbidden to come into the temple to make sacrifices. b. Why? c. Because God will be the one bringing them to do that one day! 3. So how do we harmonize these two texts? a. How can God bring foreigners into the temple if those uncircumcised in heart and flesh cannot enter? b. How did the Jews of this time harmonize this? i. The Jews of this time, completely ignore the Isaiah passage. ii. Even if a Gentile converted and became a Jew, even becoming circumcised… they would still not be permitted, even into the court of women. c. So how do we harmonize it? i. While we could be accused of exploiting a loophole, the fact of the matter is that there are many prophetic riddles throughout the scriptures. God expects us to think as we read His Word. ii. [Slide 8] What two conditions must be met in order to reject a foreigner from the temple according to Ezekiel 44? They must be both uncircumcised in heart and in flesh. iii. Trophimus was a gentile, uncircumcised in flesh, but circumcised in his heart. Therefore, he does not meet the conditions of Ezekiel 44 but DOES meet the conditions of Isaiah 56. xiii. [Slide 9] Added to this – These Jews raise issue with Paul and grab hold of him and will drag him out and attempt to kill him even though… 1. He is a Jew 2. He is enduring purification rights under the Mosaic Law 3. Even if he brought a gentile into the temple… the Gentile is the one that should be killed according to their law, not him. He would certainly be punished perhaps even severely. 4. But Paul should not be killed for this infraction even if it were exactly as they said it was. xiv. The fact of the matter is, the Jews, because of their national pride and racial prejudice, have so perverted the Word of God that they have determined that the exact opposite of what He has revealed is true. xv. And now they are going to kill Paul, an apostle of their Messiah and Everlasting King, because of their rebellion and their racism. c. [Slide 10] 30 - Then all the city was stirred, and the people rushed together, and taking hold of Paul they dragged him out of the temple, and immediately the doors were shut. i. As we pointed out last week, this time period was right in the middle of the escalation of hostility between Jews and the Roman Empire. ii. Although we are still 13 years away from the fall of Jerusalem, the conflict begins in AD 66 which is only 9 years away. iii. Not only that but Festus, a character we will meet in a few chapters, will actually spend two years making peace with the Jews and effectively kick the can of the revolt down the road… iv. Adding all this together we can see that even though the fall of Jerusalem is 13 years away, it is not a stretch for us to consider that at the moment Paul walks in the temple of Jerusalem, the divide between Jews and the Romans was nearing its peak. v. Knowing this, we can see quite easily why the crowd would respond to Paul the way they did. vi. Loyalty to the temple was closely tied to patriotism and Jewish Nationalism. An attack on the temple was an attack on Judaism. vii. And Paul is the lightening rod for all of this. viii. They took him out of the temple, because they could not commit violence and shed blood within the temple courts ix. To avoid this the guards close the doors. x. The temple guards could have stopped the violence. Instead, they closed the doors. d. [Slide 11] Summary of the Point: Throughout the book of Acts Luke has portrayed the Jesus movement as the next step in Judaism. To confess Jesus of Nazareth to be the Messiah of God and eternal heir to the throne of David is to take the next and final step in the redemptive history of Israel. In Acts we've seen many Jews embrace this New Covenant, which was ratified in the death and resurrection of Jesus proving Him to be the Messiah. He is the Son of Man prophesied in Daniel. He is the suffering Servant prophesied in Isaiah. And yet, as clear as this was to many, it remained repulsive and offensive to many more. The offense of the gospel drives natural man to terrible things. Jesus predicted that the disciple is no greater than the master. Meaning that what they did to Him, we can expect the same to be done to us. Paul is actually living out that experience in the pages of the passage we just saw. They accused Jesus of blaspheming the temple. And here Paul is accused of defiling it. We can expect the same to come to us. If we are to preach the gospel, we should both expect it to be offensive to the world and that we will be falsely accused of doing evil things because of it. So, what is our response? Our text this morning does not include Paul's response to all of this. Mainly because his response is quite lengthy. But generally speaking, we can see as Paul raises his defense of the gospel and his ministry, that we too must be ready to give a defense for the hope we have in us. Transition: [Slide 12 (blank)] But surely someone in the crowd will have the sense to question Paul as to whether these things are true? Surely someone will have the courage to say – yes but Paul is still a Jew and can go into the temple himself. So surely he doesn't deserve to die? Let us see if anyone among them will do this. Perhaps the Romans will if the Jews won't? II.) Because of the offense of the gospel men will revile and persecute us, so we must be ready to give a defense for the hope we have in us. (31-36) a. [Slide 13] 31 - While they were seeking to kill him, a report came up to the commander of the Roman cohort that all Jerusalem was in confusion. 32 - At once he took along soldiers and centurions and ran down to them; and when they saw the commander and the soldiers, they stopped beating Paul. i. Luke doesn't tell us who took the report to the commander. Perhaps one of Paul's companions or the church reported this to the Roman officer? ii. A Roman cohort consists of 1000 men. It is roughly 1/6 of a Roman Legion. iii. Within each cohort there were there were Centuries which would be 100 men, and each of them would be lead by a Centurion. iv. As a Roman officer in Judea, your one job is to make sure that these generally rebellious Jews paid their taxes and didn't revolt. v. During festivals, when Jerusalem was full of Jews on pilgrimage, it would be all hands on deck. vi. We see that this commander wastes no time, at once taking soldiers and their centurions down to where the beating was happening. vii. The Anatolia fortress was located on the Western side of the northern wall of the temple mount. Two stair cases down led to the outer courts. viii. So they were probably there quickly. ix. It is hard to know how many men he took with him, but we can assume at least a couple hundred since he took centurions (plural) with him. x. Assuming that is the case, 200 fully armed Roman soldiers running down the steps to the temple would be quite an intimidating sight. xi. No wonder the Jews stopped beating Paul when they came marching down. xii. But if the relations of the Romans and the Jews are so strained, how would the Roman Commander make sure that this doesn't look like the Romans are once again coming in to tell them how they should practice their religion? b. [Slide 14] 33 - Then the commander came up and took hold of him, and ordered him to be bound with two chains; and he began asking who he was and what he had done. i. The Roman Commander has Paul bound in chains, probably to two separate guards. He then asks who the man was and what he has done. ii. The concept of innocent until proven guilty is not a universal ideal. iii. The Romans certainly did not consider prisoners innocent until proven guilty. iv. In fact, as we've seen in the study of the book ok Acts, their subjects especially those who were not Roman citizens, could be beaten and imprisoned, and in some cases even killed without charge. v. This Roman commander shrewdly assumes that the man being beaten is guilty and asks the crowd for the information regarding his guilt. vi. If the answer he got was that clear – that Paul had defiled the temple – the Roman officer probably would have let them kill Paul. c. [Slide 15] 34 - But among the crowd some were shouting one thing and some another, and when he could not find out the facts because of the uproar, he ordered him to be brought into the barracks. i. This is the very definition of mob mentality. ii. Most of these people had no idea why they were hitting this man, they just knew that he had done something worth hitting him for. iii. When emotionalism and extreme rhetoric wins, the most natural thing we humans do, is follow the crowd of people who scream the loudest. iv. We'll always find something to be outraged about, and if it isn't what the crowd is outraged about – that's ok – we'll just vent our frustration in the convenient opportunity the mob has provided. v. Like when we burn a city when a football team wins… or also if they lose the big game???? vi. Such in the case here. vii. Seeing that the crowd has no idea who this person is or what he did, the commander chooses to escort the man to safety so that they could interrogate the prisoner himself. Which we will see him attempt to do in a few weeks. d. [Slide 16] 35 - And when he got to the stairs, he actually was carried by the soldiers because of the violence of the crowd; 36 - for the multitude of the people kept following them, shouting, “Away with him!” i. Even today, tactically speaking, stairs are what are called fatal funnels. ii. They are essentially hallways forcing you to change altitude and keeping you from flanking to safety. iii. These stairs are probably the first flight of stairs up to the Anatolian fortress. They would have been quite wide, but would have been difficult to navigate especially with a large crowd of people following them trying to get at their prisoner. iv. The Roman soldiers are forced to pick up and carry Paul up the stairs because the crowd continued to try to assault Paul on the way up. v. They call out “away with him” which is a great literal translation of the words, but idiomatically this certainly was their cry for Paul to be put to death. vi. We are reminded of the crowds call to “crucify” someone after He too entered the temple offering something that no one wanted. vii. Scholars sometimes press the similarities too far, but I think it is obvious that Luke sees the similarity of Christ's experience in Jerusalem during his passion week and Paul's experience here. Although they do not end the same of course. e. [Slide 17] Summary of the Point: Although Luke makes it clear in the book of Acts that the Romans saw no threat posed to the empire by the Christians, we should note that that doesn't mean that the Romans would always ride in and save Christians from persecution. In fact, this particular Roman commander not only arrested Paul without any idea what Paul did, he also, as we will see in the following weeks, intends to beat Paul some more in order to find out what happened in the temple. And these Jews, while not being in agreement as to why Paul was being beaten, all agreed on one thing… he needed to die. Again, we compare Paul's experience to our Lord Jesus'. He too was not rescued by the Romans. And the people cried out for Him to be killed too. Paul is suffering the same way Jesus suffered. If it can happen to Paul, and all the apostles, and countless others throughout the church's history, then it most certainly can… and will happen to us. If we faithfully preach the gospel men will revile us and persecute us. Why? Because the gospel is offensive. But again, what do we do when this happens? We must be ready to give an answer for the hope we have in us. Conclusion: So CBC, what have we learned today and how shall we live? Basic Concepts for Faith and Practice: [Slide 18] The gospel is by nature offensive to natural man. The religiously zealous Jews and the Roman pagans alike, both despise what Paul teaches and seek to silence it. And the world goes about silencing those who speak the gospel in two ways presented in this passage. They falsely accuse those who preach the gospel of evil things. They accused Paul of defiling the temple and teaching against the law of Moses. They will also revile and persecute those who preach the gospel. We see them beat, arrest, and call for the execution of Paul, to silence his teaching of the gospel. What does that mean for us? They will hate us too. Even if we are nice. Even if we are kind. Even if we are loving. They will still hate us. They will falsely accuse us of some of the most terrible things. And they will revile us and persecute us. What then should we do? We must be ready to give an answer for the hope we have in us. Even as they usher us through the door to that hope. These are the basic concepts of faith and practice in this text – but let's us dive a little deeper into them today. 1.) [Slide 19] Mind Transformation: “What truth must we believe from this text?” or “What might we not naturally believe that we must believe because of what this text has said?” We must affirm that the gospel is offensive to natural man. a. Why is it offensive? b. It teaches that every single person, whether they are moral, immoral, religious, irreligious, wealthy, poor, powerful, powerless, strong, weak, regardless of nationality, tribe, language, political party, every person is spiritually dead in their sin. c. They are… as the bible calls them… children of wrath. d. Slaves to sin. e. Every single person lacks all agency to do anything to save themselves or even to seek God to save them. f. This is what Paul says in Romans chapter 3 and this is what Augustine of Hippo defended in his treatise On Grace and Free Will against the Pelagian heresy. g. Mankind is not naturally equipped in their will to choose God or pursue Him in any way. They are given commands by God but are unable to accomplish them without God giving them grace to do so. h. There are two things I have found in my life that seem to be universally true of we humans. i. We hate being told we are wrong ii. And we hate being told we can't do anything about it. iii. Not only do we hate being told these things… we reject these things entirely. i. But the gospel tells us both and to the most extreme degree. i. It isn't just that we are wrong… we are dead wrong. So wrong that we have committed treason against the highest court of the highest kingdom on whose throne sits the highest God, Yahweh. ii. And we not only can't do anything about it… we don't even want to. Men love darkness and hate the light because their deeds are evil and they want to keep doing them. iii. There are none righteous and there are none who seek God. You are children of wrath of your father the devil and slaves to sin. iv. Just to quote a few j. All of this is the preamble of the gospel. k. It's funny – to the world that doesn't sound like good news at all. l. But to we who have been made alive in Christ… To know we are sinners and deserve nothing but judgment and wrath… That truly is good news. m. Why? n. Because Christ died for sinners! Just like you. Just like me. o. But until God gives a new heart and enables a person to see their own wickedness, they will continue to hate the gospel and fundamentally disagree with its accusations against them. p. As Matthew Henry once said, “Men hate Christ because they love their sin.” q. From our discussion last week – fear that the gospel may be right leads them to hate it. And what do we humans do with things we fear? We either flee them or we fight them. r. And that leads us to something we must deny. A lie we must dismiss especially now in the culture we are in… 2.) [Slide 20] Refutation: “What lies must we cast down” or “What do we naturally believe, or have been taught to believe, that this passage shows is false?” We must deny that religious toleration for the true gospel is normative. a. Although it is a much easier sell today than it would have been a few decades ago, because we still have relative freedom to continue to worship God in the way that He has commanded us to, we tend to find it difficult to connect with warnings about coming persecution. b. One other general human trait that I have observed is that we as humans tend to believe that all of life will continue as it has. We assume that because we live in a country where we are free from constant persecution against our beliefs that this will always be true. c. However, we know from the words of Christ that if we are His disciple then we should not expect anything less than the same rejection He experienced. d. If Men hate Christ because they love their sin – it stands to reason that they will hate any who follow Christ and are calling them to repent of their sin. e. This is why the “God loves you and is just wanting you to love Him back” gospel message is so popular today. Because it doesn't actually call anyone to abandon their sin. Instead, the message conveys the idea that God would be really lucky to have you if you would just say yes. f. And because of this message being out there, the real gospel message of God calling all men to repent and believe on Christ as Savior and Lord – is reviled and despised. g. And just like Paul was accused of blasphemy against the temple and even betrayal toward his own kinsmen, we too will be slandered. i. We spoke last week how the church is seen as homophobic or transphobic because we agree with God about sexuality and gender. ii. We are accused of hating democracy and freedom because we advocate for our laws to be based on God's moral will. iii. We are accused of intolerance because we believe Jesus when He says He is the only way to the Father. iv. We are accused of hating women because we believe God's word when it tells us of gender roles and authority structures within the home. v. In short, the world will rebrand us as arch villains because we have the audacity to see, through the lens of ancient Scripture, that their cherished practices are sin. vi. And we may, in the most loving and compassionate way we can, call them to repent and trust on Christ for the forgiveness of sin and new life… vii. But remember men love darkness rather than light for their deeds are evil. viii. God must give them a new heart in order for them to receive the gifts of repentance and faith. h. And unfortunately, men's hatred of the gospel and those who preach it will not just stop at slander. As it did with Paul, slander was the vehicle used to harm, revile, and persecute Paul. We too should expect the same. i. It is only a small step from where we are to where many other countries are in relation to persecution. ii. We may be tempted to think that such things could never happen in our country or that if they do, we are decades away. iii. But my friends, it would not surprise me to wake up tomorrow and learn that it is no longer legal to preach certain scripture passages or certain interpretations of scriptures passages. iv. It seemed like overnight governors of states were commanding churches not to sing to God in their services. v. And there isn't a party that exists today that has a biblical worldview. So just like Paul could not look to the Romans to save him, so too we cannot look to the Republicans to save us. vi. We will be persecuted on all sides. Not just from liberals. We will be persecuted by people who call themselves Christians. Perhaps even some in this very room will be the ones turning us in to the authorities. i. I don't know when the hammer will fall. I don't know how long God will allow for us to worship Him in peace with the culture around us. But I do know that from where the country started to where we are – our trajectory is on a nose dive headed straight for persecution. j. It does us no good to put our heads in the sand and continue to deny that such things would or could happen. k. We must even now ready ourselves by counting the cost and whether we are willing to pay it. l. But what is our response to persecution? Should we resist? Should we fight back? 3.) [Slide 21] Exhortation: “What actions should we take?” or “What is this passage specifically commanding us to do that we don't naturally do or aren't currently doing?” We must take every opportunity to give a defense of the hope that is in us. a. Interestingly, in this text, there is not a single example positively of what we are to do, nor is there a direct command in this passage associated to what is happening in the text. b. Before the end of this chapter Paul will respond. c. And originally in my sermon planning I did include verses 37-40. d. But in order to understand Paul's response we would need to look into what he says which would mean looking at MANY more verses. e. Paul actually begins his first of 6 defenses of his faith and ministry that are recorded in the last 7 chapters of the book of Acts starting in chapter 22. f. Now without looking at the first defense in its entirety let alone looking at all 6 defenses, we can still draw a very general application from what we know of the remainder of the book of Acts. g. And quite simply that is that we should take every opportunity we are given, in the midst of persecution, in the midst of slander, in the midst of opposition and hardship from all sides, we should take the opportunity we are given to give a defense for the hope that is in us. h. We cannot afford to fight back, resist, or get even when persecution comes. Why? Because we always have a responsibility to be ambassadors for Jesus Christ. i. Paul was gravely assaulted by these people, but he will stand before them and 5 more hostile audiences in the next 7 chapters, and will boldly decare the gospel of Jesus Christ. j. We must do the same. k. And maybe you are thinking… wow. I don't think I can do that. l. That is just not my default setting. Someone takes a swipe at me, my natural impulse is going to be to swipe back. m. So, the real discussion is, how do you fight that natural impulse and do what Jesus commands you to do? n. I think it starts with what Jesus says should be our perspective on persecution in general. 4.) [Slide 22] Exhortation: “What actions should we take?” or “What is this passage specifically commanding us to do that we don't naturally do or aren't currently doing?” We must rejoice and be exceedingly glad when we are persecuted for Christ's sake. a. Although you'll have to forgive me for going outside of our text this morning to snag this application, because the scriptures are one, I don't think I am doing any disservice to Luke's account by tossing this little aside in. b. [Slide 23] Matthew 5:11-12 c. After reading this text, tell me you don't see Paul's experience all over Christ's teaching here in the sermon on the mount! d. Paul was slandered. Paul was reviled. Paul was persecuted for Christ's sake. So, what should Paul's response be? What should our response be? e. We must rejoice and be exceedingly glad. f. What? Why? g. Because we are blessed. We are favored of God when this happens. h. How does that compute? How does this comfort us? 5.) [Slide 24] Comfort: “What comfort can we find here?” or “What peace does the Lord promise us in light of this passage of scripture?” Our reward in heaven is great and we are in good company. a. God's kingdom and His righteousness is constantly opposed by a kingdom that is perishing. b. In the Old Testament, God's prophets were treated this way. And time proved that they were right. c. In the New Testament, His apostles were treated this way and time has proved out that they were right. d. My friends, if you are truly slandered, reviled, and abused for the sake of Christ and His gospel… You are blessed. e. You are blessed because your reward will be great in the Kingdom and in that kingdom there will be many, just like you, who were hated for the gospel. f. So, rejoice and be exceedingly glad. g. You are in good company. [Slide 25 (end)] Let me close with a word of prayer from the English Reformer Thomas Cranmer Merciful God, you grant all peace. You are the giver of all good gifts, the defender of all nations. And you desire us to count all people as neighbors, to love them as ourselves, and not to hate our enemies. Rather, you want us to wish them well, and also to do them good if we can. Look down upon us and see this small portion of earth where the name of Jesus Christ is proclaimed. Give to all of us the desire for peace, unity, and calm. Make us weary of all war and hostility, weary of bitterness toward those we call enemies. May we and they praise your holy name with one heart. May we all remake our lives according to your way. Grant, O Lord, that our children's children may know the benefit of your great gift of unity. May you discredit all those who work against it. Diminish their strength and punish those who interrupt godly peace-or rather, convert their hearts to the better way, and make them embrace unity and peace, which will be for your glory. Put away from us all war and hostility. But if we are driven to it, be our shield and protection as we seek peace. Do not look on our sins, Lord, or the sins of our enemies. Do not give us what we deserve, but remember your abundant, infinite mercy. Do this, O Lord, for your Son's sake, Jesus Christ. Amen. Benediction: May the God Who changes not, Who has no shadow of turning, And Whose compassions fail not, Preserve you by His loving kindness, So that you might know, Great are His faithful acts, they are new every morning. Until we meet again, go in peace.

