Podcasts about pelagian

In Episode 499 of the Reformed Brotherhood, Tony Arsenal and Jesse Schwamb conclude their extended study of Matthew 25 with a close examination of the Sheep and Goats passage (vv. 31–46). The conversation tackles one of the most frequently misread sections in the Gospels — a text often weaponized for works-righteousness or social-justice reductionism — and recovers its deeply Reformed, gospel-saturated meaning. The hosts argue that the works displayed at the final judgment are not meritorious currency but the spontaneous, unselfconscious fruit of transformed hearts. They explore the significance of the sheep's surprise, the inheritance language of the kingdom, unconditional election, and the precise meaning of "the least of these." The result is a theologically rich, pastorally grounding episode that offers genuine assurance to believers while calling the church to practical, ordinary mercy toward its own members. Key Takeaways Works at the final judgment reveal identity, not merit. The sheep are on the right because they are sheep — not because their accumulated deeds earned them a place. Their works flow from a renewed nature, not toward a threshold they must clear. The righteous are surprised — and that surprise is theologically decisive. If the sheep were consciously stacking up merit for judgment, they would have kept careful ledgers. Their inability to recall their own works demolishes any works-righteousness reading of the passage. Inheritance is not wages. Jesus' use of the word "inherit" signals that the kingdom is received by virtue of relationship, not performance — a point reinforced by Paul in Romans 8 and Galatians 4. Election precedes and grounds the works. The kingdom was prepared "before the foundation of the world," meaning the deepest cause of the sheep's blessedness long predates any of their deeds. Works are downstream of grace, never upstream. "The least of these" refers primarily to fellow believers, not to the poor in general. The phrase "my brothers" in verse 40 narrows the referent to members of Christ's body — those who belong to him by adoption, faith, and union with Christ. There is no two-stage justification. The final judgment is not a second review of whether one has done enough. It is a reassertion of the righteousness of Christ already imputed to believers — a public vindication, not a fresh assessment. Practical, ordinary mercy toward the church is the mark of kingdom membership. The six works listed — feeding, giving drink, hospitality, clothing, visiting the sick, visiting the imprisoned — are not heroic or extraordinary. They are the unglamorous, costly, consistent kindness that flows naturally from those who have been made new. Key Concepts The Surprise of the Righteous: A Devastation of Works-Righteousness One of the most theologically loaded moments in Matthew 25:31–46 is the reaction of the righteous at the judgment: "Lord, when did we see you?" They are not feigning humility. They genuinely do not remember. As Jesse Schwamb notes in this episode, this surprise is "devastating to a works-righteousness reading of the passage" — because anyone consciously building a merit ledger would have kept meticulous records. The sheep kept none. Their works flowed so naturally and unselfconsciously from hearts already made new by the Spirit that those works barely registered as remarkable. This is precisely what the Reformed doctrine of sanctification predicts: truly gracious affections issue in Christian practice as the spontaneous fruit of a transformed nature — as natural as a good tree producing good fruit. The works are real, the works matter, but they are not calculated. They are evidence, not currency. Inheritance, Election, and the Order of Grace Jesus does not tell the sheep they earned the kingdom. He tells them to inherit it — and he specifies that it was prepared for them "from the foundation of the world." These two details together form a nearly complete statement of Reformed soteriology embedded in the judgment scene itself. Inheritance, as both Paul and Jesus make clear, is received through relationship and not through performance. An heir does not negotiate terms; an heir receives by virtue of who they are in relation to the testator. Layered on top of this is the language of eternal, unconditional election: the kingdom's preparation predates all human works, good or bad. There is no "looking down the corridor of foreseen merit" here. The sheep's blessedness has its deepest root in the sovereign grace of God exercised in eternity past — which means their works, however real and meaningful, can never be the ground of their standing before the King. "The Least of These": The Church as the Primary Referent A significant and often overlooked interpretive question in Matthew 25 is the identity of "the least of these my brothers" (v. 40). The episode argues, in line with the dominant Reformed and historical reading, that this phrase refers primarily to fellow believers — members of Christ's body who are suffering, vulnerable, or marginalized within the community of faith. The word "brothers" is not incidental. It places the referent in a specific covenantal and familial relationship with Christ. This does not exclude broader applications of mercy — the hosts acknowledge that the principle may extend centrifugally outward — but the center of the text is the church's care for its own. This reading is consistent with Galatians 6:10 ("do good to all people, especially the household of faith"), with Acts 9 (where persecuting the church is persecuting Christ), and with the overall logic of the passage, in which belonging to the King is the decisive category. Memorable Quotes Their works flowed so naturally and unselfconsciously from a renewed heart that they scarcely remembered them, let alone regarded them as currency for salvation. — Jesse Schwamb Sheep are put on the right side because they are sheep, and goats are put on the left side because they are goats — not because they act like sheep or because they act like goats. Those characteristics flow from what they are. They don't make them what they are. — Tony Arsenal God provides grace. Now do all that you can do. That's the Christian way to look at things. He has prepared good works in advance for us to walk in. This is not some sort of measurement of whether or not you're in the kingdom. It's a description of what those who are in the kingdom look like and how they behave. — Tony Arsenal Full Transcript [00:00:08] Jesse Schwamb: Welcome to episode 499 of the Reformed Brotherhood. I'm Jesse.  [00:01:13] Tony Arsenal: And I'm Tony, and this is the podcast with ears to hear. Hey, brother.  [00:01:18] Jesse Schwamb: Hey, brother. Well, we're back. We're back in Matthew 25, and if you haven't been tracking with us for a little while, we've, we've talked about all the parables hanging out in Matthew 25. But what we've been talking about recently is this kind of surprise pop quiz, that's redundant, that Jesus kind of gives at the final judgment, and he talks about separating these groups into sheep, into goats, and the sheep aren't shocked that they get into heaven. They're shocked that their quiet, kind of unglamorous kindness apparently got tallied at all. And because all of these good works apparently are done from a heart already made new, have a way of sneaking past even their own doers' notice. But then there's this other group, the goats, and they learn the hard way that they never really did anything for anybody. And it's not a great look when your deeds are just faith's paper trail. And so Jesus has a lot to say to us in this, what we're calling, like, parable adjacent kind of message that he gives. Summarizing these three- Yeah ... great teachings, here comes all of this really direct and explicit instruction about, uh, the final judgment, which by the way is impossible for me now to hear or say without thinking of the final countdown. [00:02:30] Tony Arsenal: The final judgment.  [00:02:32] Jesse Schwamb: I was hope- I was hoping you would sing us into that, and it was beautiful. Yeah. It was fantastic.  I  [00:02:36] Tony Arsenal: try. I  try.  [00:02:37] Jesse Schwamb: So I think on this episode we got a lot to say in our ongoing conversation about this judgment, about these deeds, these works. What are they? What is their purpose, especially for these different groups of sheeps and goats? What's the deal?  [00:02:52] Affirm Deny Segment [00:02:52] Jesse Schwamb: So we'll get to all of that in just a second, but first, it's that blessed and glorious time in every Reformed Brotherhood conversation where we either affirm with something that is something that we really like, think is understated, that's really is not getting the attention, people are sleeping on, or conversely, we deny against something that just isn't that cool, just is not that great. So Tony, are you affirming with something or are you gonna deny against something today?  [00:03:17] Tony Arsenal: I'm affirming with something. I'm not sure how long this has been a thing. I stumbled upon it, uh, a little while ago, and it's been in my affirmations list for a couple weeks. Um, and I'm also not 100% sure that this is available to every Logos Bible user. So those are the caveats.  [00:03:33] Logos Minutes Reading Plans [00:03:33] Tony Arsenal: Um, what I stumbled upon is if you create a reading plan now, instead of saying, "I wanna finish this book by this date or in this number of sessions," uh, you can say, "I wanna finish this book by reading X minutes a day," which is great. Um, it's a, it's a feature that I've, I thought, like, why didn't they have this a long time ago? Because a lot of times you want to sort of set aside a certain amount of time a day. Maybe it's 15, 20 minutes of Bible reading. Maybe it's five minutes of Bible reading. Maybe it's 30 minutes of- Bavinck or Calvin or whatever you're reading. So what you can do now is you tell it the page range or you tell it, "I wanna read the whole book." Uh, you could do, you know, passages or verse ranges or sections of the Bible. And then where you normally in the next screen where it would ask you, uh, how many days you wanna read, how many sessions, or whether you wanna read until a certain date, there's a new option. And so it just divides that up based on the amount of time. What's really slick is it will actually break pages in half. Nice. So, like, if you have a short, um, either a short amount of pages that you wanna read, and it's kinda like I wanna read for two or three minutes a day, and two minutes is not a whole page. I run into this when I'm reading Matthew Henry when I'm preparing for sermons, because for whatever reason, uh, maybe it's just the Logos page pagination, but the pages are really long. Like, a one page of Matthew Henry's commentary will sometimes take, like, 10 or 15 minutes to read, which is obnoxious. Um, I think it's just that the pages are just, like... I don't know, I think it's just long pages. Um, but if you say I wanna read this one page and I wanna read for five minutes a day, it'll actually split the page up, um, into chunks based on the word count and whatnot. And obviously, that five minutes is, it's not calculating how quickly you read, like, uh, Kindle does sometimes when you're doing that.  [00:05:25] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:05:25] Tony Arsenal: Um, so it's basing that on an average reading speed. So if you're a little faster, uh, of a reader, then it'll be, you know, you'll get done a little quicker, and it might take you a little longer if you're slower. But it's a really slick feature, and I think it's, like I said, I think most of us If we wanna be diligent to read whatever it is we're reading, whether it's the Bible or other theological works, um, we want to set aside time, and we wanna sorta time block. We've talked a lot about productivity, um, in this podcast. We wanna, like, time block our time so it's protected and it's, it's set aside for that task or for that purpose, and this is a great way to do it. So you just put it on your calendar. You say, "I've got 15 minutes that's set aside to read the Bible in the morning, and I know that it's gonna be a digestible chunk." And then it's a, you know, it's no longer a, a date-bound reading plan, so there's no falling behind. If you miss a day, it just means you pick up the next day. Right. So it's a great way to do it. Again, not that there's anything wrong with time-bound reading plans or deadlines, but it's a little bit of a different way to make sure that you're getting into the Word or whatever book you're reading, uh, consistently. [00:06:30] Jesse Schwamb: That's definitely a feature that I think people are sleeping on in Logos. I have that too, so I don't know if, like you said, it is d- coupled with some kind of particular package or dependent on that.  [00:06:40] Stress Free Reading Habits [00:06:40] Jesse Schwamb: But generally, I think maybe we haven't spoken enough about, like, just making what- whatever it looks like, stress-free reading plans, because I was also reading some stuff by Ryan Holiday recently, and just the reminder of how there really is a fair amount of time to read, to actually consume, like- Yeah good written material. And really, it's maybe a little bit more about how, like, we understand walking and the benefits of walking now. You don't need to, like, set aside 20 or 30 minutes to go for a walk. Even going for, like, a quick burst of three to five minutes is so happy and healthful for you. And so I think- Yeah that in the same way, we actually do have more time to read than we think, and if you wanna, like, consume material and learn more things or just become more meditative in your thoughts spiritually, I think if you create the plan, that's just another thing to, like, help you on the way. But it's gotta be one that's, like, stress-free, like you're saying, and that's what I like about the Logos. You just set it up, and every time you go back into it, it's kinda asynchronous, and so, like, it just starts you off with wherever you're at. It's never gonna, like, pop up and be like, "You missed a day, and now you owe me 60 pages." Yeah. "Get on the ground and give it to me." Like, it's, it's not gonna be like that. So I love the joy of having the plan before you, and then that means that when the time comes, you're like, "Oh, I got a couple minutes," you can just go there. It can guide you into that reading, like, easily, succinctly, with low barriers, and make you feel happy and feel, like, that joy of reading again.  [00:08:04] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah, I, I think it's great. And, you know, I think sometimes we fall into this trap, and you kind of alluded to it. Like, you fall into this trap that if you don't, uh, if you don't have, like, 20, 30 minutes to sit and read, that it's not worth it. Right. Right. And I know I used to fall into that trap, where I felt like if I didn't sit down and read an entire chapter, that I somehow was not actually, like, getting the material. But I think most of us have some sort of regular, uh, like, waste time. Uh, and what I mean is, like, for me, I ride the bus home every, like, every day. Most days I ride the bus home, and I know that's about a 25, 30-minute period of time that, um, I can choose to, like, scroll Twitter, and that's fine. Like, it's fine to do that. I can listen to podcasts. Um, I can do all sorts of stuff. I play video games on my tablet. Um, or I could set aside 15 of those minutes and have a p- sort of a preset reading. And you will be surprised, or maybe you won't. Maybe I'm the only one who's been surprised at this, but I think you'll be surprised uh, to find how quickly you actually move through material, even at- Right something like five minutes a day. So just for example, Joel Beeke's, uh, Systematic Theology Volume 1 is about 28 hours worth of reading, at least according to Logos. If you set aside 15 minutes per day, you will finish that reading in approximately 114 sessions. So that's not that long. That's not bad. That's like a third of a year. That's not bad, yeah. So you could, you could read through all of Joel Beeke, which is thousands of pages. I mean, we're talking, we're talking four, four different five or 600 page volumes. Um, and this, this actually is counting, like, the table of contents and the index, so, like, not all of it is what you're gonna read. You could read through that whole thing in under a year and a half if you just set aside 10 or 15 minutes. Um, and obviously if you have more time, maybe you have a 45 minute, um, bus ride home or, you know, you, you regularly have doctor's appointments and you know you're gonna be in the waiting room two days a week every week or something like that, this is a great way to just make sure you've got something set aside. Like your dad always says, you always say, like, "Bring a book." Well- That's right ... this is not only bring a book, but it's bring a book with like a s- like a set chunk of that book set aside for that time period. So maybe it's your lunch break, maybe it's the walk in from the bus stop, whatever it is. Um, I think it's, it's pretty straightforward. And all the old features, like all the old ways of setting up reading plans are still there. They're not eliminating those. Um, and this is just a great way, I think, to get, kind of get your reps in. Like, sometimes you just have to do the work and- Right ... get your reps in.  [00:10:45] Jesse Schwamb: Get it.  [00:10:45] Tony Arsenal: And this is a low pressure, this is a low pressure way to do it. It's not, um, it's not setting aside specific amounts of, uh, dates or anything like that. So yeah, check it out. It's, it's super easy to access, it's the same way you would always make a reading, um, like a reading goal. Um, and you actually can still set a regular reading schedule even with this feature. You could still say, "I wanna read Monday, Wednesday, Friday." You could say, "I don't wanna have a schedule at all," which means you just, when you click on it, it just brings you to the next section, but there's never any reminders. So they actually really are, like, expanding the way that, uh, you're able to generate these reading plans. The one thing I wish they had that I'm not sure why they don't, I wish they had a dynamic catch-up feature where, like, if you were... You know, let's say I wanted to finish this book and I wanted to finish it by, I don't know, the end of the year, and I missed a couple days or I missed a week, I wish there was a way to push a button and have it just redistribute the remaining readings out across- Right ... what's left of the reading plan. That's not there. That's a... If you're listening, Logos, or someone who works at Logos, that's what we need. I've told you that before. Why haven't you listened to me? But, um, uh, yeah, we need that. But th- this is a good start too, because again, it's, it's not, um- It's not making you do a deadline. Right. So it's much more relaxed paced. [00:11:59] Jesse Schwamb: Exactly. Exactly. That's one of the things I love about it.  [00:12:03] Burst Reading Benefits [00:12:03] Jesse Schwamb: Uh, let me make, like, one more plea if you're, like, like you're listening and you're unconvinced about this burst style reading, and that is I've been so convinced that that kind of consumption can be really helpful to processing reading. Because especially if it's like, say you're reading something of the Puritans or something relatively deep, there is something to be said of course for, like, being able to sit down if you have all this time and just kind of read to get the flow. But what I think even there I struggle with is some things are worth stopping and thinking about, and this forces- Yeah ... some kind of meditation that happens in the background anyway, and I've found that to be so helpful. Like, it kind of just creates a little bit of attentional space by way of making you walk away from the thing that you just read. And also, if you know that you've only got this short little time span available, I think I'm prone to read kind of in a different way with a little bit more focus.  [00:12:52] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:12:53] Jesse Schwamb: And then I find myself really thinking about some of those things. And some of the things that you and I talk about, the things that we love to read, are worth stopping and considering. And so it's too easy to be like, "Well, I just, I need to hit the page number. I gotta get the count in. I wanna get this volume finished." Yeah. And that's great, but at the same time, like presumably, like we read to comprehend, we read to put into practice, we read to, like, help us build wisdom and to process the world and to understand things in a more robust and profound way, and that can really only happen with that kind of spacing. So this builds in some spacing, so embrace that as I think a feature and not a bug maybe of some good reading.  [00:13:29] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah, it's funny you, you mentioned Ryan Holiday earlier. One of the things I appreciate about his, um, at least most of his books, I've only read the sort of the Stoic Wisdom series, but, um, he keeps his chapters super short. [00:13:40] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah.  [00:13:40] Tony Arsenal: So, like, part of that is sort of the self-help grocery store format that he's, he's going for. Um, not that it's... It's not empty calories, that's not what I'm saying. I think sometimes that is implied there. But he keeps his chapters short, so it's very easy, like, to just pick up. I'm working through Discipline Is Destiny right now. It's the one I'm reading now. It's very easy to just pick it up and be like, "I'm gonna read one chapter," and it's, like, five, 10 minutes long. Um, and the chapters are... They're not identical, but they repeat enough themes that, like, y- you don't need to really, like, sit down and really, like, cram through it to get the concept. Right. But you'll read through and you'll get the concept over and over again. And I actually think the Puritans can... Some of the Puritans can be that same way, where they say the same thing- Right ... slightly differently over and over again. Um, another book that reminds me of that is, um, Knowing Christ by Mark Jones, which we talked, but that's a, it's weird that that's actually kind of an old book now. Um- Right ... I think it's coming up on close to a decade now since it came out. Um, but those chapters are super short, 10, 15 minutes. So this kind of at a burst reading, session reading, rap reading, whatever you wanna call it, it's actually super productive and it's, it is, you're right, it's very good for meditation because you are taking time to do it. You're doing it consistently, so it's kind of, it's kind of like hammering itself into your head. Um, but it's not, it's not so much time that it, you get, like, reading fatigue.  [00:15:01] Jesse Schwamb: Right. Right. Exactly. That's a beautiful thing.  [00:15:04] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:15:05] Jesse Schwamb: I, I agree. Like, it's reading all kinds of ways, but one of the things that Ryan Holiday was recently convicted me of is, like, he talks about how many things he's able to consume. People are always like, "How are you able to read all those books with all the traveling, all the different things, engagements that you have?" And he's like, "Because I just read all the time. I read when I'm-" Right ... waiting at the post office. I read when I have, like, literally three minutes between doing something or picking up a kid, that, that I read." And I don't know, I kinda like that idea. I, I... he's not ashamed to be like, "If that's... If I have 30 seconds, I probably just pull up a book," because I think that that's even- Yeah ... valuable space in which to consume good writing. So, and when I r- I, I, like, subscribe to all, maybe like you, like all these different feeds, all these lists. There are just- Yeah ... so many things I wanna read. My to-read list is so stacked, pun intended, and it's like books of- I know ... all kinds. And then I'm in this space now where I find that as I'm getting older, again, one, like suddenly birds continue to be interesting to me in new ways that I never anticipated, and the second thing is, like, suddenly I wanna read all this history. And so, like, now there's like this whole, where it never really appealed to me before, now there's like this, all this new, like, vistas opened up, and I'm like, "Who has time for this?" So- Yeah ... maybe the idea is to just, again, consume it in bites. And I'm beginning to really appreciate that as an effective strategy for not, like, re- necessarily reading more, but learning more, and learning it better. [00:16:26] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. And I actually think it is probably an effective strategy for reading more for most people. I know it has been for me- True ... to just sit down and do, do a few minutes at a time. Um- Just get it ... I've got kids, there's work to do. Like, it's, y- you're not gonna be able to... Most, I think most of our listeners are probably not in a- stage of life anymore where you can really devote hours to study like you maybe you could when you were in your 20s, where you just- Right you had a job and you didn't have much else responsibility. You, you just, you know, you just had things to do. Uh, it's not like that for most of us anymore. So being able to take five, 10 minutes and, and read a book is probably a luxury, but it's probably a luxury that we could, we could probably structure our lives and make that more of a reality. Right. And this feature in Logos will help you do that with really any theological book you can practically think you wanna get your hands on that's available on Logos. So Jesse- Right ... we could talk about reading all night every night, and we- ... love to read, but that's not what this podcast is about today. So why don't you tell us what you're affirming or denying?  [00:17:27] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah.  [00:17:27] Jesse Book Pick Perkins [00:17:27] Jesse Schwamb: Well, now, now I'm gonna switch it up because I had a book, and so, like, it just seems like people are gonna be like, "Oh, of course," and you just rolled right into that. So the quick affirmation is more Puritan stuff, A Perfect Redeemer by William Perkins. That's this week's book, so you should do that. I don't know if it's available on Logos. I presume that it is, and you can set up your own reading plan, and it's beautiful and amazing, and Perkins makes a case that true satisfaction isn't found in things, but in Christ. He tears down all these illusions of self-sufficiency and points us to rest fully in God's grace. It's beautiful. It's glorious. It's practical. It's like 27, to your point, Tony, 27, I think, like, really brief chapters. Perfect for the bus. Like, it's prime bus reading.  [00:18:05] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:18:06] Jesse Schwamb: So yeah, that's affirmation. Okay.  [00:18:07] Denial Dying Guitar Batteries [00:18:07] Jesse Schwamb: Here's a denial, 'cause I've rarely do denials, but as you were speaking I was reminded of one that came up this morning that maybe is only going to really resonate with a small group, but I think if you know, you know. I was actually, this denial was constructed out of a conversation I had with a dear brother this morning, who I think was sharing the denial with me, uh, but might have been suspicious entirely of what I was going after. But it's this. A lot of, I'm trying to think how to set this up properly so it's, like, explained to a wider audience. So a lot of guitar instruments, that's a weird way to say this, but, like, I'm talking about guitars that have to be plugged in, have some kind of, like, onboard electronics. But principally, like, electric instruments. I'm talking about, like, electric bass, electric guitar. They usually have what's called, like, a preamp in them, which means that the signal is essentially being set up before it goes to the board, and that process requires some power. And so generally those instruments have, like, a little, you know, battery that goes in them, uh, uh, different kinds. Here's my denial. I don't know why so many of these instruments, including the- most of the ones that I own, have no nothing, no indicator to tell you how close that battery is to dying. And so what happens is- Yeah you, I think every musician, everybody who plays an instrument of, of this nature has had this happen to them, where they need to play it in a critical environment, and then the battery dies. And why I'm denying this is because this came up for me yesterday, where I was, had the benefit of playing at a church event, but it was with my acoustic electric guitar. It, it's a Martin D-16. It's a beautiful guitar. But even the Martin, it doesn't have an indicator on it. And so, like, I always swap out the battery, which I think is probably pretty wasteful, because I knew I had to leave this guitar plugged in on stage for, like, almost two and a half hours before it was gonna be used, and whenever it's plugged in, it's drawing the power. And so, so many times you get halfway through, you're playing, you're in a worship set or you're making music with people, and it just goes out on you, and when it goes out, there's no way to get the sound back except for, at least in my instrument, you have to unplug it, you have to pop out the battery, you have to put it back in. There's no, nothing discreet about this. There's nothing convenient about this. And there's certainly nothing- ... like, noiseless about that, especially if the person running sound is not being- Doesn't know ... very, like, adept with how they're handling the instrument so that you don't, like, blow people's ears out as you try to replace the battery. So I'm just wondering about this. Like, come on, instrument manufacturers. I know it's probably not pretty to put this somewhere, but you could put it somewhere discreet. Here's what I just wanna say, though, finally. Um, please don't at me. I know that there are some, especially like acoustic electric guitars, Fender's a good example, like onboard Fishman pickups that have, like, the EQ box. Some of them do have this indicator, but not enough. And if it's, like, an electric guitar- Yeah ... I rarely see this on a pure electric guitar. So please, for the love, just put, like, a little light. Maybe, maybe it turns orange or yellow or red when, like, the battery's about to go. I just, I need to know, because it's, it's so nerve-wracking when you're playing and you're like, "Oh, no. When did I last change this battery? How much longer is this thing going to last?"  [00:21:28] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. You know, I'm, I'm wondering, um, maybe I don't know enough about electrical engineering, but I actually feel like being able to determine when a random battery is starting to lose charge is probably a fairly intricate process, so that might be why, like, there's not as many. It's funny, my Ibanez guitar, which I haven't, I haven't even taken out of its case in years, I just don't, don't have a, a, a real occasion for it anymore, um, it has an indicator on it. So it's funny that you say that 'cause, like-  [00:21:59] Jesse Schwamb: Some do  [00:22:00] Tony Arsenal: Not a cheap guitar, but it's, um- Right ... it's not, yeah, it's not like a super expensive guitar. Uh, and it does have a little indicator. It's just like a little blinking light when the battery- Yes ... starts to go, it just blinks. Um, but yeah, even then, it still... It's funny, I, um, when I was in like high school and, and first couple years of college, I helped out with youth ministry at my church quite a bit, and I would often be on the team that would go, like, down to the camp the day before to set up all the equipment and to, like, get everything ready. And I remember I was always, I was always being told like, "Make sure you change the batteries. Make sure you change the batteries." Right. And like- Right ... it was always my job first thing in the morning to go around to all the microphones and all the guitars and, like, change out all the batteries. And I remember thinking, "This is so wasteful." Right. But then I remember, like, the one time we didn't do it, and it, like, crashed in the middle of, like, the big... And again, like, I don't even know if I would support this model of camp ministry anymore, but it crashed in the middle of, like, the big worship set on, like, the, like, the emotional decision- Yeah for Jesus night. Your altar call- It crashed in the middle of it ... totally blown  [00:23:01] Jesse Schwamb: up.  [00:23:01] Tony Arsenal: Yeah, and it, it, and it did. Like, it affected everything. We had to, like, stop and... So yeah, always, always change your batteries. Um, you know, like, I, you, I, when I was doing musical worship on a regular basis, I just had a couple, like, inexpensive rechargeable batteries that I would swap out at the beginning of each session. I would put the battery that was in my guitar into the charger and the battery that was in the charger into my guitar. Um, and those, those wear out over time too, so that- Right ... you know, that, that's not a healthy charging habit for those batteries, and you go through them faster. But it's better than throwing away a nine-volt battery every couple of, you know, couple of days, so. [00:23:37] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah.  [00:23:37] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. That's annoying. It's, it's obnoxious when that happens. Um,  [00:23:40] Jesse Schwamb: that's, that's why I'm just straight denying against it. I suspect that this is a matter of aesthetics, and that many of these manufacturers don't wanna put something as ugly as a light somewhere on this beautiful instrument, even if it's in, like, a discreet place. That's my guess. Yeah,  [00:23:53] Tony Arsenal: maybe.  [00:23:54] Jesse Schwamb: I also theorize, like, why can't there be an intermediary pedal that would help us with this? So, like, many people, including myself, have a tuning pedal which you can essentially bypass, and you, you engage it when you wanna tune. Why can't that draw... I, I think it should be relatively straightforward, but who knows? But either way, all I need is just a heads-up. I don't need like a, "You have, you know, 16% left," or, "You have 2.67 hours left." I just need to know that it's not gonna fail me at this most critical time. Like, just tell me to swap it. That's all, that's all, that's all you have to say. Yeah. Just tell me to swap it. So I'm sure it's more complicated than this, but I think it might be a matter of, of beauty over function and purpose- Maybe ... because-  [00:24:33] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:24:34] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, that's probably- Many, many are particular about that kind of thing Yeah. So anyway- Yeah ... yeah, I, that's maybe... I like what you said, Tony. It's maybe a good PSA. Like, change your batteries often and frequently. Don't be like me. Don't be in that position where all of a sudden, I remember I was leading some very acoustic worship on an evening service. It was a very full congregation, probably, like, 200 people. And, uh, we finished up, and somebody had to yell out, uh, "We can't hear your guitar at all." And I'm just up there playing. [00:25:01] Tony Arsenal: Ugh.  [00:25:01] Jesse Schwamb: And yeah. You know, it's distracting. It's one of those things. But-  [00:25:04] Tony Arsenal: Yeah ...  [00:25:05] Jesse Schwamb: um, in the end... Uh, ironically, some people at the end of that were like, "Well, that was really great. It was much better than usual. We heard a lot less guitar." And I was like- ... "Okay."  [00:25:14] Tony Arsenal: My, um, my Ibanez, I never used it, but my Ibanez has an XLR cable in addition to the quarter-inch- Oh and the XLR provides power to the preamp. So that's- See, there you go ... the real solution is just to have a direct XLR, uh, XLR mic cable that goes in, uh, and then you bypass the direct box. Although then you can't, then you can't go into a tuner or pedal. Yes. So-  [00:25:33] Jesse Schwamb: Exactly ...  [00:25:34] Tony Arsenal: pros and cons. Yeah. But-  [00:25:35] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah. It go- it, it, it's all over the place. But let, let's talk about- Yes ... judgment, shall we? Like, what, what-  [00:25:41] Tony Arsenal: Welcome, welcome to the Reformed Guitar Cast for the  [00:25:43] Jesse Schwamb: night. Yes. E- exactly. We could talk all day about books, reading, reading plans, study plans, productivity, and guitars. These are all beautiful things. And  [00:25:51] Tony Arsenal: batteries and  [00:25:52] Jesse Schwamb: electrics. And batteries. Of which, uh, allegedly you can ha- never have enough of any of those things in that group.  [00:25:57] Tony Arsenal: It's true.  [00:25:58] Back To Matthew 25 Reading [00:25:58] Jesse Schwamb: But let's talk about, uh, judgment. And I suppose we should go back to Matthew 25, which we've been hanging out in quite a bit. And someday we'll move out of this passage. Pro- probably not today, but someday- we will actually get beyond it. And I, I know, I know we're 25 minutes in, but I am gonna read again for all of us because Tony and I, you have been resolute in saying that the best parts of our conversations really are the scripture, hearing them and going through them with great depth and a deliberate kind of measured slowness, which we're unapologetic for. And so let's just go to Matthew 25. I'm gonna read verses 31 through 46 with a f- a fair amount of speed, but enough to get us to the place where again, I just want this to be familiar as we speak about it. "But when the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. And all the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate them one from another as the shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. And he will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom which has been prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry, and you gave me something to eat. I was thirsty, and you gave me something to drink. I was a stranger, and you invited me in, naked, and you clothed me. I was sick, and you visited me. I was in prison, and you came to me.' Then the righteous will answer him saying, "Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? And when did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or naked and clothe you? And when did we see you sick or in prison and come to you?" And the King will answer and say to them, "Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brethren of mine, even the least of them, you did it to me." Then he will also say to those on his left, "Depart from me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat. I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink. I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me." Then they themselves also will answer saying, "Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison and did not take care of you?" Then he will answer them saying, "Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these, least of these, you did not do it to me." And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous unto eternal life  [00:28:27] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:28:29] Heavy Passage Rightly Used [00:28:29] Tony Arsenal: Like we said last week, this is a really kinda heavy passage. Um, and it can be, uh... Let me put it this way. It can be used to make, uh, believers fearful in the wrong way. I, I do think the, the passage is to instill fear of God and is inst- to drive us to good works. But it can be used in a way to sort of, as I mentioned last week, it can be used in a way to sort of say, "If you don't do all these good things and you don't measure up, then Jesus never knew you." Um, and, and it implies, or sometimes even fully says that, uh, Jesus comes to know us because of the good works that we do. Right. Right? And that's just not, um, that's just not Christian theology. That's not Reformed theology certainly. Um, it's, it's not Protestant theology, and it's not even really Roman Catholic theology down. Um, but this passage really is more about understanding what marks the life of a person who has already come to faith in Christ. That's right.  [00:29:30] Justification Not Two Stage [00:29:37] Tony Arsenal: What marks the life of someone who has been changed and transformed, uh, to be like their master, like their king. Um, so, so this passage doesn't try to teach us what we have to do to merit eternal life. Um, this isn't... A- and maybe we'll get into some of this, I don't know if we will or not, but this isn't sort of John Piper future justification, um, you know, on the basis of works, or future sa- salvation on the basis of works. Um, there's no two stages to justification, right? If we're justified, it's because Christ has imputed his righteousness to us. That's right. And what happens in the, in the final judgment, there's a real thing that happens, but it's not an assessment of whether or not we have done enough or been enough. It's the reassertion of the righteousness of Christ over us. So we'll, we'll get into that, we'll talk about it, but I wanted to make sure we set the frame for that, um, before we get into it. 'Cause sometimes when you talk about these passages, it's hard to talk about future judgment according to works, which is a genuine Christian reality, right? There's a future judgment according to works. But it's hard to talk about that without starting to sound a little bit like we're, we're earning our salvation or, like, our, our justification's in, like, sort of a second stage of review or something like that. So we'll, we'll get into that, but this is not, this is not works righteousness, this is not future justification, this is two stages of justification. [00:30:52] Jesse Schwamb: And that seems, like, very clear from the way that Jesus sets this whole up. The language is so beautifully gospelly centered and oriented.  [00:31:00] Inheritance Not Wages [00:31:00] Jesse Schwamb: Even behind the judgment, like, this curtain of judgment, when you, when you open it up, is the gospel in all of its fullness, and that begins with th- this idea of inheriting the kingdom. And inheritance, of course, is not wages. In fact, like, Paul makes this kind of, like, identical move in Romans 8 and in Galatians 4 where he basically emphasizes what Jesus is talking about here. That is, sons and daughters inherit, inherit. They don't earn a paycheck. An heir receives by virtue of relationship and not performance. And that single word is, I think in the judgment of, like, most of the Reformed understanding here, decisive for, like, reading this whole passage correctly. That whatever role these works mention in verses 35 and 36 play, they cannot be meritorious works. It's not the ground of the inheritance, because inheritances by definition are not earned. Yeah.  [00:31:51] Election Before Works [00:31:51] Jesse Schwamb: And then, like, right into the same kind of train of thought, the same line of reasoning, is this idea that, well, not only are you inheriting the kingdom, but all this was prepared for you before the foundation of the world. And here again is, like, the beautiful gospel in the form of this un- you know, eternal, like, unconditional election stated, like, very plainly. Now the kingdom isn't pr- w- was not prepared in response to, like, some kind of foreseen works. I think we talked about that last week, right? Did we talk about the cor- looking down the corridor, all that kind of weird stuff? Yeah.  [00:32:22] Tony Arsenal: Yep.  [00:32:23] Jesse Schwamb: It was prepared in eternity past before any works, like good or bad, had been performed by anyone. And so that's, like, the true answer, in my opinion, to, like, any Pelagian or semi-Pelagian reading of this passage. The deepest cause of the sheep's blessedness long predates their deeds of mercy, and so their works are downstream of election and grace, not upstream of it. That's really good news. Like, that again is the Gospel, that all things are entrusted to, belong to God. God does all the verbs. However you want to say it, what we have here is true grace, and that their works are flowing out of that grace. And so because of that, there's no... It's, like, it would be insanity to boast in them, because that boasting would mean absolutely nothing. And so Jesus sidesteps that altogether by talking about inheriting the kingdom and having this all prepared for us before the foundation of the world. [00:33:15] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:33:15] Kingdom Language Clues [00:33:15] Tony Arsenal: Yeah, and there's some interesting, um, I think some interesting text feature that I just noticed here that, um, I don't wanna read too much into it, but one of the things that's striking about this is the, the language around the sheep or around those on the, um, on the right of the king here. Um, there's much more of a communal, um, kingdom-type language, right? Uh, in the first section where it's talking about those on the right, uh, the word king is used repeatedly.  [00:33:45] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:33:45] Tony Arsenal: Right? And then when you get to the second section on those on the left, the ones that the, the, the righteous son of man does not know, um, it doesn't use the word king. And that's not, of course, not to say that he's not the king of those who are, you know, condemned. He's the king of all. But there is this, this, uh, obviously intentional, uh, choice to use the word king, and what, what is a king if not someone who has a kingdom and a people? Exactly. So there, there even baked into that simple linguistic feature is already this idea that the people he's speaking to are his people. And so, like I said, we've talked about parables and parable-adjacent teaching as kind of being sort of systematic language in story form, systematic theology in story form. Even here, we're seeing election, we're seeing definite atonement, right? The people are his people because he prepared this kingdom for them before the foundation of the world. [00:34:42] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:34:42] Tony Arsenal: Um, and then the, the people who aren't his, they don't even get to be associated with him as king. They don't even beg- get to, get to be associated with his kingdom. They're so far outside of the kingdom of heaven, outside of this kingdom, that even to say that the king is speaking to them is almost like, uh, it's almost like a contradiction, right? So, um- In sort of like common parlance, we might refer to another nation's king as King Charles or, you know, K- King whatever, um, or President so-and-so. But that person is not my king. Right. And so although, like, maybe there's some decorum just in general, and, like, politically it's wise, I'd have no obligation to call King Charles King Charles. Like, I can ... I ... He's not my king. I don't owe any obligation of, of fidelity to him or to his title or to his crown. Another funny example, um, recently, um, you know, I work, uh, at a hospital. We have a spiritual health or chaplaincy department, and there's some Catholic priests who are on staff there. And, um, the, the spiritual health department is part of the care experience group, which is the same group that my patient relations team is part of. And some- someone noticed that at, like, broader team group meetings, I don't refer to them as Father. I'm one of the only people in the room who just says Joakim or, you know, or Sam. Like, I don't ... And they don't mind. It doesn't bother them at all.  [00:36:03] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:36:04] Tony Arsenal: Um, and it's funny because someone asked me that, and I'm like, "Well, they're not my priest, and I, like, I don't acknowledge- Right their status as the Father. Like, there's actually some biblical reasons why I wouldn't do that." I think this is kind of sort of almost like, in a third person perspective, kind of the same thing. Like, the k- king, i- the, the Gospel writer here, Matt, is refusing to use the word king in relation to this Son of Man in relation to these people to say something about them, to say something about those people- Yes who are outside of the kingdom  [00:36:34] Jesse Schwamb: Yes, that's right on. It's a bit like, I suppose, in a, a lesser way, like there was a time... So you're married to my sister. There was a time where you weren't, we weren't Yeah ... uh, and during that time, like I, I was not in your family, nor were you in mine.  [00:36:48] Tony Arsenal: Right.  [00:36:48] Jesse Schwamb: And then at, when you married her, I am part of your family. Like you can't kick me out. As long as you're married to Ashley, I will be part of your family and you part of mine. Right. That's how it works. And so that identity proceeds, like it c- this is like confusion between identity sometimes and I think like harmony, and so many people wanna read this as like some kind of like harmonic reflection of the state of obedience of these persons, and therefore, if they had harmony, then they were in the kingdom, and that's getting it backwards. That they were part of God's kingdom by his family by definition of identity.  [00:37:20] Surprised Righteous Hearts [00:37:20] Jesse Schwamb: So that by the time like we get to verse 37 when Jesus is saying the, the righteous are gonna answer him and they're gonna say, "Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink?" I think that's one of the most like theologically important verses in this passage, which proves the point you just made. And I think it's often under-read because the righteous, they don't remember doing any of these things for Christ. They are surprised. They have like no self-conscious ledger of merit that they can point to, and that surprise I think is devastating to works righteousness reading of the passage because- Yes if these people were consciously stacking up merit to present at the judgment, then they would've kept a very careful account. But instead, their works flowed so naturally and unselfconsciously from a renewed heart that they scarcely remembered them, let alone like regarded them as currency for salvation. And so I think, I know there's been a lot written, you and I have talked about a lot about how people wanna parse this idea of works, understanding that it has some place, but what is that proper place? This I think does lead us into like the right focus in that kind of discussion because it's precisely what like the Reformed doctrine of sanctification would predict, and that is, you know, truly gracious affections I think issue in Christian practice as a reliable sign, hear me out here, but crucially that practice is not calculated or like self-res- referential. It's like the spontaneous fruit of transformed nature, as natural it is for a good tree to bring forth good fruit. And so the righteous in this passage, they're not the legalists that some would, I think, portray them to be or get worried that they are. They're not tallying good deeds. They're simply people who, having been made new, and who makes them new? God in Christ, right, through the power of the Holy Spirit. Because they've been made new, they just could not help but love their neighbor.  [00:39:13] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:39:13] Sheep And Goats Identity [00:39:13] Tony Arsenal: Yeah, and, and you know, I think it's sometimes hard... We, we made the point last week that, um, the, the language in verse 32 where it says, uh, "He," He being the Son of Man, "He will separate one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats," that, that comparative as is the same language that introduces other parables. Right. And so the, the parable, parabolic element of this is a comparison to a shepherd separating two different kinds of animals in his, his bigger flock. Mm-hmm. I made the point that like we should be careful to overread sort of like what sheep are like into the behavior of those who are righteous on the right of Christ here. Um, because sheep are dumb, sheep do stupid things, sheep are disobedient. There, there's no use for like sheep to do good things and goats are not. And productive goats are also productive. Um, so what we should see though is that sheep are put on the right side because they are sheep, and goats are put on the, the left side because they are goats. Um, not because they act like sheep or because they act like goats, right? And so I think, yes, goats and sheep may have thinked behavioral, recognizable behavioral characteristics, but those characteristics flow from what they are. They don't make them what they are.  [00:40:35] Jesse Schwamb: That's right.  [00:40:35] Tony Arsenal: And so I think that's kind of what we see here in the parable, is the people on the, the right, the righteous on the right hand of the, the Son here, of the King as He sits on His glorious throne, the righteous simply do what righteous people do, right? They, they don't ... So much so, and again I think the shock of this is, is sort of the, the path of the teaching. The shock of this, the surprise of this on the part of the righteous are, uh, like it's palpable. And I think that when you actually talk to someone who is ... Think of the most sanctified, holy, righteous Christian you know, right? And I'm not gonna try to tell you who that is, but think of that person and think of a time that you have paid them a compliment or thanked them for doing the right thing.  [00:41:24] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:41:24] Tony Arsenal: They're like, "Oh, I didn't even think about that." Like, it's just not even on, not even on their radar. How many times have you, um, have you done a kind thing for someone at work and they like make a big deal out of it and you're like, "Oh, this is just I thought this is just what we do to each other. I thought we were just kind to each other." Um, and, and f- the flip side of this too is the, uh, the righteous in this parable or in this teaching, they're actually sort of like questioning the Lord's judgment in that they're saying like, "Wait a second, like w- why am I on the right here?" And He's like, "Well, uh, you were h- I was hungry and you fed me, and I, you know, I was thirsty and you gave me drink." And they're like, "When did we do that?" The flip side- Right ... of that is that those on the left, they're trying to justify themselves, right? They're trying to justify themselves, 'cause He's like, "Well, you didn't do these things. You're not my people." And they're like, "Well, when did we see you? When did we see you, when did you have these things happen and we didn't take care of it?" So the, the righteous are like surprised that this happened, and are almost questioning the fact that it's true, and the unrighteous are trying to justify themselves, basically blaming God. Bad judgment. It's not altogether, um... I forget which pro- I wanna say Micah or Malachi, one of those two, um, um, where the, the, um, God basically says, like, "Y- you, you're sinful people." And they're like, "When? When were we sinful people? Like, you tell me." Yeah. And then of course he does, 'cause it's the prophets. Right. But it's the same kind of thing. He comes to the, to the unrighteous in judgment. He says, "Depart from me, y- you cursed people." And then he says, "These are the, these are the things that have marked your life." And then they're like, "Where, when did that mark my life? Like, what are you talking about?" And he, he, the funny part is he doesn't give them an answer. He doesn't explain to them really. Right. He, he just like, "No, you can go, you can go away from me 'cause you." He does say like, "Well, you never, you did not do this to the least of these," and we, we need to unpack that phrase a little bit. But he doesn't give a long explanation to them justifying his judgment. He just makes the statement, basically makes the statement again, "You just didn't do it, so that's the consequence of eternal punishment." Um, again, not in like, "You didn't feed the poor, therefore you're going to hell" kind of a statement. It's more like, "You are not the kind of person that is a, a part of my kingdom." [00:43:48] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:43:49] Tony Arsenal: Without necessarily a firm statement about w- how that came to be, just a statement, "You are not the kind of person that is part of my kingdom." That's  [00:43:56] Jesse Schwamb: right. That's right. I think that's actually very evident in these, like, six concrete works of mercy which are listed, feeding, giving drink, hospitality to strangers, clothing, visiting the sick, uh, visiting the imprisoned. And as we've said before, those are not extraordinary feats. I mean, there's no mention- Right ... of miracles or doctrinal precision or heroic martyrdom. Yeah. It's just these ordinary, super unglamorous ministry of practical love, and I think that is significant, like you're saying, because it is a mark of true faith, this idea that it's found frequently not in spectacular religious performance, which is what some of the audience is probably after, honestly, but in this quiet but costly unnoticed compassion. And I think that is critical to understanding that those who have been identified and marked by Christ undertake these things with a seriousness, under being willing to bear the c- the cross and the curses and the cost of all those things, uh, because it is born out of a transformed life, one that has been re-identified almost as it were a new creation. And so that- Yeah ... created man does these things without putting the notches on the belts, so to speak, to tally them up because I think to that person that would be insane. What is the purpose of doing that? If I can't earn my salvation, I'm doing these things anyway. It, it wouldn't even matter. It's like trying to pay a bill that you have no money for anyway. Why would you then try to count the dollars that you have in your pocket to see if for some reason you could cover the cost? It's impossible. Yeah. And so everything changes to such a degree that I know we keep saying, like, surprised, and that is what is kind of manifested in the passage. But it's, it's not kind of like the shock of like, "I don't know what you're talking about." It's more, it's more this idea of, again, I think those being brought forward at the final judgment, and it's almost as if Jesus is saying, "You are coming into this kingdom- Because, or you are being, uh, allowed, so to speak, to come into my presence in the fullness because you did all those things. And their surprise is almost as to say, "Well, why would those things bring me into the fullness if I've, in fact, have inherited it because you've called me your own?" Does that make sense? Like, I think it's- Yeah ... there's a little bit gone there- Yeah ... that's not just they're kind of like, "Oh, this slipped my mind," or, uh, "It came so easy to me that I didn't even know I was doing it." I think it was more about the g- we should just get to the least of these then, right? Like, what does it mean- Yeah that they did these to the least of these, and how does that surprise fit into that?  [00:46:19] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:46:20] Least Of These Explained [00:46:20] Tony Arsenal: The other element of this that I think is super important for us to cover in the 10 minutes or so we have left. Um, this phrase, "the least of these," right? Yes. And, and this, this can really cause this passage to be misunderstood  Um, I wanna s- loud and clear, uh, taking care of the poor in our society, you know, mercy ministries outside of the church, those things are all good, and I think scripture makes an argument that we should be engaged in those, both individually and also that the church has an obligation to, um, to meet some practical needs of those who are destitute around it. Um, but that's not what this passage is saying, right? Right. So when we look at the phrase "the least" first, first thing that, that comes off here, right, in verse 40 where this phrase first appears, "Truly I say to you, as you did it to the least of these, my brothers, you did it to me." Right? This is not a general statement. The least of these are not, like, the lowest and meekest and poorest of the world. The least of these my brothers referring to those who belong to Christ. Right. Those who are related to me. And, and I actually think that that, that is probably, like, the hallmark of passage. Beyond, um, what we've talked about already of just sort of like not being about works righteousness, this is really about being a part of the church, right? They're marked by the fact that they have inherited this kingdom which was prepared for them before the foundation of the world. They're marked by the fact that, uh, they are the people of this king, so much so that the other people aren't e- the word king can't even appear in association with these other people. And this last part, they're marked by the way they have treated those in whom they are with c- in, in community with, right? They're marked by the way they have treated those who are related to the king by blood, who are adopted, who are married to the king, who are in, in the family of the king, his brothers. [00:48:17] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah. Okay.  [00:48:18] Tony Arsenal: So this is painting a picture of kind of what we see, right? W- we see in, uh, Galatians, right? Um, "Do, do good to all people, especially the household of faith." Mm-hmm. Right? Uh, our own tagline, "Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood," right? That's, that's a statement of like, yes, you're supposed to be kind to all people, but you're especially supposed to be kind and be committed to and taking care of those who are in the household of faith, who are in the church. That is what this passage is about. That is what marks those people who belong to the king. The sheep are part of the sh- part of the sheep because they're in that same flock, because they- Right ... are ontologically, they've been made new and they've been renewed into this new creation as sheep. Um, that's what this passage is getting at. And then the people who, uh, who are not a part of that, they, they have not done anything with the church. They're not associated with the church. They didn't take care of the church. They didn't, they didn't feed the church. They didn't do anything with that. And this, this again, like, think about, like, Acts chapter, you know, when, when, um, when Paul is, when Saul is called by Christ, right? "When did I persecute you?" "Well, you, why are you persecuting me, Saul? Well, you persecuted my people." So this, this passage ties a lot of those same s- same threads together- Yeah ... in a way that I think presents this really cohesive picture of what it is that's going on. This is not works righteousness. Right. [00:49:37] Serving Christ In Church [00:49:37] Tony Arsenal: This is an assessment of the fact that you are, in fact, a m- a member of the people of God, that you have been engrafted into Christ and have become a part of his body. And just as he is our head, we are his body. The people who are cast out, the reason he never knew them is 'cause they've never been engrafted into him. [00:49:55] Jesse Schwamb: Right. Sometimes this does, I think, get read and defined as, like, the all the poor and suffering writ large, which is helpful, but I don't think, like, the dominant view here, at least in my perspective. And you, and you tell me otherwise. Yeah. Because, uh, on this view, of course, like, Christ does identify with all who suffer, and that maybe mercy to any sufferer is mercy to him. I think that could be partly correct, part reflection and application here. However, the stronger view, I think, e- like, even historically, is that- Really we're talking about, especially when we get to, like, visiting those in prison, the, the persecuted or itinerant Christian missionary. When we're talking about the imprisonment and persecution language is, that especially suits believers suffering for the gospel's sake, not merely the poor in general. Now, is, are there ways for us as Christians to embody the gospel and to be a witness for Christ by going out and performing acts of social justice? I would say yes, if you connect those items explicitly to the gospel. That is, that you make it clear your emphasis, genesis, your volition comes through this message of who Christ is. Otherwise, there's plenty of institutions doing very good things, and I don't necessarily, what's in view here i

Title: “Let No One Deceive You” Part 3 Text: 2 Thessalonians 2:9-12 FCF: We often struggle fearing the deception that is to come. Prop: Because all who did not receive the love of the truth will be deceived, we must let no one deceive us. Scripture Intro: [Slide 1] Turn in your bible to 2 Thessalonians chapter 2. In a moment we'll read yet again the text starting in verse 3 and going to verse 12. Today I'll be reading from the Legacy Standard Bible but you can follow along in the pew bible or in whatever version you prefer. You'll notice on the screen that this is part 3 of this sermon. If you have not heard parts 1 and 2, I would encourage you to catch up on the teaching Paul has given regarding the man of lawlessness. The previous two sermons are foundational in understanding what is going on here and how we are to think about the end times. However, the sermon today, although relying on some of the conclusions we've made in the last two sermons, is by far the most standalone of the three. The message today is terrifying. It is gut wrenching. Because it speaks of a time when God is truly done with giving mercy to people who have rejected Him. And although God has done similar things in the past – it has never happened like this and only once on this scale. It is also terrifying because it remains in a context which emphasizes that many of the people who are being discussed here who have rejected God, are those who at one point believed in Him. But as terrifying as this message is – there is hope and comfort in holding fast to saving faith. Let's read once more. Please stand with me to give honor to and focus on the Word of God as it is read. Invocation: Gracious, Merciful, and Holy Father, You have endured the wickedness of men for thousands of years. You are longsuffering, extending mercy to all and allowing men to profane Your name and reject Your Son while You continue to bless them and give them common grace. But one day You will remove Your Restrainer and allow the man of lawlessness to come forth. One day Your mercies will end. One day Your common grace to wicked men will cease. And one day You will judge the world. I pray that even now You would be merciful and gracious to those in this room. Speak now words of comfort to Your people through this text…but Gracious God, send Your Spirit to open the eyes of the blind here and speak words of terror to those who are perishing. We ask this in Jesus' name, Amen. Transition: [Slide 2] ”It is the creed of every sound evangelical church that those who do go back to perdition were persons who never really believed in Jesus.” A.A. Bonar “None sink so far into hell as those that come nearest heaven because they fall from the greatest height.” William Gurnall [Slide 3] “To forsake Christ for the world is to leave a treasure for a trifle…eternity for a moment, reality for a shadow, all things for nothing.” William Jenkyn “To see a ship sink in the harbor of profession is more grievous than if it had perished in the open sea of profaneness.” William Secker [Slide 4] “The essence of apostasy is changing sides from that of the crucified to that of the crucifier.” John Stott “Scripture does not need to be denied for apostasy to begin: all that is needed is that scripture takes second place in our calculations.” Iain H. Murray Let these words prepare your heart for the preaching of God's Word today. I.) The Man of Lawlessness will be powered by Satan to deceive all the perishing, so we must not let ourselves be deceived. (9-10) a. [Slide 5] 9 - whose coming is in accord with the working of Satan, i. The LSB has put hash marks into the previous verse to set it off from what follows in verse 9. ii. This is incredibly helpful because for we western English readers, this would be quite jarring, since we would assume the “coming” he is talking about now is still the coming of Christ. iii. What we don't see that would make this even more jarring, is that in the Greek the word for “coming” is… parousia. Advent. iv. However, Christ will not come in accord with the working of Satan. v. Paul is going back now to the topic of the man of lawlessness. And Paul intentionally points to the mockery of Satan here by using the same word he has used repeatedly to refer to the return of Christ. Only this time he refers to the coming of the man of lawlessness. vi. That the man of lawlessness comes in accord with the working of Satan, clarifies and affirms that the man of lawlessness is indeed a man. vii. Much like Judas Iscariot was a man who was possessed by Satan Himself, so also this man of lawlessness is a man that will come in accord with the working of Satan. viii. This is probably an idiomatic way to say that this man too will be possessed by Satan. ix. Now just like the scriptures always see Judas as culpable for his own actions… he was not a victim… so also this man of lawlessness is not a victim either. x. This man will do and say things that are so egregious and so infamous that he could not be a mere man. xi. And this man will go along with it, willingly obeying his father the devil. xii. Again, this points to the mockery of Satan. xiii. Jesus did and said things that indicated that He was no mere man too, all in willing obedience to His heavenly Father. But this Anti-Christ figure will have an advent that is similar but will do the opposite. xiv. But that isn't the end to the similarities. b. [Slide 6] with all power and signs and false wonders, i. Part of the working of Satan happening for this man is that he is coming with all Satan's power and influence. ii. He will be able to perform signs and wonders, all of which will be false. iii. How do we determine if a sign or wonder is false? iv. Scripture gives two criteria 1. [Slide 7] In Deuteronomy 18:20-22 Yahweh clearly says that if a prophesy does not come to pass, then they know that what the prophet said was not from Him and that prophet has spoken presumptuously and should be put to death. 2. [Slide 8-9] Let's go to Deuteronomy 13:1-5 and read this together. Because what if the signs and wonders do come true? What if they are effective? a. Notice what God says… b. If a prophet performs signs and wonders that come to pass but they advocate worshipping other gods, they should not listen to that prophet. Why? c. Because Yahweh sent (take note of that. Yahweh sent) that prophet to the people to test their love for Yahweh. d. Then God reinforms them of the command. They should walk after Yahweh, fear Him, obey His commands, listen to His voice, serve Him, and cling to Him. e. But the prophet should be put to death for His attempt to mislead God's people. v. [Slide 11] The wonders and signs the man of lawlessness commits won't be false because they won't be powerful, effective, or come to pass. They will be false because they will be used to encourage people to worship him instead of Yahweh. Or to worship him as Yahweh or Jesus Himself. vi. We know how our Lord Jesus is coming next. He is coming on the clouds. He will gather us to Himself. That is how we will see Him next. In the air. vii. EVERY ESCHATALOGICAL FRAMEWORK AGREES! viii. Remember that my friends. Remember God's people. We will see Him next in the AIR. ix. No matter what signs or wonders a man does on earth… He isn't Christ if we don't meet Him in the air. He isn't Christ if we must go to Him. The Real Jesus will bring us to Himself. We will be CAUGHT UP. c. [Slide 12] 10 - and with all the deception of unrighteousness i. Another key factor that is hinted at in Deuteronomy 13 was that a person bringing signs and wonders that advocates for the breaking or distorting of God's laws – cannot be sent from God. ii. Jesus Himself said that a house divided against itself cannot stand. How can the real Jesus appear and lead people to conclude that living unrighteous lifestyles is… fine? iii. That disobeying the law of God… is fine? iv. Did Jesus do this at His first advent? v. He fulfilled the law, but He never rejected it or broke it. Nor did He ever advocate His followers do so. vi. As loving as He was to sinners and as much as He healed people what did He say? “Go and sin no more!” vii. He said, “Your righteousness must exceed that of the Pharisees.” viii. He said, “You must be holy as my heavenly Father is holy.” ix. When Jesus walks this earth again… x. HE WILL NOT TREAT SIN WITH KID GLOVES. xi. In Isaiah 11, where Paul pulled the reference to Christ consuming the man of lawlessness with His breath, in that same context it says that in that day “they will do no evil nor act corruptly in all My holy mountain. “ xii. The man of lawlessness though, will be a man who advocates a reversal of God's laws. Perhaps emphasizing love and peace over righteousness and blamelessness. xiii. Indeed, his only law is that all must worship… him. xiv. But what Paul says next is absolutely essential for a proper understanding of this time. d. [Slide 13] for those who perish, i. Notice that the power, the lies, the signs, these are all aimed at a specific group. ii. The perishing. iii. The bible gives us warnings and we must absolutely heed them. But just because the warnings exist doesn't mean that there is a chance that God's promises won't be fulfilled. iv. God has promised that He will seal all His people until the day of redemption. v. Just because the bible gives warnings of falling away and believing a lie doesn't somehow make God's promises null and void. vi. Instead, we must look for a way to make both truths of scripture stand with all their strength without contradiction. vii. And the church has, for thousands of years, understood that it is by hearing the word of God that we receive faith. Not just faith to believe on Christ but faith to believe all that God has said. viii. God's word is effective to produce change in the hearts of God's people. His Word will not return void or empty. ix. Warning passages accomplish their purpose to cause true believers to be alert and vigilant. x. This is the means God uses to prevent them from falling away and succumbing to a lie so powerful that if it were possible the elect would be deceived. xi. Paul makes it clear, that the man of lawlessness will be able to deceive ONLY those who are perishing. Why? xii. Because true believers, believers that have genuine faith, will heed these warnings, continue to reject sin and pursue Righteousness, and continue to believe God. xiii. Paul writes this as a comfort to a church whom he is convinced is counted worthy of God's Kingdom, whom he is convinced received the gospel in power. He is not uncertain about their identity as children of God. Therefore, this comment is designed to give them comfort. The perishing are the ones who will be deceived. xiv. So, they must not let themselves be deceived. xv. But why are they perishing? e. [Slide 14] because they did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved. i. The wording here is actually quite important. 1. The expression we might expect is that these people who are perishing would be those who did not believe the gospel. Or perhaps that they did not believe the truth. Or that they did not receive the truth. 2. But that isn't what saves a person and eliminates their possibility of being deceived by this Satanic Superman. 3. Christ Himself said that in the last day there would be many who said to Him, “Have we not prophesied in your name, and performed miracles and cast out demons in your name, but I will say to them depart from me lawbreakers, I never knew you.” 4. Paul says that people who did not receive THE LOVE of the truth are those who are perishing. 5. Only those who cherish the truth will be saved. 