In this episode, listen to a lecture on Original Sin and Prevenient Grace by William Greathouse. In this lecture, Dr. Greathouse provides a historical perspective on the Augustinian and Pelagian views of original sin, and then articulates a Wesleyan understanding of this doctrine in contrast to Luther and Calvin.   Lifelong Learning Code: 80890 Click here to learn about Lifelong Learning

In this video, We read through a section of Phillip Schaff's "History of the Christian Church" entitled External History of the Pelagian Controversy. We discover that the controversy between Pelagius and Augustine is much more complicated and detailed than many modern accounts you will hear. We see how having this more in depth knowledge of the history will equip you to respond to non-calvinists and their claims about Pelagianism and Augustine.

In this conversation, Kyle discusses the difference between natural and supernatural forms of formation. He introduces the concept of continuity versus discontinuity in spiritual formation and emphasizes the need to start with discontinuity. Kyle explains that starting with continuity often leads to a generic account of personhood, maturation, and the God-world relationship, which can result in a reductionist and Pelagian view of formation. On the other hand, starting with discontinuity allows for a distinctively Christian understanding of formation that is grounded in divine revelation and the unique work of the Spirit. Kyle highlights the importance of union with Christ and the doctrine of infusion in spiritual formation.Chapters00:00 Introduction: Natural vs Supernatural Formation05:50 The Infiltration of Naturalism in the Church13:31 The Dangers of a Generic Account of Formation27:18 Jesus' Focus on Reconciliation, not Formation35:34 Becoming Fully Ourselves by Imaging God Get full access to Kyle's Formation Substack at kylestrobel.substack.com/subscribe

Today is the first time I've wondered if the movie title “Free Willy” was actually a hidden joke. …probably not. Nonetheless, the question of just how “free” our wills may be is no longer a conversation restricted to theologians. That said, this conversation is from a theological vantage point. In it, Nathan Adams (who is currently a PhD student @ McGill University) runs us through the paper he recently presented at the Wesleyan Theological Society. Wanna find out more? Either listen to the pod or comb through the guides below.Hey, if you've gotten this far… maybe either leave a comment here (

Download the book HERE: https://oll-resources.s3.us-east-2.am... Support Fighting for the Faith Join Our Crew: http://www.piratechristian.com/join-o... Patreon:   / piratechristian   Merchandise: https://www.moteefe.com/store/pirate-... Fighting for the Faith Radio Program: http://fightingforthefaith.com Social Media Facebook:   / piratechristian   Twitter:   / piratechristian   Instagram:   / piratechristian   Video Sermons    / @kongsvingerlutheran670   Sermons http://www.kongsvingerchurch.org/sermons Sunday Schools http://www.kongsvingerchurch.org/bibl... Bible Software Used in this Video: https://www.accordancebible.com Video Editing Software: https://adobe.ly/2W9lyNa Video Recording Software: https://www.ecamm.com

A new MP3 sermon from Alpha and Omega Ministries is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: Pelagian Pope, Two Part Romans Utterly Refuted Subtitle: The Dividing Line 2024 Speaker: Dr. James White Broadcaster: Alpha and Omega Ministries Event: Podcast Date: 5/21/2024 Length: 105 min.

Pelagius was so optimistic about human nature and the freedom of the will that he went so far as to deny the reality of original sin and the need for infant baptism. Saint Augustine corrected Pelagius and his followers, but in the heat of the debate he went a bit too far in in the opposite direction, and proposed a doctrine of election that the Church ultimately did not embrace. This episode explores, not only the problems with Pelagianism, but also the problems with its opposite, and the ways in which Saint Augustine inadvertently laid the foundation for the later heresy of Calvinism.  Links To listen to Mike Aquilina's episode 38 on Augustine of Hippo (part 1): https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/38augustine-part-1-misspent-youth-and-conversion/ To listen to Mike Aquilina's episode 39 on Augustine of Hippo (part 2): https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/39augustine-part-2-mob-made-bishop-makes-his-mark/ To listen to Mike Aquilina's episode 40 on Augustine of Hippo (part 3): https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/40augustine-part-3-last-days-and-end-age/ To read St. Augustine's Confessions: https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/fathers/view.cfm?recnum=3102&repos=8&subrepos=0&searchid=2399020 To read St. Augustine's On the Proceedings of Pelagius: https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/fathers/view.cfm?recnum=3308&repos=8&subrepos=0&searchid=2399018 To read St. Augustine's On the Spirit and the Letter: https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/fathers/view.cfm?recnum=3305&repos=8&subrepos=0&searchid=2399019 To read St. Augustine's On Grace and Free Will: https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/fathers/view.cfm?recnum=3302&repos=8&subrepos=0&searchid=2399021 To read St. Augustine's On the Soul and its Origin: https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/fathers/view.cfm?recnum=3311&repos=8&subrepos=0&searchid=2399023 To read St. Augustine's Handbook on Faith, Hope, and Love: https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/fathers/view.cfm?recnum=3287&repos=8&subrepos=0&searchid=2399022 For more on the controversy over Pelagianism, St. Augustine's rebuttal of it, and the Council of Orange, see the book: Reading the Church Fathers: A History of the Early Church and the Development of Doctrine: https://sophiainstitute.com/product/reading-the-church-fathers/ For more on the concept of the will of God as it relates to God's sovereignty, human free will, and the submission of the human will to the will of God, see the book: Praying Like the Early Church: Seven Insights from the Church Fathers to Help You Connect with God: https://sophiainstitute.com/product/praying-like-the-early-church/ SIGN UP for Catholic Culture's Newsletter:  https://www.catholicculture.org/newsletters/ DONATE at:  http://www.catholicculture.org/donate/audio To connect with Dr. James Papandrea, On YouTube - The Original Church:  https://www.youtube.com/@TheOriginalChurch Join the conversation in the Original Church Community on Locals:  https://theoriginalchurch.locals.com/ Dr. Papandrea's Homepage:  http://www.jimpapandrea.com Theme Music: Gaudeamus (Introit for the Feast of All Saints), sung by Jeff Ostrowski. Courtesy of Corpus Christi Watershed:  https://www.ccwatershed.org/  

A new MP3 sermon from Alpha and Omega Ministries is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: Pelagian Pope, Two Part Romans Utterly Refuted Subtitle: The Dividing Line 2024 Speaker: Dr. James White Broadcaster: Alpha and Omega Ministries Event: Podcast Date: 5/21/2024 Length: 105 min.

Started off with the Pope's comments on 60 Minutes, and then dove into a refutation of Brent Lay's -Two Part Romans- theory -originated in 2013- that is being promoted by Jason Breda in a series of videos. The entire theory is based upon an alleged -ambiguous antecedent- in Romans 1-13, except, there is no such construction there, the antecedent is not ambiguous, and hence the theory is DOA, and needs to be abandoned. An hour and 45 minutes-

Started off with the Pope's comments on 60 Minutes, and then dove into a refutation of Brent Lay's -Two Part Romans- theory -originated in 2013- that is being promoted by Jason Breda in a series of videos. The entire theory is based upon an alleged -ambiguous antecedent- in Romans 1-13, except, there is no such construction there, the antecedent is not ambiguous, and hence the theory is DOA, and needs to be abandoned. An hour and 45 minutes-

Started off with the Pope's comments on 60 Minutes, and then dove into a refutation of Brent Lay's "Two Part Romans" theory (originated in 2013) that is being promoted by Jason Breda in a series of videos. The entire theory is based upon an alleged "ambiguous antecedent" in Romans 1:13, except, there is no such construction there, the antecedent is not ambiguous, and hence the theory is DOA, and needs to be abandoned. An hour and 45 minutes!

LOTUS: A Free Grace Response to TULIP has been released on February 1st, 2024, and has already been making waves within many theological discussions! This work wouldn't be possible without excellent contributions from noted theologians, pastors, and scholars. This interview is part of the LOTUS Interview series where I speak with each contributor to the LOTUS book and ask them questions regarding their individual section.Today's interview is with Shawn Willson of Rev Reads, who contributed to LOTUS by writing the Introduction of the book. Shawn is a pastor of Grace Community Church in River Ridge, Louisiana, and the host of the Rev Reads YouTube channel.Refutations to Calvinism:https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLGbiR21FjZBc-YFVJsMzLES5XGPdHZ-H7The Myth of Pelagianism Review:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MC4kp2HHOng&pp=ygUUcmV2cmVhZHMgcGVsYWdpYW5pc20%3DAre you a Pelagian or Semi-Pelagian (w/David Allen):https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpJ8eBiQEqM&t=170sRev Reads YouTube Channel:https://www.youtube.com/@RevReadsRev Reads Book Reviews:https://www.amazon.com/shop/revreadsbyshawnwillsonRev Reads Facebook:https://www.facebook.com/groups/1632544567080511Support Rev Reads:https://www.buymeacoffee.com/revreadsGrace Community Bible Church:https://www.gcbcrr.org/?fbclid=IwAR2nSRMlam9b7MWBCiAuQyTrYC_9nChm16_HkYQqgcRtG7clWHPottZ_0Y4----------LOTUS: A Free Grace Response to TULIP:https://www.amazon.com/LOTUS-Free-Grace-Response-TULIP-ebook/dp/B0CQWN7JH8/ref=sr_1_1?crid=MHQYB7SY7FAD&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.sGT5rromzNGhaWFVLbhHWg.NtGFwDA0SDaUxvh8NFAVWg_27pKp6-FyPh7XiLIDl4I&dib_tag=se&keywords=lotus+daniel+weierbach&qid=1710337610&sprefix=%2Caps%2C369&sr=8-1Other Books by C4C Apologetics:Investigating Lordship Salvation:https://www.amazon.com/Investigating-Lordship-Salvation-Response-Works-Based/dp/B09XZJD4RHA Biblical Sketch: Free Grace Theologyhttps://www.amazon.com/Biblical-Sketch-Theology-Understanding-Basics-ebook/dp/B0B4X8JMHG/ref=sr_1_1?crid=11WY6AK3UBPUC&keywords=weierbach&qid=1662478524&s=books&sprefix=weierbach%2Cstripbooks%2C78&sr=1-1C4C Apologetics Website:www.c4capologetics.comFinancially Support C4C Apologetics Ministry:https://odbaptist.com/give----------My Church's Information:Open Door Baptist ChurchPrattville, AL 36066Website:https://odbaptist.com/Sermons/Teachings:https://odbaptist.com/podcasts/sermons-teachingsRumble:https://rumble.com/user/ODBaptistYouTube:https://www.youtube.com/@odbaptist8313Facebook:https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100064738054591#LOTUS #FreeGrace #FreeGraceTheology #TULIP #Calvinism

This is the fourth in a series of talks on the solas of the Reformation. This talk discusses the semi-Pelagian controversy and the Council of Orange, and how that connects to the Lutheran Reformation.

This week Dr. Jenkins begins what will be a long and involved discussion of the Pelagian controversy. This touches more than just a British monk, but questions of the soul, freewill, predestination, inherited guilt and corruption, and difference between Greek East and Latin West. Orthodox Education Conference: https://tinyurl.com/OrthodoxEducation A Perilous Realm: http://tinyurl.com/DragonsAngelsSaints

This week Dr. Jenkins begins what will be a long and involved discussion of the Pelagian controversy. This touches more than just a British monk, but questions of the soul, freewill, predestination, inherited guilt and corruption, and difference between Greek East and Latin West. Orthodox Education Conference: https://tinyurl.com/OrthodoxEducation A Perilous Realm: http://tinyurl.com/DragonsAngelsSaints

Today Dr Will Ryan & Dr. Matt launch a series examining the Doctrine of Original Sin. If you've followed us long enough you've probably seen there are 2 theologies we tend to jab at quite a bit: Dispensationalism, Calvinism/Reformed Theology, So we basically have issues with doctrines that promote fear and a distortion of God's Character. In this series we'll be looking at how Original Sin is not Biblical or Ancient. The first 400 years of the Church did not believe this There is zero evidence that Judaism ever believed this. Messianic Jews do not believe this. The Eastern Orthodox church along with some Protestant denominations never adopted this view. As we'll see in this intro, Augustine was the inventor of this doctrine in the 5th century and much of it was due to his importation of his pagan background into Christianity. Defining original sin We do not deny that there was AN ORIGINAL SIN. What we will be referring to as “Original Sin” is the doctrine of Original Sin which teaches that because of Adam and Eve's sin we are all born guilty before God and that we inherit their guilt from birth. Sometimes we may refer to this as Original Guilt. This is also called Augustinian Anthropology or Augustinian Original Sin Original Sin is the building block for Total Depravity or Total Inability of Calvinism's TUPLIP which is about the nature of man in that they are so totally depraved that they cannot even seek after God.  Augustine and Original Sin The doctrine came into the church through Augustine of Hippo (396-440 CE) and the doctrine was originally called Concupiscence.   “Concupiscence” , according to Augustine, relates to Adam's sin being transferred through sexual reproduction.  It's root definition is a base sexual desire. We get our word concubine from this.  He believe that though this all men are born with their will, body, and mind corrupt and this is transmitted sexually. They inherited the sin through the sexual act leading to birth. Augustine could only read Latin. He tried to learn Greek but despised it due to his teacher who was very hard on him and so never learned it. He also could not read Hebrew. Augustine came to original sin by reading Romans 5:12 in a bad Latin translation.  Augustine and Pelagianism  Often the label thrown at those who disagree with Original Sin or who hold to Freedom of the Will is “Pelagian”.  Augustine developed 14 points of accusation against Pelagius. But you can look Pelagius' writings and they completely refute the accusations.  The 14 Points of Pelagianism: 1. Adam was created mortal & would die whether he sinned or not  2. Adam's sin harmed only Adam, not mankind  3. The law leads to heaven in the same way as the Gospel  4. Newborn infants are in the exact same state as Adam before his sin  5. The whole human race doesn't die through Adam & live through Christ  6. Even unbaptized infants possess eternal life  7. The wealthy must renounce their possessions or they will not see the Kingdom of Heaven  8. God's grace & help are not given for individual actions, but consist in free will, the law & teaching.  9. God‘s grace is given in accord with our merits & is located in the human will  10. Only those who are without sin can be called children of God  11. Forgetfulness & ignorance are not sinful since they're not done willingly  12. A choice is not free if it needs God's help  13. Our victory is not the result of God's help, but free will  14. The soul can be as sinless as God.  “Pelagianism” based on Augustine's 14 slanderous claims is not a real thing, but rather a strawman, a distortion, defamation and slander of the beliefs of a truly Orthodox Christian in order to change orthodoxy in the church.  --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/expedition44/support

How much focused are you toward yourself? There can be times when we struggle with perfectionism, control, and activism, and this can sometimes rub off on our spiritual life.  Jesus does not demand great actions from us; rather, the invitation is simply to live in surrender and gratitude to Him. At times, we can take a more Pelagian approach where more emphasis is given to our efforts, initiatives, and self-improvement—our achievement of holiness rather than the primacy being given to God and it being His work. This gift of grace is the sweet way of love that Jesus sets before the little and the poor and that's what we're gonna talk about in this episode. The Poco a Poco podcast happens because of many generous donors, including recurring monthly donations of any amount. Thinking about helping out? You can give at https://spiritjuice.org/supportpoco. Thank you!