6. What does it mean to cherish the truth? We'll get to that, because a little later Paul is going to give us the opposite of this. Just hang tight for now. ii. So, the deception of the man of lawlessness will reach all the perishing because they didn't receive the love of the truth. What does that mean? iii. Right now, the gospel call goes out to all men. All men are given at least natural revelation that there is a Creator God who must be worshipped and obeyed. And all men are called to repent and believe the gospel. iv. But one day that general call will stop. v. At some point – when this man of lawlessness steps on the scene, the general call of the gospel to all men will no longer be available. vi. That isn't to say no more will come to saving faith in Christ at this time… vii. God may still effectually call people to Himself. viii. But those who are perishing, those whom God has not elected, will believe the lies of the man of lawlessness. f. [Slide 15] Summary of the Point: Paul has presented who the man of lawlessness is and the blasphemies he will commit. He has discussed when he will come and how he will end. Now, Paul reveals how he will deceive and who will believe him. The perishing, whether they have professed Christ or not, all those who have not received the love of the truth will believe the power, signs, and wonders of the man of lawlessness, and will be deceived into unrighteousness. God's general call to all men to repent and believe the gospel will ultimately go extinct as all the perishing are given over to the lies of this man. If we are truly elect of God, and we have received the love of the truth, we will not succumb to these lies. But how do we know we are elect and have received the love of the truth? We do not let ourselves be deceived. We hold fast to what we have been taught. We trust God no matter what our senses say. [Slide 16 (blank)] Transition: Perhaps you wrestled with that statement regarding the gospel call. Perhaps you were uncomfortable thinking that there will be a time when God is going to stop calling all men to believe the gospel and will only call those who are elect. Well, if you struggled with that. Buckle up. It is about to get very uncomfortable. Paul will now reveal how it will be so that all the perishing believe the lies of the man of lawlessness. II.) In order to judge them, God will actively reprobate the perishing, so we must not let ourselves be deceived. (11-12) a. [Slide 17] 11 - And for this reason, God sends upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, i. For this reason – meaning because the perishing have not received the love of the truth. ii. God is not forcing them to not receive the love of the truth – but as a response to them not receiving it… God will act. iii. Why do I say that the general call of the gospel will cease? iv. Because God will send a different message. He has already sent the gospel call to all men. v. But He has not sent out another message to all men yet. vi. All the lies and deceit and questioning of God's truth today is all generated by the lies of demons and by evil men. vii. But one day they will not be the only voices spreading misinformation. viii. One day, God Himself will send an influence that deceives the perishing. ix. Ok. Stop right there. We all know that God cannot sin. Specifically, we know that God cannot lie. So how can we interpret this differently so God isn't lying. x. Well does this text actually say that God will lie? xi. It doesn't. xii. It says that God will send a deluding influence. The Greek word for “influence” here suggests it is strong and inescapable. xiii. Notice that it does not say “allow” either. The Greek word here, translated “send” cannot mean that God simply is “allowing or permitting” this influence to occur. The Greek word means to cause to go somewhere. xiv. God will cause a deluding influence to go to the perishing. xv. God isn't lying, He is sending someone or something to lie to the perishing. xvi. Why? xvii. So that they will believe what is false. xviii. The general call of the gospel ceases because God sends something to make sure they believe something else. xix. Why would God do this? b. [Slide 18] 12 - in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in unrighteousness. i. God wants to make sure that every single person who is perishing, is justly judged. 1. This phrase here is the explanation of what it means to NOT receive the love of the truth. It means to not believe the truth but to take pleasure in unrighteousness. 2. These are not, however, two items. They are one. 3. The New Testament often defines genuine belief as belief unto obedience. To have saving faith is to love righteousness. So, if we see someone taking pleasure in unrighteousness, they cannot believe the truth, no matter what they say they believe. ii. But attentive bible students might wonder why God needs to send a deluding influence at all. iii. If God did nothing, wouldn't they still be judged? iv. [Slide 19] The answer is yes. 1. The doctrine of election is a doctrine of God's intervention. a. In order for anyone to be saved, God must intervene. b. No matter what kind of Christian you are, you must believe that God saves us and must intervene to do this. c. Otherwise, you are a Pelagian and a heretic. d. God's elect are those whom God has chosen, according to the counsel of His will and based on nothing of us, to intervene for and rescue from our sin. e. The others that God has not elected will not inherit salvation, but not because God has intervened to keep them from salvation. Rather they will not inherit salvation because God has chosen to NOT intervene for them. f. God judges them according to THEIR deeds which are evil. 2. In short, all men are deserving of judgment and wrath because of their sin. God intervenes for some by electing them to salvation. v. So, what is different here? vi. God is no longer passive. He intervenes… but in order to assure that the perishing are judged for their rejection of the gospel and their unrighteousness. vii. This is what we would call the doctrine of reprobation. God closes and seals the door actively rather than passively. The outcome is the same, but God's activity in the matter is markedly different and it signals an end to God's mercy and common grace toward the perishing. viii. And the really interesting thing is, although we've only seen God do this on this scale once in the global flood, it was not accompanied by God sending a lie. But we do have smaller cases of this happening. 1. [Slide 20] In I Kings 22, King Ahab had long heard the prophesies of Micaiah. God's prophet. Yet Ahab continued to refuse the counsel of the Lord. He continued to ignore and dismiss what God said. a. God determined that Ahab's time… was up. That it was time for him to be judged. b. To ensure that Ahab would earn His judgement to the fullest, God met in a heavenly council. He and angelic beings took council and God determined the course of action. c. He determined that a spirit must go and deceive Ahab. In that setting a spirit stepped forward and volunteered to be a lying spirit to the prophets of other gods and encourage them to tell King Ahab that he should attack a city because he would be victorious. A lie. d. Of course, God's prophet told Ahab that he would fail and even relayed the story of this heavenly council. e. But Ahab continued to choose to believe these false prophesies rather than believe God's prophet. f. Would Ahab had suddenly changed his mind and listened to Micaiah had God not done this? No. He wouldn't have. g. But that is not what the story is about. h. It isn't about Ahab's rejection of God… it is about God's rejection of Ahab. i. And that is what makes the story so harrowing. j. Ahab rejecting God, is just par for the course. k. But God rejecting a King of Israel to the point that He sends a lying spirit to convince Him to continue to DISOBEY Him? That is what is terrifying. 2. [Slide 21] In 2 Samuel 24 and 1 Chronicles 21 we see the same thing. a. We see God being fed up with Israel's disobedience under David's rule. b. The text of Samuel says that God incited David to take a census, and 1 Chronicles says that Satan enticed David to take a census. c. So, which is it? d. The devil is God's devil remember? e. God used Satan to accomplish His will. Which was to incite David to disobey so that God could judge Israel. f. Would they have earned His judgment without His intervention? g. YES!!! h. Again, this says more about God than about man. i. God's mercy does come to an end. At some point, God says, enough. ix. [Slide 22] And that is what is terrifying here friends. x. Wicked people loving their sin and rejecting God's truth? That has happened since Cain killed Abel. That isn't new or scary. xi. God sending a delusion to make sure ALL THE PERISHING reject Him? That is God rejecting, forever, those who are not His people. And that my friends… has never happened before. xii. There will be a day when God says… “I'm done with wicked mankind.” xiii. And it will coincide with a day when another says… “I'm God, I accept you as you are, come and worship me.” xiv. And everyone who hasn't received the love of the truth… will believe and worship that Satan empowered man. c. [Slide 23] Summary of the Point: For their comfort, Paul shows the Thessalonians that one day those who are persecuting them will be given over to the worship of the man of lawlessness. One day they will be judged. Paul's thought isn't quite complete. He will continue through the rest of the chapter to encourage them with positive news for them. But it is important that they know the end of the wicked. In order to judge them, God will give over those who did not receive the love of the truth to a reprobate mind so that He may judge them. They will believe and worship the beast and succumb to the pleasure of unrighteousness. So, what are the Thessalonians to do? Keep believing what they were taught. Hold fast and stand firm in the truth and do not let themselves be deceived. Why? Because with this man of lawlessness will come a great apostasy too. They must hear the warning of this passage and not let themselves be deceived, for only those who are truly elect will do so. Conclusion: So, CBC, what have we learned today that refines our beliefs and directs our lifestyles? Basics of Faith and Practice: [Slide 24] In his correction of the lie that the Thessalonians have allowed themselves to believe, Paul has reminded them of all that he had taught them concerning the man of lawlessness. And in these concluding thoughts about him, Paul reveals his influence and who will be deceived by him. There is no doubt that Paul does this to draw a contrast between the Thessalonians and those who will be deceived. He will make that even more apparent with next week's text. But the fact remains, that when the man of lawlessness steps on the scene, he will be empowered by Satan to convince all those who did not receive the love of the truth, that he should be worshipped as Yahweh. God is not passive in this, but rather than intervening to prevent this, God's mercy has reached an end, and God will send along with him a deluding influence to convince all the perishing to believe his lies. God will give them over to reprobation so that He may judge them for their love of unrighteousness. Paul's opening application to the Thessalonians remains the application. Don't allow yourself to be deceived. First must come the apostasy and the man of lawlessness and the deception of the perishing. Then and only then will the Day of the Lord come and the Lord return to gather His people to Himself. Don't believe anything but what we have already taught you. Otherwise, they too will succumb to the lies of this man and the deluding influence of God. But what does this mean for us? How can we be sure that we don't let ourselves be deceived? 1.) [Slide 25] 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 perishing are those who do not receive the love of the truth. a. Notice once again Paul's wording here. b. They do not receive the love of the truth. c. But wait a second, doesn't the bible simply talk about belief, faith being the way God unites us to Christ? d. It does. e. Isn't this a contradiction? f. Not at all. g. Just as we use the same word to talk about different aspects of the same thing, words like the cup which could mean 8 fluid ounces or just a drinking receptacle, so also the bible uses words differently depending on context. All doesn't always mean all. Call doesn't always mean the same thing. And as John the apostle demonstrates in his gospel, believe doesn't always mean the same thing. h. Here Paul is defining the kind of faith that saves. The kind of faith that unites us to Christ. It is not a faith that merely receives the facts. It is not a faith that merely respects the authority of the name of Jesus. i. The kind of faith that is saving… is a faith that receives the truth… and loves it. j. If salvation is a gift, we've all received gifts that we love. We have also all received gifts that we… do not love. k. We are warned in the gospels, that of the four soils of our hearts, three of them receive the gospel message. But only one produces fruit and is, therefore, useful to the farmer. l. The test of true and genuine saving faith is not in whether or not you believe in God or in Jesus… it is whether or not you love and cherish the truth of the gospel in your daily life. Is it precious to you to reflect on how you were once a sinner, doomed to hell, and Christ died to set you free? It is precious to you that Christ gave you His righteousness so that you could be declared righteous before God's judgment? Is it precious to you that the Lord sends His Spirit to all who are His and He enables us to live in obedience to Christ in an ever-growing way? Is it precious to you that Christ has united you to an assembly of people locally and universally who hold you accountable and encourage you? Is it precious to you to look hopefully toward Christ's coming as you live holy lives in preparation for His Kingdom? m. This is why when Paul later characterizes those who will be deceived, he says both that they did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in unrighteousness. n. In order to be saved by faith – it has to be a God-given kind of faith. What kind is that? One that propels you to seek God's Kingdom and His righteousness… first. o. Only those who love the truth… will deny the lie. 2.) [Slide 26] 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 man of lawlessness will deceive the perishing. a. Everyone else. b. No matter what you say you believe. No matter how much time you've spent coming to church, reading your bible, or praying. c. Everyone who does not love the truth and take pleasure in righteousness. Everyone who does not seek God's Kingdom first and His righteousness. d. Everyone else… will worship the man of lawlessness as God and submit to His rule over their lives. e. Fearing that they will lose their jobs, their possessions, their land, their homes, their wealth, they will take his mark and worship him as God. f. And mark my words… a good percentage of them will be those who have claimed to believe on Jesus. Many of them will have said the sinner's prayer. Many of them will have gone to church and come from a Christian family. 