When the Canons of Dort speak of "Pelagianism," of whom is it referring? Were the Remonstrants Pelagian? In this episode, Pastors Brandon and Zac discuss the these questions and more.  For more information, see:  The Canons of Dort.  Saving the Reformation: The Pastoral Theology of the Canons of Dort by Robert Godfrey  Crisis in the Reformed Church: Essays in Commemoration of the Great Synod of Dort  ed. by Peter Y. De Jong But for the Grace of God: An Exposition of the Canons of Dort by Cornelius Venema

When the Canons of Dort speak of "Pelagianism," of whom is it referring? Were the Remonstrants Pelagian? In this episode, Pastors Brandon and Zac discuss the these questions and more.  For more information, see:  The Canons of Dort.  Saving the Reformation: The Pastoral Theology of the Canons of Dort by Robert Godfrey  Crisis in the Reformed Church: Essays in Commemoration of the Great Synod of Dort  ed. by Peter Y. De Jong But for the Grace of God: An Exposition of the Canons of Dort by Cornelius Venema

In episode 7, Teresa Morris and Will Wright discuss how virtue is the mean between excess and deficiency. They talk about how virtue relates to spiritual life. Teresa explains Plato's analogy of the Cave, Mumford and Sons, G.K. Chesterton, and Dr. Peter Kreeft are brought up. This conversation has a few tangents, but all of them are worthwhile. Give it a listen! Listen to episode 7 and then join us as a free or paid subscriber here at https://gooddistinctions.com/Rough TRANSCRIPT of the Video:Will Wright:Welcome back to Good Distinctions. I'm Will Wright.Teresa Morris:and I'm Teresa Morris.Will Wright:And good distinctions are...Teresa Morris:the spice of life.Will Wright:So today, Teresa, we are talking about virtue. I'm glad that you're with me because I don't have a lot of it. I'm working on it, but I would like to grow in virtue. So hopefully this conversation will be helpful to everyone that's watching. So let's dive right into it. First of all, let's define what is a virtue.Teresa Morris:Hmm. I wish the answer was as simple as just being able to give what is a particular virtue or what is the overall definition of virtue. I will give the definition of virtue that I tend to think is maybe the best one. And then perhaps we can kind of talk about why people have different opinions on why that may or may not be a good definition. So virtue was initially proposed by Aristotle and Aristotle essentially said that virtue is a habit of excellence and that it's a mean between two extremes of excess and deficiency. So his proposal was that people should be trying to live a virtuous life and where virtue falls, if you think about kind of like a line, virtue falls right in the middle. and you want to be oriented towards this kind of middle ground and you're not trying to fall to one of the other sides of excess or deficiency. So you don't want to be too much of something but you also don't want to be lacking in something or deficient in something. So virtue is kind of that middle ground of excellence that we're trying to cultivate.Will Wright:So we could say in Medio stat Virtus, which is Latin. I don't know why I know the phrase in Latin. Aristotle spoke Greek. Anyway, it means in the middle stands the virtue, right? And so that's what we're getting at. I think it's hilarious when asking a philosopher anything because you're gonna get a very philosophical answer. No, it was very beautiful. And I'm excited to unpack that. I would just like to offer. I guess the theological answer would be what's in the catechism, right? So the virtue is a habitual and firm disposition to the good.So I'm not thrilled with that definition as like the end all be all. I don't think it includes exactly what you mentioned of excellence as being the mean between excess and deficiency. But I think we should start by unpacking that real quick. So It's habitual, which means it's a habit.It's something that we have to do. And it's something that we have to habituate and make part of our routine, something that we need to practice. Later, I think we'll definitely talk about the difference between the theological virtues and the cardinal virtues and moral virtues, because there's a huge distinction to be made there. But putting a pin in that, habitual. So it needs to be habitual, but it also needs to be firm. Right, it's not wishy washy. You can't just... You know, you're walking down the road and you see a kid walking towards the street and there's a car coming and you go and you reach out your hand half-heartedly, grab the back of their shirt and say, hey, don't do that. That doesn't make you a brave person. That doesn't make you courageous. That makes you basic borderline minimum human.Teresa Morris:Mm-hmm.Will Wright:You're not a monster.Teresa Morris:Yeah, right.Will Wright:So good for you. You know, everybody's, well, I didn't kill anybody. Like that's not a very good metric for whether you're a good person or not. But anyway, so it needs to be firm. It needs to be something that you practice every day. You wake up and you say, I'm gonna be courageous today. If there's an opportunity where I need to practice courage, I'm going to. And then disposition, so disposing ourselves towards the good, which ultimately is God, and being in accordance with natural law and the eternal law.Teresa Morris:Yeah, I think something that is is helpful about the concept of virtue is, you know, what you're saying is that it's a habit. It's a really hopeful view of morality. It's a really hopeful view of building character because it's saying that we have the capacity to improve upon ourselves. So sometimes people are like, well, I'm just not built that way. Or I'm just like not a good person. Or I'm not given when other people are given, which may or may not be true, right? Like we're all given different gifts. We're all given different upbringings that can dispose us to different virtues or not. but the proposal that virtue is a habit inherent in that idea is that you have this capacity to work on yourself and build up this habit. So it's not something that you're just gonna wake up and you're like yeah today I'm gonna be courageous and you're just gonna automatically be that way. It takes practice and it's something that requires intentionality and eventually it becomes our natural mode of being. So spoiler alert for Nicomachean ethics at the end of Nicomachean ethics, Aristotle is asking this question of like, well, how do we even get here, right? That if we can say, here's this list of virtues that we have determined are important to strive for. How do we get from point A to point B? Point A saying, I see that this is a good thing. Point B being this is integrated into my life. And what he says is you have to surround yourself with virtuous people and learn through imitations. So if I find in myself a lack of something where I'm like, I just wish that I was more honest, or I wish that I was more courageous, or I wish I understood chastity better. It's not that I have to white-knuckle my life and just force myself into those things.Will Wright:Hmm.Teresa Morris:What I should do is I should say, who do I know that lives these well. Who do I know who's really courageous? Who do I know who's really honest? Who do I know who lives chastity beautifully? And I look at how they're living and I just kind of imitate them. It's kind of like how children learn, right? It's like when we're teaching children how to speak, we're like, say, da-da, and then we're trying to get them to imitate it. That's how humans just naturally learn is we're given a model for something and we kind of like act it out until we can do that. So It's, I love the concept of building virtue as a habit because it connects us to community and it says you're not supposed to do this on your own. This idea of becoming a good person isn't solitary. You're not doing this in isolation. You do this by imitating the people around you. And it takes time because habits take time to build and that's okay. It's not something that we should feel discouraged about which I think sometimes in ethics or in just the process of becoming a good person. it's easy to get discouraged because it's like, oh my gosh, I failed again. I woke up and I made this decision to be this way and I missed the mark and virtue ethic says that's okay. Habits take time to build just like anything.Will Wright:And we will mess up. And it's not just about aiming for the good, it's about the reality that God is the greatest good and that we're in a relationship with Him. And so, when we encounter good, whether it's in ourselves or in someone else, we're encountering the spark of the divine, we're encountering the image of God in that. And so, it's not... Like you say, it's not just picking ourselves up by our bootstraps and white-knuckling it. We're not Pelagians. The Pelagian heresy is that we can will ourselves to heaven, that we don't need grace. Well, that's a huge lie. Of course we need grace. But grace builds on nature. It perfects nature, as St. Thomas says. So if that's true, and it is, then by surrounding ourselves with good people, good friends and allowing God to show us to those people. Right? Saying like, Lord, I need better friends. Like lead me to them.Teresa Morris:Mm-hmm.Will Wright:And then allowing him to sort of put these people in our lives. At least that's been my experiences. I have these people come into my life that I never would have gone out of my way to find. And I mean, even I know we talked about this in Episode One, but like how I met, how I found myself moving from North Carolina to Phoenix was very unexpected. Well, now I know all these wonderful people. And I have a bunch of wonderful friends in North Carolina as well. And it's just beautiful. The Lord has led me through this different pathway and journey. And I know these people have made me better. But in the past, when I've had some friends who didn't always live up to virtue, didn't always have the same orientation as me towards the good and towards what is true and beautiful, I felt myself sliding backwards because I really believe that we can't be stagnant. There is no stagnation. We're either moving forward or we're moving backwards. And that's just a function of the fact that we're alive and in time. Right.Teresa Morris:Right.Will Wright:Right, the good, the virtue. So, right, if we have good friends, they will lift us up, which is what you were saying. And I think there's... lot to be said about grace building on nature and allowing God into that mix. So it's not all or nothing. I think that's kind of what I wanted to get at is for anyone listening who's thinking, okay, well, it's a habit that I need to firmly dispose myself towards. So it seems like I need to put forth effort. But then you're saying, well, it's not something that you just white-knuckle. Well, okay, then how do I do it?Well, I think it's this mystery of synergy. Between God acting and giving us grace and us cooperating and responding to that grace.Teresa Morris:Mm-hmm, definitely. And I really like what you said about how the people that you surround yourself with really affect us and that. one of the prayers that we can pray is, Lord, give me people in my life who are going to aid in my flourishing because he wants that for us. And that flourishing is something that was really important for the Greeks, this concept of eudaimonia, which is virtue is oriented towards that, that it's not existing for its own sake, it's not even existing for this consequence in society, it's existing for our own flourishing. And... that we do become like the people we surround ourselves with. Even in social psychology, people talk about how you become like the five people you spend the most amount of time with, which is why it really matters who you choose as friends. It matters who you choose to marry because you're going to become like those people. It's why I love teaching because I want to be like my students. I think that they're wonderful and I want to be more like them for the most part. And so we can't let ourselves be unaffected by the people that we are surrounded by and so that it's possible to change and to become like the people that were surrounded by. IWill Wright:It reminds me that there's a narrative to our lives that God is writing ultimately. And then there's a meta-narrative that we all fit into. There's one true story. One of my friends is a filmmaker and he talks about this a lot, that all good stories exist within the one true story, the story that God is writing, this meta-narrative, which is exactly the opposite of postmodernism. that there actually is meaning and that we can plug ourselves into that. But I've also heard, especially those who follow Carl Jung, especially like Jordan Peterson, for example, talks a lot about how we play this set of games over time. And it's really a rehearsing of behaviors to play the meta game or the meta narrative. And that's how, like what you were talking about with the kids watching. other people and figuring out how to play the game, so to speak. And he doesn't mean that in a cynical way. It's just how do I navigate my life? How do I navigate interpersonal relationships with others in an effective way where I will be flourishing?Teresa Morris:Mm-hmm.Will Wright:And that idea of you eudaenomia that you brought up, would it be would it be acceptable in your mind to equate that? And I've made this I'll go ahead and say I've made this case. So feel free to push back. that eudaenomia, that true real blessedness, that true lasting happiness is synonymous with what Jesus is talking about in the Beatitudes.Teresa Morris:Mm-hmm. I would say so. And I think ultimately that concept, I mean like everything is fulfilled in the beatific vision, right? That like all of these ideas of happiness, flourishing, excellence are ultimately fulfilled in our experience of an encounter with Christ. And that helps us then having this sense of, oh, this is the ultimate vision for our lives. This is where ultimate fulfillment is coming from. Helps us then. orient all our other actions towards that type of excellence to say like this is this is the primary goal and So it helps order all those other things. So I would say that the Beatitudes are an orientation towards virtue and excellence because it's not just Here's here are the things that you can't do. It's not just a list of behaviors It's an orientation towards goodness and an orientation towards excellence. And I think that's what You can say this about virtue from a philosophical sense, or you could say this about virtue in a theological sense, which I think could be attributed to the Beatitudes, like you're saying, that it's not this question of what should I do, which can be a really stark view of doing ethics or just living your life, of what should I do or what should I avoid? And here's this list of things that I can and can't do, but it's who do I want to be? What type of person do I want to be?Will Wright:Hmm.Teresa Morris:And I think that's what. eudaenomia offers, I think that's what the Beatitudes offers, it's this proposal for what type of person do you want to be and it's an orientation of the heart and it's an integrated vision of how to act. It's not just I'm going to will this thing and just you know do this because I feel like I have to but it's a movement of the heart towards something good and something excellent.Will Wright:Dr. Peter Kreeft has a brilliant lecture on this, where he talks about the Beatitudes and he brings up the concept of eudaenomia, but he also brings up GK Chesterton's biography of St. Francis of Assisi. And he says that it's the line about coming out of the cave, walking on your hands, seeing the world hanging upside down and understanding dependence when we know the maker's hand, comes from an encounter with God in which we turn all of our expectations on our on its head, which is really what Jesus is saying in the Beatitudes. These are these are nuts, really. first look at them they go, what are you talking about, blessed are to the poor in spirit? I don't want to be poor in spirit, I want to be rich in spirit.Teresa Morris:Right.Will Wright:But what it's saying is no you need to be humble, you need to empty yourself in order to be filled with God. And then he walks through Peter Crave walks through the rest of the Beatitudes and shows how it's an inversion of a lot of the things that we think we want, like conquestTeresa Morris:Right.Will Wright:of nature, freedom from pain,Teresa Morris:Yeah.Will Wright:et cetera. So it's really fascinating. Incidentally,Teresa Morris:Mm-hmm.Will Wright:Mumford and Sons the Cave is, you know, that exact line from the Chesterton biography of St. Francis of Assisi, and it's awesome. So go listen to the Cave, everyone.Teresa Morris:it's such a good song. I also thought for the longest time before I read that work by GK Chesterton, that he was talking about Plato's cave, which is my heathen philosophical viewpoint of the world,Will Wright:HaTeresa Morris:Which you can kind of say that it's both, but it really is much more the sense of Christ turns everything upside down and has, you know, this proposal of paradox for the way that Christians should live their life.Will Wright:But why couldn't it be Plato's cave?Teresa Morris:It could be. It can be both, I think. I think they're really, yeah, I mean, you walk out of the cave and you're shocked at how the world looks. You're like, oh my gosh, all these things that I thought were just shadow, like there's actually a real flower. There's a real this. And it feels like the world is upside down because it's not shadow, it's real.Will Wright:Alright, professor, I think it's time. I think we need to take the time rather to explain the cave analogy. Just a little bit, just a little bit, because people listening, I'm sure not everyone has been exposed to this. Not everybody's read the Republic. So what have you got?Teresa Morris:Okay, yeah, so there's this famous analogy in Plato's Republic where the Plato's Republic is trying to determine what it means to be a just person and it's doing that by giving this analogy of what it means to have a just city and a just city is this analogy for a person and in that he talks about uh he gives this analogy of what it means to to live a good life and what it looks like to finally understand what a good life is and to experience it. So that everyone is born into this cave and they're facing the back wall of the cave. So you're just looking at this blank wall and you're in chains and the sun is behind you on the outside of the cave. So everything that you're seeing is just a shadow. So like a dog walks by and you see a shadow of a dog or a tree is growing, you see a shadow of a tree. A bird flies by, you see a shadow of a bird. And that's what you think the world is, because that's all you're ever exposed to. And then at a certain point, someone breaks out and they leave the cave and they go outside and the sun is illuminating everything and they realize, oh my gosh, this thing that I thought was a dog, this shadow is actually a dog, this tree is actually a tree and this bird is actually a bird. And you're experiencing everything in reality and it's so much better and so much more intense than what the shadows were. And that's kind of the experience of doing philosophy is your... experiencing the really real. And so then that person goes back into the cave and they're trying to tell everyone about it and they're like, oh my gosh it's so much better out there, I promise. And you would think everyone would be like, yeah, that sounds great. Let's go. And what they actually do is they say, no, you're crazy. I don't actually want to experience that. And they stay in the cave and they actually end up killing the philosopher. So it's really not a great look for philosophers because it's sort of a sad ending. But it's this idea that reality is worth experiencing, that truth is worth experiencing and encountering, even if you're kind of put to death for it, that it's worth standing for truth, even if everyone around you doesn't think that that's worthwhile. So in the song, the reason when I was first listening to Mumford was actually my freshman year of college when I was first studying philosophy and I heard that song and I was like, this is Plato's cave. It's this experience of walking out of this cave and the world is opposite of what you thought it was. It's so different than what you had thought and it's so much better. than what you had ever dreamed it could be. And that's, I think, life of virtue and truth that can be experienced just through kind of morality and philosophy, but even more so, exponentially more so, is that experience of a life with Christ, where all of these natural inclinations or desires that I have that I could make an argument for justifying and saying, well, I can reason my way to that, this is how I should act. Christ says, sure, but I'm actually going to propose something that might maybe even seem unreasonable to you. That is really crazy. That is, you know, you should totally humble yourself and you, you know, so all these things Christ proposes is this world flipped upside down.Will Wright:Well, and how prophetic in a sense when I'd never thought about it in this context, but Jesus is wisdom incarnate. He is the word. He is the logo. So of course he was put to death, right?Teresa Morris:Mm-hmm.Will Wright:He is like, he's coming into the cave and saying, yeah, all those shadows aren't real. Let's have the real thing, which I think you're reading of the cave. The song is very much in line with what St. Augustine would have thought. I mean, he was a big fan of Plato. He saw the world of forms as heaven as being in the mind of God and So How does that this might be a little bit tangential, but I think it's worthwhile How does that transition from that transcendence of Plato to the more eminent philosophy of Aristotle? How do you get from Plato who's the teacher to Aristotle who's the student because there's usually In the sense that you have that famous painting of Plato pointing up and Aristotle pointing down. So what's that about?Teresa Morris:Yeah, I think that Aristotle, you know, Aristotle kind of rejected this concept of the forms that were just participating in these ultimates that Plato really was proposing. And that I think upon an initial reading, in a lot of ways can sound like Christianity in some senses, which is why I think Augustine really took to that. Aristotle was a bit more focused on what does this mean for human behavior. and that he saw a tension between a proposal of absolutes and forms, and that there's a bit of a disconnect between saying here's just these objectives that we're looking at, and he was struggling to find the in-between, this kind of virtuous mean between well you can say that you know there's a there's an objective virtue or there's objective goodness, but what that looks like for an individual person might be different from person to person. So for example, he thought that there was a truth in saying, there's objective goodness, there's objective beauty, but the way that you and I are going to engage with those things is going to be different. So what it looks like for you to be courageous, we can say courageous or being courageous is a mean between. the excess of recklessness and the deficiency of cowardice. But how that's lived out in my life and your life might be different or how you might be courageous in a particular situation is going to need to be different from me. So an example of this is like, if I need to talk to, if I need to be courageous to a boss and I need to stand up for myself in a work setting, what courage might look like for me is going to be different than what it would look like for you in a work setting standing up to a boss. So it might be courageous for me to write an email standing up for myself, whereas for you, that might not be courageous. The courageous thing would be to walk into someone's office and have a conversation. So AristotleWill Wright:Hmm.Teresa Morris:saw more of a nuance, whereas Plato was much more hard-lined in these forms and were just participating in these objectives. And Aristotle kind of saw that there was a difference in how those things were lived out from person to person. So I think his sense of human behavior. and looking at individual human behavior and the cultivation of virtue in the individual, kind of accounted for, yeah, the distinct way that people can live their lives in accordance with these objective truths.Will Wright:which we would see as being in accordance with the natural law, which is our participation in the eternal law in reality as it is. SoTeresa Morris:Mm-hmm.Will Wright:I don't, I don't see a huge gap in retrospect. Like obviously if you're thinking through it as Aristotle, without the light of Christ to fill in the gaps.Teresa Morris:Mm-hmm.Will Wright:I mean, I could see the, the world of forms, for example, as being in the mind of God, butTeresa Morris:Mm-hmm.Will Wright:God is simple, like divine simplicity, that he doesn't have parts and pieces and attributes. He is. Period. Right? He is, He exists as essence is existence. So if that's the case, then our participation in those perfections is a participation in reality as God made it. And ultimately in him, because in him, we live and move and have our being. So I think ultimately there their views are reconcilable, at least in my mind, to a large extent, because they show us that there is a standard, there is an objective reality. But then, I don't know, I'm kinda like, I'm thinking through this as we go, but it seems like the way that you explained Aristotle seems very subjective or relativistic. And I know that that's not true. So how would you respond to somebody who maybe is moral relativist at heart, who's who hears what you say and say, see, it's different, it's completely different. So stop trying to compare me to you and there is no standard.Teresa Morris:Yeah.Will Wright:So how would you respond to that?Teresa Morris:Yeah, I would say that there's a difference between when we're talking about goodness in a metaphysical sense, which I think you could say that Plato is kind of, when he's talking about the forms, he's kind of talking more about metaphysics and, you know, what is goodness itself, whereas Aristotle is focused on the cultivation of goodness within a person and that he thinks those two things are distinct and that they're not opposed to each other, but what it looks like to choose the good in terms of action is different than what goodness is. in this metaphysical sense. So he does think that virtue is more than just fulfilling certain roles, or it's just doing what I personally think is good. He does think that it's the acquiescence of a person towards something objective, that there is something outside of myself that I'm trying to achieve. I'm trying to be. courageous or I'm trying to be honest or whatever. And it's something beyond myself that I'm trying to then orient myself towards. So he doesn't think that the individual gets to decide what the virtue is, but that the individual gets to decide how to get there. And so he is in no way saying that society should be composed of individuals who get to determine. what is good or what virtue is because the consequence of that is just moral and coherence in societyWill Wright:Hmm.Teresa Morris:that we can't have that and Aristotle is not proposing that. But what he is proposing is that it's not insignificant how an individual's heart and will is formed to be a good person in society. That it really does matter who the individuals are. It's not just follow these set of rules. that it's a transformation of the person. So in that sense, it's subjective because it's a subjective way of living out these objective virtues. But it's not subjective or relative in the sense that you get to determine what that is. It's just that for you, how you're living it out is subjective because you personally have free will and you personally have to choose it.Will Wright:because it pertains to you as the subject. So what's the difference between subjective and relative? Because I feel like these are often conflated,Teresa Morris:they are.Will Wright:usually by people who are not moral relativists, usually people who say there is only objective truth.Teresa Morris:Mm-hmm.Will Wright:And I met more than one person who claims this. And at first I thought to myself, well, that's absurd. Of course there's subjective truth. But then as we got talking more, I was more and more confused and I wasn't sure of myself and I was like, well, maybe it is just objective truth, but it's objective for you. Like preferences, for example, like is it true that I like pepperoni and bacon pizza? Yes. Is it true that is the only pizza to like? No. So it doesn't matter because for me, I love pepperoni and bacon pizza. And so that seems subjective in that I, the subject like this certain type of pizza. But if somebody else is looking at that and whether they know it or not, if they make that claim, you know, Will likes pepperoni and bacon pizzaObjectively, are they correct? Yes.Teresa Morris:Mm-hmm.Will Wright:So that seems like an objective truth.Teresa Morris:Mm-hmm.Will Wright:So I thought that was a pretty darn good argument. I didn't have a response to it. So I'd love to know.Teresa Morris:Yeah.Will Wright:I'm not a philosopher. I'm not an ethicist. So...Teresa Morris:Yeah,Will Wright:what do you say?Teresa Morris:I think that we use the term objective truth way too freely. And I think that there are objective truths and personal preferences being true in the moment isn't an objective truth. We can say right now it is objectively true. that you like your pizza however you like it. But that's not an objective truth because objective truth is unchanging. SoWill Wright:Hmm.Teresa Morris:something that is in this moment objectively true isn't an objective truth because that could change. Whereas objective truths are unchanging. So I think weWill Wright:I love that.Teresa Morris:Use that term way too freely. And I think that if we just say, we're going to reserve the term objective truth for things that are unchanging, it actually frees us to then distinguish between things that are. subjective and they can be subjectively true and something can be true and not be an objective truth. So I think that the difference between, so I think that's important. And then the difference between subjective versus relative. Subjective just means it pertains to the subject. So things that pertain to the subject can change, right? My preferences can change. But that's different than saying something is relative. Something is relative just means like It's just relative to the person and there's nothing objective that will ever be responded to. So it's just what's true for you and that's different than what's true for me or what you think is good is fine. You know, what makes you happy or what you think is beautiful or whatever is totally different. It's relative. We don't need to agree. There's no common ground. When we're talking about subjective, I really think that when we speak about the subject, it's a really sacred thing. And this is the philosophy of personalists, the philosophy of JP2. which is that the subject matters, and the subject really matters to God, that it's not just, I'm just an iteration of a human, and I just amWill Wright:Hmm.Teresa Morris:an iteration of flesh and blood, and I'm just equally loved and here I am existing, it's that God uniquely loves each of us as subjects. And Augustine actually, I think in some ways, is the first personalist in this sense because he talks about the subjective nature of the mind. that when we recognize in ourselves a desire to know other things, it leads us towards something objective, right? That I crave beauty or I crave truth, and that leads me to something objective. I go towards something else. But when the mind begins to think of itself, it's already arrived at the answer. So there's something subjective there. Nothing else can touch my mind. It's my own. And so the subject just refers to the person, the subject. and the subject can encounter something objective. The subject could choose to be relative, but those two things are totally distinct. That relative is more a concept, if you would think of like relative in relation to other people, thatWill Wright:Hmm.Teresa Morris:it's just something I think about in terms of society. Things are relative, we can't agree on anything, and there's no common ground, there's no foundation, where a subject is personal. It's what is my experience. of being oriented towards objective truths.Will Wright:I think a lot of the times we use the term relative in directly when we're talking about morality, that it's moral relativism. So one of the things that you mentioned was that objective truth doesn't change ever. I love that, it's very helpful. So how does that square up? And again, maybe this is