3.) [Slide 27] 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 in the last days God will give over the perishing to a deluding influence. a. See it doesn't all come down to this man of lawlessness' cunning or his power. b. Paul doesn't give him all that credit. And Paul doesn't want to mislead the Thessalonian church. c. This man of lawlessness will be a Satanic Super Man… but if God wished to oppose Him, this man would not deceive even one. d. The fact of the matter is that when this man steps on the scene, when the restrainer is removed, God will actively send an influence, probably Satan himself, to deceive every single person who has not received the love of the truth. e. He will do this not because they have not already earned their judgment. But because He is done with evil mankind. He is ready to remake the world. His Kingdom is coming in full. f. Why will this man be so successful? The short answer? Because God wants him to be. g. But… 4.) [Slide 28] 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 the elect will succumb to the deluding influence. a. In spite of the strength of the lie, based on this text, based on what Paul will say next, and based on the other promises in scripture – we must not conclude that God will allow any of His elect to be deceived by this deluding influence. b. Jesus said that in those days, IF POSSIBLE, the elect might be deceived. Jesus' wording leaves no room for misinterpretation. It isn't possible. c. The question then that must be asked, is how does God preserve us? 5.) [Slide 29] Comfort: “What comfort can we find here?” or “What peace does the Lord promise us in light of this passage of scripture?” The Perseverance of the saints is primarily about God preserving us. a. The statement, “Once saved always saved.” Is technically true but oftentimes it communicates something that the bible flatly rejects. Even in this text. b. Just because you have professed Christ doesn't mean that you are saved. And just because you are saved, doesn't mean that you don't need to persevere. c. This doctrine must be primarily about God. d. God gives to all His elect a faith that endures. So much so that if we see our faith fail, it is not because we have lost it or because we did not persevere. It is because we were not given saving faith. We were a soil that received the message of the gospel but it did not produce fruit. e. The apostle John says of people who walked away from the faith, “that left us because they were not of us.” Not, “they left us because they are no longer of us.” f. God is the primary agent in preserving His people and enabling them to persevere… g. But… that doesn't mean we are passive. 6.) [Slide 30] 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 not let ourselves be deceived. a. We are not passive in our own perseverance. b. Instead, God's true children will take warning passages such as these and, with fear and trembling, they will cling all the tighter to the gospel of Christ and the pursuit of holiness and righteousness, without which none will see God. c. God's true children will see the coming of this man of lawlessness, his empowering by the Devil, and God's active role here, and they will run back to what the scriptures teach and reject the lies even when all their senses tell them it is truth. And even when it will cost them everything. d. We must hold fast and stand firm in what we believe. e. So when we combine the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints with our role in persevering we realize that though we are certainly not passive in persevering… we are also… Praise the Lord… NOT ALONE. 7.) [Slide 31] 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 Jesus accepts us as we are. Believing this is a symptom of not receiving the love of the truth. a. There is a teaching alive and well today that insists that Jesus accepts us as we are. b. Now what could be meant by that teaching is that there is no prerequisite to repenting of sin and trusting Christ. c. Meaning you don't have to be perfect in order to believe on Jesus. You don't have to have stopped sinning in order to become a Christ follower. You don't have to join a church, get a tattoo, be circumcised or any other prerequisite. d. If that is what is meant – then this is true. e. However, oftentimes this message ends up being – Jesus accepts you no matter what lifestyle you choose to keep living. Jesus will never ask you to be someone you aren't. Jesus just wants to love you for who you are. f. This… is a lie. g. Jesus died because of who you were. Jesus died because you fall short. You miss the mark. You are not good enough. That is why Jesus died. To pay for your shortcomings and to make you like Him. To change you. He died to make you a NEW CREATURE. Old has died… and new is taking its place. h. Jesus says in order to be His disciple you must crucify yourself… daily… and follow Him. i. He told the rich young ruler to sell everything he had and give it to the poor and follow Him. j. Christ's message is clear. k. Turn from your sin, follow Him and sin… no… more. l. There is no such thing as a Christian who loves his sin and Jesus too. m. There is no such thing as a Christian who dislikes God's law. n. There is no such thing as a Christian who loves this world. o. They simply… do not exist. p. They may call themselves Christians… but in the last day… they will be deceived, take the mark and worship the Anti-Christ, so that God may justly judge them. q. Jesus is so not satisfied with who you are, that He submitted to death to change you to be like Him. r. If you disagree – its time to really listen hard… 8.) [Slide 32] Evangelism: “What about this text points us to Jesus Christ, the gospel, and how we are restored?” In the last days, many that profess Christ today will take the mark of the beast and worship him as God. a. The tension in the scripture is clear. b. Although God by grace alone unites His people to Christ's sacrifice through giving them faith in His Son, the kind of faith that God ALWAYS gives, is a faith that changes the person to whom it is given. c. When God gives faith, it is like when someone gets hit by a bus. d. Their life is going to be different from that day forward. It will change… because it must. e. The soil of the heart is prepared by the Lord to receive His truth and produce fruit. f. All other soils may look like they have received the truth… but things choke or scorch them to death. g. There will be many in that day who have prayed a prayer and accepted a cheap grace that forgives sin and asks nothing of them. A grace that has less to do with you being a citizen of God's royal family and more to do with keeping you from going to hell. h. But the same grace that keeps you from hell, makes you into a citizen of His family and conforms you to His standard. It's a package deal. You don't get one without the other. i. So how do you avoid being yet another dupe? How do you avoid standing at the judgment seat of Christ wondering why the books containing your works did not prove you were His? j. You must be born again. You must have your heart prepared by God to receive the love of the truth. k. How do you know God has done that for you? l. Well – is He stirring you now? Do you feel the Spirit of God pulling on you now? That is a pretty good sign that your heart is ready to receive the love of the truth. m. So, turn from sin. Turn from your pleasure in unrighteousness. Turn from worshipping and pursuing things on earth. Money, relationships, careers, possessions, lusts, passions… n. Turn from your desires, your pursuits, your will o. Lose your identity so that you can be absorbed into Christ's. p. Trust Him and love Him and what He has done for you. Love Him so much that He becomes your first priority. q. Submit to His rule over your life as your one and only King. r. Trust Him and love Him enough to leave all other things you trust and love behind. s. Then… and only then… will you start to see the Lord change you into His own possession. t. If that is you today… don't wait to tell someone. u. Don't walk out the door and think -I'll just tell them later. I'll just call them later. No. v. If you need to follow Christ. If you are done following you. Tell someone you know is a Christian here. We would like to rejoice with you and help you in the next steps. [Slide 33 (end)] Let me close with a prayer by the church father Augustine of Hippo In a vast wilderness full of snares and dangers, look! At your enabling I have cut off many of them, thrusting them out of my heart. And yet so many of these things buzz on all sides about my daily life. Do I dare say that nothing of this sort catches my attention, or causes even the slightest interest? True, I do not spend time in the worst kinds of entertainment, I do not dabble in astrology or the occult. I detest all those sacrilegious mysteries. And I owe you my humble and singlehearted service, O Lord my God. Yet the enemy, with tricks and suggestions, looks for a way in. So I beg you, by our King, even if I am far away from consenting to the enemy, may it ever be farther and farther away. You enable me, and will enable me, to follow you willingly, doing what you want me to do. We ask this for ourselves in Jesus' name, Amen. Benediction: Now may He who raises the poor from the dust, The needy from the ash heap; And makes them sit with nobles And inherit a seat of honor. Bear you through troubled days, To you who trust in God's unchanging love. Until we meet again, Grace and Peace to you.

Let's relax in the wayback machine with more from the religious history of England. This time, Saint Bede recalls Saxon double-dealings, divine healings, the Pelagian heresy, and the somewhat cowardly companions of Saint Augustine, who get politely yelled at by the pope. Miraculous!   Help us stay ad-free and 100% listener-supported! Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/boringbookspod Buy Me a Coffee: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/d5kcMsW   Read "Ecclesiastical History of England" by The Venerable Bede at Project Gutenberg: https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/38326   Music: "Boring Books for Bedtime" by Lee Rosevere, licensed under CC BY, https://leerosevere.bandcamp.com   If you'd like to suggest a copyright-free reading for soft-spoken relaxation to help you overcome insomnia, anxiety and other sleep issues, connect on our website, https://www.boringbookspod.com.

We open the show on a wiffle ball game in the backyard. Adam's pitching. Jude's at the plate — right-handed, like always. Adam throws a sinker. Jude cranks it. Home run. On dad. In front of the whole family. Adam shakes it off, gets ready to deliver some justice on the next at-bat… and Jude steps over to the left side of the plate. "Jude, what are you doing?" "Dad. Just pitch the ball." Brushback pitch. Second swing — gone. Out of the park. Left-handed. Turns out Jude found out earlier that day he can bat from either side and forgot to mention it. Adam took it like a man — somewhere between humiliated and proud. Dave's response: this is why he still brushes his teeth left-handed. To stay coordinated. (Adam also has four cavities. Unrelated.)This week we're sipping Laphroaig Càirdeas 2024 — Triple Wood & PX Casks. Aged ten years in ex-bourbon and quarter casks, finished in Pedro Ximénez sherry casks. 52.4% ABV. Dark cherry-amber in the glass — uncharacteristic for an Islay. The classic peat smoke is there, then it opens into ginger, fruit, sherry sweetness. Càirdeas means friendship in Gaelic, which is exactly where the episode is headed. About $130-$140. Limited release, every year a little different.Mary update: she's off the paralysis medicine. Still heavily sedated, but her eyes are open. She's looking around. Oxygen, blood pressure, heart rate — all trending in the right direction. More good days than bad right now. Adam and Lady Haylee are grateful. Keep them in your prayers.Then we get into it: spiritual friendship, through St. Aelred of Rievaulx — the 12th-century Cistercian abbot whose book Spiritual Friendship is basically the Catholic doctrine on what a real friend is. He opens it with this line: "Here we are, you and I, and I hope that Christ makes a third with us." That's the whole thing.Adam walks through the bell curve of zeal every man hits when he starts taking his faith seriously. Phase one: you read everything, you want to tell everybody, you should start a podcast. Phase two: you realize you know almost nothing and you go quiet. Phase three is where Aelred meets you — somewhere between "let me lecture you" and "I'm not qualified to say anything." The answer isn't to forfeit the zeal. It's to ground it in humility. You don't have the answers because you are not the answer. Christ is. But you do have your own experience, and what He's done in your life is yours to share.Aelred's rules for friendship cut right through the noise. Spiritual friendship is not a teacher-student relationship — both men give, both men receive. Don't sacrifice your own vocation to be a "spiritual father" to someone else. When you meet, it's not the depth of the conversation that matters most, it's the consistency. And the cheat-code question for getting under the surface: how's your prayer life? Try that on a buddy this week and see what happens.We close on Aristotle and the Eucharist. Nicomachean Ethics lays out hierarchies of friendship — friendship of utility, of pleasure, of virtue — but you can't be an authentic friend if you don't first know the good. And the good, ultimately, is Christ in the Eucharist. If the man you call your friend doesn't live a Eucharistic life, you may have a buddy. You don't yet have a spiritual friend. Make one. Be one. Bring him to Christ.Raise your glass.TOPICS COVEREDJude's ambidextrous wiffle ball ambush and the inevitable day every dad gets cranked onAdam's left-handed toothbrushing regimen and his four cavities (related, probably)Why the Càirdeas release is one of the most interesting Islay bottlings out thereAn update on baby Mary — off the paralytic, eyes open, more wins than lossesThe bell curve of zeal — and why most men quit halfway up the back sideSt. Aelred of Rievaulx, the 12th-century Cistercian abbot the Church basically credits as the doctor of friendship"Here we are, you and I, and I hope that Christ makes a third with us" — the opening line of Spiritual FriendshipWhy spiritual friendship is not a teacher-student relationship and why treating it like one ruins itThe danger of becoming the guy who turns every conversation into a lectureDon't sacrifice your own vocation to play spiritual father to someone else'sConsistency beats intensity — and why a Pelagian attitude toward your men's group will wear you out"How's your prayer life?" — the question that breaks past small talk in under thirty secondsVulnerability as a man's strength, not his concession to a cultural buzzwordWhy one man's honest confession in a group does more for the listeners than the speakerLady Haylee and Lady Pamela both telling their husbands, in different houses, the same thing: you're a better man when you come back from those groupsSubsidiarity in friendship — the smallest circle is always the most important circleAristotle's hierarchy of friendship and why you can't be an authentic friend without knowing the goodThe Eucharist as the prerequisite for real spiritual friendship between menMake a friend. Be a friend. Bring a friend to Christ.Bourbon of the week: Laphroaig Càirdeas 2024, Triple Wood & PX CasksREFERENCED IN THIS EPISODEBooks:Spiritual Friendship by St. Aelred of Rievaulx — be careful of older translations from the 60s and 70s that read sexualization into the text that isn't thereNicomachean Ethics by AristotlePurgatorio by Dante (Adam's office reading group, currently working through it)Saints:St. Aelred of RievaulxSt. Benedict (and the Cistercian reform out of the Benedictine order)St. Peter (the lawn chair analogy)People & references:Lady Haylee MinihanLady Pamela NilesAdam's Substack (where he wrote about the Dante reading group)The friend in Adam's office who told him, "I didn't even realize that friendship like that existed"Concepts & passages:John 15: "I no longer call you slaves, but friends"The three Aristotelian friendships: utility, pleasure, virtueThe four ends of friendship in St. AelredThe "Friends of Laphroaig" plot programThe three TCMS pillars: Protect, Provide, EstablishSPONSOR BLOCKSponsor: Select International Tours — selectinternationaltours.comWhen Adam and Dave decided to lead their first pilgrimage, the same name kept coming up: Select International Tours. Having now used them, we can tell you they're the real deal. Whether you want to lead a pilgrimage or join one, Select has a tour ready for wherever the Lord is calling you. Head to selectinternationaltours.com and take a look.