tangential to our virtue conversation, but I think, I like it, we're gonna keep going. So how does that square up with like scientific truths? things that are observable in nature. For example, the acceleration due to gravity is such here on earth because of the mass of the earth and yada, right?Teresa Morris:Mm-hmm.Will Wright:If we go to a different planet, gravity is gonna be a little different.Teresa Morris:Mm-hmm.Will Wright:But those are still scientifically observable things if the mass, and really what we're saying is that the force exerted because of mass and the electromagnetic. field and all the other things that go into the, I am not a scientist, so I'm way out of my depth here, but my understanding is that the coefficients related to physics exist in such a way as to hold all things together here, but that in some far-flung part of the universe, those coefficients might be totally different, and they might even change. So it seems like a lot of the things that we observe in nature are subject to change. And of course they are because of like entropy and matter being created, not created, it's neither created nor destroyed, but it's changed. So with all of that change, of course there's gonna be a change in composition and like eventually everything's gonna, I guess explode, I don't know, or just drift further apart and go and be frozen. There's all kinds of different theories, but how do we square objective truth when we're not talking about morality with something like a scientific fact because it seems like a lot of people today being scientific See, you know all these things that we learn by science that's truth that's fact But it based on what you said about objective reality not changing that seems to not mesh up at all if that makes senseTeresa Morris:Hmm. I guess I just would not, maybe this is too simple or reductionistic of an answer, but I just don't have a problem in saying that scientific facts don't need to be categorized as objective truths. And I think it goes back to, I really tend to lean towards saying something is objectively true versus an objective truth. And I just think that perhaps they're just far fewer objective truths than maybe we think that there are. And perhaps all of those things just are things that are true in relation to God, right? That like who he is and who we are in front of him. I am a created being. That's an objective truth. That's never going to change. I am loved by my creator. That's an objective truth. That's never going to change. My creator is love itself. That's never going to change. So I think that objective truths have to do more with the nature of God and who we are in relation to him, whereas scientific facts, we can say, are facts that are currently objectively true. And that leaves room for those things to change. And I think that the tendency to identify those as objective truths is a product of the enlightenment, that the enlightenment really pushes us to only trust things that are proven and to say that something that is proven is an objective truth. And I think you can say, yeah, I can prove that this is objectively true, but that might not be true in 200 years, or it might not be true on Mars. And we can alter those things, right? What has been considered true in science 500 years ago, we're like, oh, shoot, that's not actually true. Or it's true in one circumstance and not in another. Or even just saying, you know, 50 years ago, humans can't survive on Mars. That was an objective truth. And that is going to change where it will be true to say that humans can survive on Mars. And so there's that area of scientific fact. I just don't think that we need to say that those are objective truths. I think we can say some things are objectively true and that leaves room for that to change, but we don't need to make them harden fast eternal truths.Will Wright:No, absolutely. And the reason I brought it up is because I have met so many people who are so entrenched in scientific thought, that they think there really is no other source of truth,Teresa Morris:Mm-hmm.Will Wright:which is perhaps a product of the Enlightenment. I think it's even further back than that. But it seems like there's this deep sort of abiding sense that philosophy doesn't matter. And especially metaphysics. I mean, I've spoken to people who I went to college with, for example, who call themselves moral relativists, accept that label. One has a PhD in public health, which I think, you know, like, it would be really important for you to understand philosophy or metaphysics, but he rejects metaphysics. Like he said that in a conversation one day, he said, I don't believe that metaphysics exists.Teresa Morris:HmmWill Wright:I said, well, I don't believe that you exist. Conversation over. No, just kidding. No,Teresa Morris:This is all fakeWill Wright:it was just really hard to wrap my head around that because if we don't have good first principles, if we don't have good philosophical groundings, then there's gonna be things that we see in science where science just becomes completely relative. And I will use thatTeresa Morris:Mm-hmm.Will Wright:word relative because it says, well, this is what I think. And so I'm just sort of gonna manifest the simulation of that. It'sTeresa Morris:Mm-hmm.Will Wright:like looking at the wall of the cave and saying there's the reality and the shadows. So these things, like you said, that were created beings that were loved by our creator, those are unchangingTeresa Morris:Mm-hmm.Will Wright:objective facts. The fact that I'm a man and you're a woman, for example, never going to change. We can try to change it. We can scientifically make all these things. This is why I think that the transgender ideology is so insidious. Is not because. of individual people sort of trying to hoodwink someone. I don't think that's the case at all. I think that they've lost the mooring of philosophy so long ago, I guess not that long ago, 10 years maybe, five, 10 years. But without that philosophical foundation, what's to stop somebody from saying, well, I feel like this, so I'm going to be it. And so I have a lot of compassion for that. I don't have a lot of compassion when it comes to some of the practical concerns that come from, especially related to children, but also adults when it comes to cross-sex hormones and genital mutilation and all these other horrible things that are happening, I think that's inexcusable. But I wonder, because I think this all pertains when we talk about virtue is, how do we approach something like that and push back in a way that's not horribly rude. We don't want to be rude, right? But we also can't back down from something that's important because I've heard a lot of people put it this way. I've heard a lot of people say, well, why do you care so much? You know, it's not it's not you. So what does it matter? And then the other person generally will respond in some iteration of, well, because I care about truth. I just feel like there's something seriously missing from that conversation. There's a huge disconnect between the two.Teresa Morris:Mm-hmm.Will Wright:So anyway, we're probably gonna get this video pulled off of YouTube, but continue.Teresa Morris:Yeah, well I think that the one of the big pieces that's missing from all of these conversations, whether it's a conversation about morality or scientific advancement or any type of medical intervention or whatever, or just the lack of virtue in general in society, is that we've lost a sense of looking to the telos of a thing. So we have removed this teleological view of the world, which is this question of what is something made for? What is it oriented towards? And when we take that away, then really you do provide this permission to do whatever you want, because you're not oriented towards anything, and you don't know what you're made for. So if we are able to return to this teleological vision of humanity, where we recognize where we are. So even just saying, you know, here we are in 2023, what has worked for morality in the past isn't going to necessarily work today. Like it is okay to say we do need a new vision for how to integrate these objective truths. But the truth of what it means to be human has not changed and what human beings are oriented towards has not changed. But I think we've really lost that. And I thinkWill Wright:Hmm.Teresa Morris:I think that was something that the Enlightenment really just rejected was this sense of teleology and you know we're not really oriented towards anything so as long as I can prove that it exists in this moment then that's all that really matters. So this question of what is the goal and what is the purpose of every human being that exists and even to go further and to say that there is a goal and a purpose of every person because some people don't even believe that. And so asking that question first and foremost. And then when it comes to these questions of, you know, medical interventions and transitioning and whatnot, I think it's, you know, some people really are, they really care about truth and the integration of truth in society and the capacity for society to take truth seriously, even just to, you know, be able to put something in front of another person and trust that they're gonna acknowledge that that's there, right, that we've kind of lost this sense of, are we even looking at the same thing? ItWill Wright:Yeah.Teresa Morris:seems like we're not even able to acknowledge that. And that's an important, that's really important to return to a society that can acknowledge that truth exists and that we can agree on it. But also I think perhaps the part that's missing that I think this concept of virtue gives is this sense of, yeah, I care about truth, but I care about my fellow man because we belong to one another. That I'm not an isolated person, I'm made for community, I'm made for relationship. So what is causing an ache in another person, this question of, you know, Who am I? Right? Which is thisWill Wright:Hmm. Fundamental.Teresa Morris:any struggle, right? Yeah, that all of us have this question of gosh, who am I? Am I made for something? What am I made for? I want to know it. And there are all these horrible answers that society gives of, oh, well, maybe if you change this, you'll have this answer and you'll know who you are then. And so I, yes, I care about truth, but I think the deeper response is I really care about the integration of truth in the hearts of my fellow man.Will Wright:Hmm.Teresa Morris:And I want them to have an answer to this question of who am I and an answer to these struggles. And there is an answer, but what's being proposed to them is so flawed. And if we're able to say, actually this answer is present in your being, thatWill Wright:Hmm.Teresa Morris:it's ingrained in your being, you don't need to alter who you are to find this answer that it's already ingrained in your existence. which is a return to metaphysics, I think we would maybe get farther in society because just saying we care about truth, that's good, but it doesn't then look to, okay, but there's still all these people struggling to integrate it. So I think that when we really care about truth, we're also caring about the people who are hearing the truth and able to integrate it into their lives.Will Wright:Well, in a postmodern world where words only have meaning in relation to the words around them, to say, well, I care about what's true, you can have so many providers, whether it's through cowardice or through actually believing this stuff, to say, well, when I have a patient come to me who says that they are actually in point of fact, a man, even though they are biologically a woman, I have to affirm that that's truth. That's their truth. That's what they believe. And so I take them at their word. Now, nowhere in medicine or psychology since its inception have we ever accepted only what the patient says as the criteria for diagnosis, but leaving that aside, and that's a huge problem, but leaving that aside, it's so easy to sort of play this word game. So I think everything you say, I'd absolutely... excuse the pun, I would affirm that. But how do we reintroduce metaphysics into the conversation? Cause I think that's the crux of what you're saying. And I agree. That's what's missing is how do we help people see that there is an objective reality and that things do have an ontological basis in the world. I guess I should, okay, what's ontology? Let's start there. WhatTeresa Morris:Yeah.Will Wright:is an ontological reality? Ontology is one of my favorite words and it's like a will write drinking game with my friends.Teresa Morris:How many? Take a shot every time. Yeah, ontology refers to being. So an ontological view of the world is referring to the being of things. And so the fact that humans are a different type of being than God is, I have a different ontology.Will Wright:and fun words like quiddity.Teresa Morris:so, look at you.Will Wright:I love, I love, I love scholastic terminology. It's fun. Just means..Teresa Morris:It is fun.Will Wright:.. whatness, right? Like what is it? Anyway.Teresa Morris:Yep.Will Wright:Yeah. Super important though. It's cause if we don't know what a thing is, how can we even talk about it? So in a world where the majority, not even the majority, I won't make that claim where a lot of people are rejecting philosophical principles and metaphysics. How can we talk about anything in an intelligent way? So anyway, sorry for that digression, so going back to that first question I asked, how do we reinsert metaphysics back into the conversation in an intelligible way?Teresa Morris:Yeah. Well, what's interesting is like I kind of think metaphysics is sneaking into Social consciousness a little bit if you look at this movement of spirituality You know even just like new age things people are recognizing that there's something beyond the physical going on Even though their answer to that, you know, like astrology or whatever is incorrect There is this desire that people are recognizing in themselves that they're more than just the physical world and that there's something to being human beyond just my physical reality. And I think that's a really beautiful and a really hopeful thing that people are kind of getting into these, really spiritual views of the world. Even if you just look at psychology, psychology is so big right now on how the body retains memories of our experiences. There's something metaphysical to that. where there's something beyond what I'm currently experiencing that my body might be remembering and physically encountering that isn't actually happening to me right now. That's a crazy proposal, but that's in a lot of modern psychology, which just brings us back to this idea that there's something beyond myself. There's something beyond just the fact that I have a body. So I think that... that desire to understand the world in a metaphysical sense, that desire to know that there's something beyond just this is already really present in social consciousness. And I think that's very hopeful. So I think taking that desire, helping people name what that is, right? It's not just like, oh, I want to be able to predict my life three months from now, or I think it's fun to ask people what sign you are. but that there's actually a true desire where that's coming from and saying, name that desire. What is it? What are you really seeking? And once people can name it, then we can kind of start proposing a true response to it. But I think that metaphysics, that view of reality is already sneaking back in. I think you can only stay stuck in a purely materialistic viewpoint for so long before the human... gets tired of it and says, I know there's something more. And so that knowledge and that seeking is already present. And I think that we can just say, okay, yeah, cool. That's great. You're there. You're recognizing this desire. Let's name that and let's orient ourselves to perhaps a more fulfilling answer.Will Wright:Well, even the new atheists who were so popular in the late 90s, early 2000s, like Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris, have gone completely relativistic at this point. I mean, Richard Dawkins being a quite adept biologist, a horrible philosopher. I mean, the God delusion is full of ridiculous things.Teresa Morris:Oh yeah, it's so bad.Will Wright:My favorite one in that is when he says that, I mean, because I mentioned divine simplicity earlier. He gets God completely wrong because he says, look at all the biodiversity. So God must be the most complex being there is. And it's like, no, you're going the wrong way, homie. You go the other direction. He's the most simple being. And that's just basic metaphysics, but he can't wrap his head around it. But now a lot of the things he's putting out there are just completely relativistic. And so I think you're dead right on that. Like you can't live in that materialist naturalist view without doing severe harm to your mind. And I mean that in a very real sense, I mean that literally. Because if we look, like you were saying with the psychological research recently, there's been a lot of work in neuroscience towards what is consciousness.Teresa Morris:Right?Will Wright:And they've made little to no headway over decades because they never will, because the mind is bigger than the brain, come to find out. So it's fascinating that from a scientific standpoint, it's sort of affirming what we've always held. Like for example, the hylomorphic reality of body and soul, that we are more than just our bodies and that our mind is more than just our brains. It's more than just chemicals firing. Cause with the new age things, I have some students who would wear crystals and things like this. And I had a conversation with one girl one day, If you're listening to this, you know who you are and you know, I love you She was like, well, you know, they give off energy.Teresa Morris:Mm-hmm.Will Wright:And the girl next to her goes, that's b******t. You know what she said? Anyway, she was like, that's ridiculous. No way. Come on, the rocks. And I'm like, Yeah, I was gonna say the same thing. And she was like, well, I feel different when I'm, I feel like there's forces around me that are working on me and doing different things in my life. I'm like, yeah, those might be demons. So can you be careful?Teresa Morris:Yeah, be careful.Will Wright:It's not always demons, but there are supernatural forces at work. Angels and demons do exist.Teresa Morris:Mm-hmm.Will Wright:Um, you know, God is real and actually trying to reach her heart. Um, so I told her, I said to her that night, uh, I said that night, I want you to go home and I want you to take off the crystals and just ask God to be present to you in a way that you'll understand that's it. And then just, just maybe lie in bed and just be ready to, to listen. And, uh, she came back a couple of days later and, um, We're back in class in his guitar class, so we weren't doing much of anything. And whatever. Anyway, we wereTeresa Morris:Shout out to Guitar Class.Will Wright:it's a great class. They learned so many things about guitar, but it afforded us time to talk. Anyway, so she didn't have all of her crystal stuff on, andTeresa Morris:Hmm.Will Wright:I was like, what? What's going on with that? And she said, well, God talked to me, so I... I think I shouldn't wear these crystal things anymore because they'reTeresa Morris:I guess.Will Wright:probably not good for me and they're probably just rocks. And I said, that'sTeresa Morris:Aw.Will Wright:awesome. But then that led to another conversation about, you know, the Catholic church teaches what is true. And then the girl who was saying that it's ridiculous that rocks have energy was saying, well, I'm only really Catholic because my parents are Catholic. And how do I know that any of this is true? Everybody else has different religious beliefs. But anyway, all of that to say.Teresa Morris:Good question.Will Wright:in these great conversations, what never came up was the idea that God did not exist. What never came up was the idea that the supernatural didn't exist. Well, that's huge. And so, just to affirm what you were saying, I'm seeing that as well, especially with the teens, is that the idea of atheism is just completely foreign to them. Now, whether that's a pseudo-like neo-paganism, or new age stuff, whatever. I find that very optimistic and heartening as well, because the Catholic Church is really good at evangelizing pagans.Teresa Morris:Yeah,Will Wright:It's kind of our thing, it'sTeresa Morris:historically,Will Wright:what we do. SoTeresa Morris:yeah.Will Wright:I think we need to step it up on that. And like you say,Teresa Morris:Mm-hmm.Will Wright:propose the truth, give words to what people are already experiencing. I love that approach. Because if we just keep fighting... I mean, basically we'd be fighting the culture war until we die.Teresa Morris:Mm-hmm. Right.Will Wright:Um, which I'm not sure what you think about this, but I, I find the culture war to be completely tedious.Teresa Morris:Yeah, and largely unaffected. LikeWill Wright:Hmm.Teresa Morris:I think that we're not really making a ton of headway on it. And it's also, it can I think lead to a lot of naval gazing. We can talk about this at a different time, but I think it can become,Will Wright:No,Teresa Morris:we've become out own gods. I think, if we just are like, yeah, our mission in life is to engage in the culture war, it's like, well then that's about me and how I'm. I'm changing the culture and it's not about, am I actually trusting that Christ can transform someone's heart and actually propose Christ to them and not just constantly be battling sets of ideas and whatnot. But yeah, I think it's so true, I found this as well in teaching younger generations that it's so fascinating because I feel like when I was being taught in high school, there was this huge battle against atheistic ideas. And it's just, we don't really have that now. That there really is, they have this sense of there's something beyond themselves and they are very spiritual. And I think that that's, yeah, it's super hopeful. And even the idea that, you know, like she has these rocks, like she wants something. physical like Catholicism understands that too. That's why we have the Eucharist because Christ is like I get that you guys need physical things like you guys really thrive being able to touch something like you're embodied persons and you know God knows that and he doesn't discount that and how he encounters us so even that you know I think there's something sweet in you know people who want to you know be touching crystals and stuff that there's this sense of yeah I'm embodied and my connection to the divine is somehow through something physical too. And the Eucharist gives that response that, yeah, that's okay. That's actually a really beautiful desire and Christ meets that desire. Yeah,Will Wright:The Catholic, uh, thinker, Louis Bouyer, I paraphrasing him because I don't remember the exact quote, but he said that if the church is only invisible, then that's not the church. And I, I love that because it shows just how embodied Catholicism is, whether it's the Eucharist or whether it's sacramentals or beautiful churches, uh, or God awful modernist concrete buildings that still have the mass offered in them. Um, you know, that's showing that embodiment can go both ways, but it's, it's so utterly true that we are body and soul, uh, like Peter Kreeft says, we're in sold bodies or we're embodied souls. Either way you slice it. We have both. Right. Um, he also makes the interesting, uh, sort of a realization that if we are bodies without souls, then we're zombies. And if we're souls without bodies, then we're ghosts.Teresa Morris:It does, yeah.Will Wright:So, you know, I don't want to be a zombie or a ghost. I'd prefer to be a full real life human being.Teresa Morris:Person, yeah.Will Wright:So practically, tangibly living this out, just kind of returning to this idea of virtue as the mean between two extremes. Let's, because we're nearing around an hour. So let's end by walking through practically with a couple of examples, what this would look like. But before we do that, I just want to make one caveat on the theological virtues, because I think that's really, really important distinction for us and a lot of people don't understand this. The theological virtues of faith, hope, and charity are God's life dwelling within us. We receive them as an indwelling in baptism. Before baptism, they're working around us because God is wooing us to the sacraments. He's drawing us to himself, but we receive them in our soul. as an outpouring of the Holy Spirit in baptism and then amplified and elevated in confirmation But those gifts of faith to know the faith to know the things of God what is revealed hope to the sure and certain hope of heaven if we are Friends of God and doing what he says following his commandments as Jesus says and then charity Which is the only one that will remain in the end is the very love of God the glue that holds all things together the ground of being itself Faith, hope and charity are not something that you and I can grow in on our own. We cannot practice them like we do the rest of the virtues. They are a gift to be used or squandered. And the way that we increase in them is by asking for more of them. So if we use those gifts that we've been given of faith, hope and charity well, and we ask God for a greater share in His divine life, and we're living life for virtue, then He'll give us more faith, hope and charity. And this can keep going forever. And this is the growth in holiness. But the other virtues, the cardinal virtues so-called, because cardine means hinge in Latin, so all the other virtues hinge on temperance, justice, fortitude, and prudence. And those four cardinal virtues sort of are something that we can work on. We are able to intentionally enter into them daily, habitually, firmly. Disposing ourselves to the good and working on them and all of the moral virtues Sort of come underneath those. So like for example justice has a sub virtue, which is piety which has another sub virtue, which is patriotism or Love of father and mother so like the cardinal virtues are here and then all the moral virtues sort of branch off from those So I feel like that's super important to just at least mention is the theological virtues. We can't grow in them on our own We receive more of them, we ask for more of them. But when it comes to the cardinal virtues and the moral virtues, let's just walk through a couple of examples of those. So generosity, for example, what would the excess and deficiency of generosity be?Teresa Morris:Mm-hmm. Yeah, so again, like generosity is this mean between two extremes. So it's like this middle ground. So the access of generosity would be, you know, giving way too much of your time, having no boundaries, giving, giving too much of your time or your belongings or whatever. And, and, and yeah, being overly giving the deficiency would be like scrupulosity, like you're not giving anything, you're being stingy. And so you want this middle ground of an adequate understanding of what you can give and giving adequately from that place. One thing I do want to mention, even as I'm talking about this, it's easy to talk about excess and deficiency by saying an excess is too much of something, a deficiency is not enough. But when we're looking at virtue as a mean between these extremes, the mean, it's the same concept as in math where it's an average of something. And if something's an average, you cannot max it out. So you can't actually have too much of an average. That doesn't make sense. So I'm using these terms of like, you're being too generous, you're not being generous enough. But if you're actually virtuous, it's not possible to be too virtuous because you're already in the realm of a mean. So it's actually not possible to be too generous or too courageous or too kind that if you actually are in a place where it's no longer generosity, it's not actually that it's too generous, it's something else entirely.Will Wright:Well, and that goes back to what you were saying about it being a subjective instantiation of virtue, right? That it's going to depend on the circumstances. So to give a little bit more flesh to the generosity thing, if I have $10 that I'm making on a given day and I owe $5 to pay my bills and house my family and I have to pay $2 for food, obviously this is like pre-Biden's America. Um, sorry, was that too political? Anyway. let's say inflationTeresa Morris:Timestamp.Will Wright:before terrible inflation anyway. So $5 for housing, $2 for food, and then I've got $3 leftover and say I give $2 of that to the church for tithing and $1 to feed a homeless person who I see on the way home. That would be well ordered because I'm paying my bills. I'm fulfilling my duties as afather and husband, right? Now, if I'm going home and I, take my $10 and I give all of it to that homeless person I encountered on the way home, that's not generosity. That's that'sfoolish. Thatwould be the deficient. That would be the excess, right? It's nolonger generosity, because I'm actually not fulfilling my duty to my family.Teresa Morris:Right.Will Wright:I'm not paying my bills, which are just I'm not feeding my family, which is my obligation. So I think that that's theright way to look at it is what you're saying is that That's no longer generosity. That's something else entirely.Teresa Morris:Right.Will Wright:That's extravagance in a sense.Teresa Morris:Yeah, which then goes back to this point about what type of person do I want to be? It's not just this set of rules of this is what I should do in these circumstances. It's who am I, right? So if someone is a father and a husband, there are certain duties that come with that. And so it's not just, you know, whereas if that was me, you know, if as a single person, I have more capacity to, you know, give to people in need because I don't have these corresponding duties to the type person that I'm currently called to be. So again, it is the subjective sense of things, but when you're subjectively living it, you have to look at who am I called to be in this moment or in this season of my life and what are the duties that come with that. I think another example that I love giving, which I think is kind of fun is, I think it's Aquinas talks about pleasantness being the virtue corresponding to like playing games. or sports, which I think could also be sportsman-like conduct is sort of the virtue. And so if you have too much of that, if you're in excess, that would be something like being a pushover. You're not actually competing and it's not really fun because you're just letting people walk all over you and you're not really being competitive, you're not trying. The deficiency of that would be something like unsportsman-like conduct or being a bully and your entire goal is just to dominate. and to win and you're not actually engaging in healthy competition. So that's a fun one too if you just think about playing a sport or being in competitions at work or whatever that's fun and you know when it's pleasant and you know when you're like I just don't want to be around this person. This has become something else entirely. We're not actually engaging as persons andit's no longer pleasant because people aren't being, aren't conducting themselves well. So that's also a fun one.Will Wright:Yeah, there's a lot of moral virtues. There's actually quite a few. So we can go through 18 of these and still not be done. So I think we've kind of hit the main points. But as a kind of final thought, I would just say, you know, because there's so many, we can't intentionally focus on all of them.So what's the best strategy to grow in virtue? Because it needs to be something that's intentional. We're striving for excellence. But we also don't want to go to the access of even that, right? Of wanting to grow in virtue. This idea of, I guess that would be fortitude, maybe even prudence, temperance. Really it's all of them, justice.Teresa Morris:Two million.Will Wright:I mean, all the cardinal virtues come into play in what I'm suggesting here. So what's a, what's a practical way that we can move forward in a life of virtue?Teresa Morris:Mm-hmm. One of the things I always talk to my students about when I'm first introducing this idea because it can it can seem either overwhelming or super exciting where you're like, oh my gosh Yeah, I really want to be a virtuous person and then it can become sort of a self-help thing where it's like I got to change my whole life and you know, I'm gonna be I'm gonna dominate I'm gonna be like the best virtuous personWill Wright:Be the best version of yourself... Sorry... Hate that phrase. Anyway, we're not talking about that right now. I feel like every conversation video I'm dunking on some famous Catholic person. I'm sorry, Matthew KellyTeresa Morris:We l

This chat arose from a twitter spat with P. Prime over whether Orthodoxy accepts inherited guilt. As a result, we had a 3 hour chat with many others covering the topic of how the effects of Adam's sin are distinct from the guilt of his sin.

Tonight 'In Focus', the Biden regime has been ordered to turn over emails that could expose their corruption even further than what we already know. Also, we will discuss how the Pelagian heresy is killing people. Plus, a teacher in Ireland has been arrested after he refused to call a trans student by their preferred pronouns.And, AOC makes her big GQ debut and her boyfriend Alex Stein will join us to share his thoughts.

We continue our study showing how Paul fought for the true Gospel at the Jerusalem Council, taking an in-depth look at the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15, and harmonising it with Galatians 2. We also review other challenges to the Gospel of Grace that took place later in Church history, such as the Pelagian heresy and modern liberalism. Finally, we note how Paul was no respecter of persons. Although he honoured the original apostles as true apostles of Christ, he insisted that as men, they were capable of being wrong, and so were not above judgment and accountability.

We continue our study showing how Paul fought for the true Gospel at the Jerusalem Council, taking an in-depth look at the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15, and harmonising it with Galatians 2. We also review other challenges to the Gospel of Grace that took place later in Church history, such as the Pelagian heresy and modern liberalism. Finally, we note how Paul was no respecter of persons. Although he honoured the original apostles as true apostles of Christ, he insisted that as men, they were capable of being wrong, and so were not above judgment and accountability.

Although Charles Finney received sharp criticism in his day, his methods for evangelism became the norm in America. Today, R.C. Sproul describes Finney's dangerous views of humanity which continue to infiltrate the church to this day. Get R.C. Sproul's Teaching Series 'Willing to Believe' on DVD with the Digital Study Guide for Your Gift of Any Amount: https://gift.renewingyourmind.org/2302/willing-to-believe Don't forget to make RenewingYourMind.org your home for daily in-depth Bible study and Christian resources.

In this episode, I close out my rants on Provisionism with a summary critique. If Leighton Flowers and his provisionists followers want to object to provisionism being compared to Pelagianism, they need to specifically outline the distinctions between their view and Pelagianism. They also need to account for why they defend Pelagius and condemn Augustine. Finally, they need to explain why they platform unorthodox Christians who claim that Pelagianism is little more than a myth, a theological construct created by Pelagius' opponents in order to proper up their own theology. What's more, they need to explain why such a creation was necessary if there really wasn't a Pelagian kind of movement from the start.

"I advise you not to be too deeply disturbed by these scandals, because their coming was foretold so that, when they came, we might remember that they had been foretold and might not be greatly troubled by them." ”Augustine's correspondence, the mark and expression of the influential personality and apostolic zeal of the author, is rich in historical, philosophical, theological, exegetical, spiritual, literary, and autobiographical content” (Agostino Trapè). In this letter (Letter 208), he exhorts a Christian woman not to be scandalized by the faults of Christians and their pastors, and to remain within the unity of the Church despite the sins of its members. The extant correspondence of St. Augustine includes more than 270 letters, including well over 200 written by him. Those numbered 124-231 span the period from the conference between Catholic and Donatist bishops held in 411, and the rise of the Pelagian heresy, until Augustine's death in 430. Links Letter to the Lady Felicia (Letter 208) full text: https://verbum.com/product/120439/saint-augustine-letters-vol-v Alternate translation freely available at Catholic Culture: https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/fathers/view.cfm?recnum=3133##  Go to http://www.catholicculture.org/getaudio to register for FREE access to the full archive of audiobooks beyond the most recent 15 episodes. Donate at: http://www.catholicculture.org/donate/audio Theme music: 2 Part Invention, composed by Mark Christopher Brandt, performed by Thomas Mirus. ©️2019 Heart of the Lion Publishing Co./BMI. All rights reserved.

Responded to a great email with eschatology questions. -Addressed the binding of Satan.-Addressed the Pelagian comments of -EION Tactics--Addressed Ephesians 1 and predestination and election.-Addressed Acts 13-48.-Addressed John 6-35-44. -Addressed the practicality of theology and how it helps us when things go against us, when things go for us, and how knowing God is absolutely sovereign gives us confidence and an anchor for the future.

In this episode, we look at Dr. Alister McGrath's description of the Pelagian controversy. Then we begin a study of Pelagius himself, by starting to read a letter he wrote in 413. Hopefully this helps us see the benefit of looking at primary sources when we look at a topic like this, instead of depending on the opinion of others and secondary sources.

Augustine & the Pelagian Controversy - Part 1This audio is a production of The Ardent Archives. The Ardent Archives is a ministry of North Clay Baptist Church. For more information, please visit our website at www.northclay.orgThis book is in the public domain and is not copyrighted. You can find a free copy of this book at https://www.monergism.com/augustine-and-pelagian-controversy-ebook

Augustine & the Pelagian Controversy - Part 2This audio is a production of The Ardent Archives. The Ardent Archives is a ministry of North Clay Baptist Church. For more information, please visit our website at www.northclay.orgThis book is in the public domain and is not copyrighted. You can find a free copy of this book at https://www.monergism.com/augustine-and-pelagian-controversy-ebook

Augustine & the Pelagian Controversy - Part 3This audio is a production of The Ardent Archives. The Ardent Archives is a ministry of North Clay Baptist Church. For more information, please visit our website at www.northclay.orgThis book is in the public domain and is not copyrighted. You can find a free copy of this book at https://www.monergism.com/augustine-and-pelagian-controversy-ebook

Augustine & the Pelagian Controversy - Part 4This audio is a production of The Ardent Archives. The Ardent Archives is a ministry of North Clay Baptist Church. For more information, please visit our website at www.northclay.orgThis book is in the public domain and is not copyrighted. You can find a free copy of this book at https://www.monergism.com/augustine-and-pelagian-controversy-ebook

Augustine & the Pelagian Controversy - Discussion 1 (Introduction)This audio is a production of The Ardent Archives. The Ardent Archives is a ministry of North Clay Baptist Church. For more information, please visit our website at www.northclay.orgThis book is in the public domain and is not copyrighted. You can find a free copy of this book at https://www.monergism.com/augustine-and-pelagian-controversy-ebook

Augustine & the Pelagian Controversy - Discussion 2 (The Controversy)This audio is a production of The Ardent Archives. The Ardent Archives is a ministry of North Clay Baptist Church. For more information, please visit our website at www.northclay.orgThis book is in the public domain and is not copyrighted. You can find a free copy of this book at https://www.monergism.com/augustine-and-pelagian-controversy-ebook

Augustine & the Pelagian Controversy - Discussion 3 (The Ongoing Controversy)This audio is a production of The Ardent Archives. The Ardent Archives is a ministry of North Clay Baptist Church. For more information, please visit our website at www.northclay.orgThis book is in the public domain and is not copyrighted. You can find a free copy of this book at https://www.monergism.com/augustine-and-pelagian-controversy-ebookInstitutes of the Christian Religion, by John Calvin coming Fall 2022!

Augustine & the Pelagian Controversy - Discussion 3 This audio is a production of The Ardent Archives. The Ardent Archives is a ministry of North Clay Baptist Church. For more information, please visit our website at www.northclay.org This book is in the public domain and is not copyrighted. You can find a free copy of this book at https://www.monergism.com/augustine-and-pelagian-controversy-ebook Institutes of the Christian Religion, by John Calvin coming Fall 2022!

Augustine & the Pelagian Controversy - Discussion 2 This audio is a production of The Ardent Archives. The Ardent Archives is a ministry of North Clay Baptist Church. For more information, please visit our website at www.northclay.org This book is in the public domain and is not copyrighted. You can find a free copy of this book at https://www.monergism.com/augustine-and-pelagian-controversy-ebook

Augustine & the Pelagian Controversy - Discussion 1 This audio is a production of The Ardent Archives. The Ardent Archives is a ministry of North Clay Baptist Church. For more information, please visit our website at www.northclay.org This book is in the public domain and is not copyrighted. You can find a free copy of this book at https://www.monergism.com/augustine-and-pelagian-controversy-ebook

Augustine & the Pelagian Controversy - Part 4 This audio is a production of The Ardent Archives. The Ardent Archives is a ministry of North Clay Baptist Church. For more information, please visit our website at www.northclay.org This book is in the public domain and is not copyrighted. You can find a free copy of this book at https://www.monergism.com/augustine-and-pelagian-controversy-ebook

Augustine & the Pelagian Controversy - Part 3 This audio is a production of The Ardent Archives. The Ardent Archives is a ministry of North Clay Baptist Church. For more information, please visit our website at www.northclay.org This book is in the public domain and is not copyrighted. You can find a free copy of this book at https://www.monergism.com/augustine-and-pelagian-controversy-ebook

Augustine & the Pelagian Controversy - Part 2 This audio is a production of The Ardent Archives. The Ardent Archives is a ministry of North Clay Baptist Church. For more information, please visit our website at www.northclay.org This book is in the public domain and is not copyrighted. You can find a free copy of this book at https://www.monergism.com/augustine-and-pelagian-controversy-ebook

Augustine & the Pelagian Controversy - Part 1 This audio is a production of The Ardent Archives. The Ardent Archives is a ministry of North Clay Baptist Church. For more information, please visit our website at www.northclay.org This book is in the public domain and is not copyrighted. You can find a free copy of this book at https://www.monergism.com/augustine-and-pelagian-controversy-ebook

Support Fighting for the Faith Join Our Crew: http://www.piratechristian.com/join-o... Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/PirateChristian Merchandise: https://www.moteefe.com/store/pirate-... Fighting for the Faith Radio Program: http://fightingforthefaith.com Social Media Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/piratechristian Twitter: https://twitter.com/piratechristian Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/piratechris... Video Sermons https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3F7... Sermons http://www.kongsvingerchurch.org/sermons Sunday Schools http://www.kongsvingerchurch.org/bibl... Bible Software Used in this Video: https://www.accordancebible.com Video Editing Software: https://adobe.ly/2W9lyNa Scripture quotations are from The ESV® Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®), copyright © 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved. Outro Music: https://youtu.be/_3eQMbHc37g