Study session scripture: Romans 5:12-21Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned— for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come. But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man's trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. And the free gift is not like the result of that one man's sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. For if, because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ. Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous. Now the law came in to increase the trespass, but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through righteousness leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.Study session topics:Hope in Christ's triumph over Adam's sin Paul now seeks to encourage his audience in assurance of their salvation by contrasting the two most important events in history Brief recap of last week--We can be assured of our salvation because: God has made peace with us through Christ's atoning work Through that same work, we now stand in a new relationship with God We have a sure and certain hope that we will see God Our salvation enables us to endure suffering in this life without despair Christ came to die for us when we were His enemies If God has justified us, He will surely glorify usPaul now explains that, even beyond justification, salvation unites us to Jesus Christ as our covenantal head "Therefore" -Paul's main idea here is that we can remain under Adam as our covenant head, or we can take Christ as our new covenant head -"death spread to all men because all sinned"--What does this mean? Pelagian view: Each person sins of themselves, apart from connection to Adam, and their death is a consequence of their individual sins Cavin's view: "all sinned" means all were corrupted by Adam's sin Augustine's view: All generations were in Adam, so when he sinned, we all sinned Federalist view: Adam stood as representative of all humanity, so because Adam, our representative, sinned, we are judged as also having sinned Three great contrasts between Adam and Jesus Natural vs. Supernatural -One sin vs. Many sins Death vs. The reign of life In v. 18, Paul finishes the thought he started in v. 12 and brings in the concept of union to Christ as opposed to union to Adam Two slippery passages "the many" has a different meaning in relation to Adam than in relation to Christ, and should not be read as endorsing universalism "the law came in to increase the trespass" does not mean God desired for there to be more sin, but that the law brings out the nature and magnitude of sin What is union with Christ? Four scriptural analogies: The vine and the branches (John 15:1-5) The foundation and the house built upon it (Matthew 7:24-25) The head and the members of the body (Ephesians 4:11-16) -Marriage (Ephesians 5:28-32)Study session audio:

IntroductionWe spend another week considering the doctrine of Limited Atonement. We examine this doctrine using John 17 and the Canons of Dort. Christ's pristly work and his compassion is evident as he goes to the cross. Our problem is that we can have a “scarcity mindset” regarding Christ's work. We might think that limited atonement teaches that there is just enough of Christ's work to go around. The reality is that this doctrine teaches that Christ's work is guaranteed to be applied to Christ's people. Christ does not potentially secure some people, but he certainly secures his people. Christ Accomplishes the Work the Father Gave HimJesus declares in John 17:4, “I have accomplished the work that You gave Me to do.” This means that Christ is conscious he has an assignment. He has met the requirements for his day's work. Christ has done his work. His people are not part of a co operative arrangment. Christ did the work that the Father gave him to do. 
The Canons of Dort rejects the idea that Christ's death was “without a fixed plan.” Jesus is acting as a servant completing the father's assignment. If the plan was to save everyone then Christ's work is sufficient. We will address that potential in a moment. The important thint to note here is that the Father assigned work. Christ consciously accomplished that work. Christ expects his wages. This simply means that Christ has obeyed in the place of his people. He is going to the cross to bear the penalty of sin (Cover/Atone) for the sin. Now, he expects that the father will raise him from the dead.
Therefore, Christ's atonement is not theoretical. It is deliberate, polished, and there are metrics he is espected to meet. Christ knows the expectation and he met the expectation. Therefore, the Father owes him a resurrection. Christ has earned his vindication. (cf. Romans 1:3,4; Romans 4:24-25; 1 Timothy 3:16)Christ Secures His PeopleNow we address the question, “Who are Christ's People?” The second section centers on John 17:2, 6, and 9, showing Christ consciously interceding for a specific group. This group is identified as, “those whom You have given Me.” This group is still in the world, lives in the world, but is not the world. 
He possesses full authority over all flesh, but his application is only to the people that the Father has given him. Eternal life, in Jesus' definition, means knowing God. This means that His people truly experience the blessings of the Spirit as they rightly know God. This is only by the Spirit's work. (John 3) The Canons of Dordt stands against the Arminian claim that grace universally restores human neutrality by a universal assisting or prevenient grace. The Canons uses the strong language that this revives the Pelagian heresy. The log is: if prevenient grace makes us capable of saving ourselves through faith, then Christ's death becomes unnecessary. The canons is working out the consistent implication of prevenient grace. 
The Reformed view maintains that faith does not save; Christ saves. Faith is the God-given instrument by which believers take hold of Christ's accomplished work. Consequently, Christ's prayer for “those You have given Me” assures us that the Lord's people will necessarily receive his blessings. This is not UniversalIn verses like John 17:20–24, Christ extends His prayer beyond the disciples to include “those who will believe through their word.” When people ask, “Well why do missions?” The reason: God uses a means to accomplish his goal. So, simply here Christ is laying out the general call of the gospel will go forth. When we properly understand that God calls his people normally through the gospel and sees to it that the call will be effective in His Spirit then we have every reason to engage in missions. We know that the work will have an end. This is later in the Canons of Dordt. 
Christ is very specific about who receives his work. His intent is not to save humanity in general, but to redeem the people who are one with Him and the Father. His work is going to be applied to the people who will dwell with God forever. 
We might wonder if we are part of Christ's people. When we consider Judas and Peter we see a stark contrast. Judas,(the “son of perdition” (v. 12) betrays Christ. He takes his life out of remorse rather than turning to Christ. (This is a very specific case of suicide, and not a universal commentary). Peter turns to Christ in remorse. The reprobate never sees Christ as a solution. Peter sees Christ as the only solution. Judas is not having a momentary crises, but it is a whole mindset that fails to see Christ's mission. So, when we doubt if Christ loves us then we should believe Christ. One who does not have Christ does not care about Christ. If we struggle in our assurance it testifies that we are God's child, and so believe! Walk in Christ becasue he is your redeemer. 
Christ's high priestly intercession continues today. We have the snippet of Christ praying for the protection of his people. We should never minimize prayer. If our Lord does it as the first order to protect his people then we should be following our savior's lead.ConclusionWe need to realize that limited atonement is not cold exclusivism but comforting assurance. It teaches believers that salvation depends wholly on Christ, not our pedigree, or our performing for God's attention. Faith is how we take hold of Christ. Faith does not save. Faith in Christ saves. It is Christ who saves and faith is the means whereby we take hold of Christ and his his distinc benefits. 
Christ's prayer in John 17 shows His compassionate heart: He wants His people with Him in glory. Christ longs for full fellowship, Christ continues to intercede on our behalf. 
Thus, the doctrine calls Christians to humility, prayer, and gratitude. We are humbled not in our choice for God, but in God's choice of us through Christ.
Because the Redeemer has accomplished His mission and continues to intercede, our salvation stands secure. His faithfulness, not ours, sustains us. That is our peace. Let us walk in faith discerning how to live as living sacrifices unto him.

A few nations have shut down homeschooling entirely, and others are about to follow suit.  Parents do not have the choice. This year, at least one state wants to impose a DEI program on homeschoolers. Where did this compulsory attendance law come from, and what is the worldview that requires state control of the children? Before Jean-Jacques Rousseau there was Prussia and Christian Wolfe; and Wolfe lived up to his name. We analyze the Pelagian view of man that infected the lapsed Christians of Germany and America in the 18th and 19th Centuries.

We dive once more into the differences between Eastern and Western Christianity. This time, Dr. Jacobs tackles the nature-grace divide. He'll trace how Augustine's anti-Pelagian framework created a nature-grace divide in the Latin West, where human nature is seen as inherently incapable of pleasing God without supernatural assistance. In contrast, the Eastern tradition maintains that humans as icons of God possess a natural connection to divine grace through the image-archetype relationship. The analysis covers how these differing anthropologies lead to distinct understandings of total depravity, synergy, and the relationship between creature and Creator.All the links: Substack: https://nathanajacobs.substack.com/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thenathanjacobspodcastWebsite: https://www.nathanajacobs.com/X: https://x.com/NathanJacobsPodSpotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0hSskUtCwDT40uFbqTk3QSApple Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-nathan-jacobs-podcastFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/nathanandrewjacobsAcademia: https://vanderbilt.academia.edu/NathanAJacobs00:00:00 Intro00:01:22 Recap & roadmap 00:10:08 The Pelagian controversy00:15:55 Hierarchy of loves00:20:22 Augustine's pursuit of truth00:28:19 Adam & Eve (original sin)00:35:45 The root of total depravity00:40:02 Divine volunteerism00:51:09 Monistic views emerge00:54:40 Medieval "faculty psychology"01:08:22 Imago Dei (Image of God) nuances01:11:30 Divine essence and energies01:23:36 Insights from Plato01:29:50 Man as icon of God01:39:14 Grace in the Christian West01:54:48 The faculty psychology problem02:12:40 Doctrine of the Logoi02:25:40 Idiosyncratic teleology02:30:52 Wrapping up the series

This session offers a critique of the Pelagian heresy present in nearly all centuries of this age.

A Critique of Practicing the Way, Part 12 - Understanding Human Inability, presented by Bob DeWaay and Barb Gretch. We address Comer's claims that the problems the world is facing today could be solved if Christians would become apprentices of Jesus and compare it to Charles Finney's Pelagian moral government theory. Both lack an understanding of human inability. (duration 00:22:57) Click here to play

Monday of the 14th Week in Ordinary Time Saint of the Day: St. Palladius; originally of British or Roman descent, possibly a deacon in Rome, or, more likely, Auxerre, France; he convinced Pope Celestine I to send St. Germanus, bishop of Auxerre, to England to end the Pelagian heresy; Palladius was consecrated a bishop, and was sent to Ireland in 430; he founded at least three churches in Leinster, and then went to Scotland to preach to the Picts; he died at Fordun, near Aberdeen, in about 457 A.D. Office of Readings and Morning Prayer for 7/7/25 Gospel: Matthew 9:18-26

Welcome to A History of Christian Theology! Today, Chad sits down with his friend and colleague, Dr. Andrew Chronister. Like Chad, Dr. Chronister teaches ancient languages at Kenrick-Glennon Seminary in addition to serving as a professor of patristics. Similarly, they both received their PhDs from Saint Louis University and studied St. Augustine's work there. Their conversation today centers around Dr. Chorinister's newest book: "Augustine in the Pelagian Controversy: Defending Church Unity," which was released in December (2024) with Catholic University of America Press. As Augustinian scholars, their conversation is lively and interesting as they approach the issue of the Pelagian Controversy from multiple angles. Thanks to Dr. Chronister for taking the time to chat on this important topic and for providing Chad with a copy of his book. We hope you enjoy!Buy "Augustine in the Pelagian Controversy"Subscribe to our Patreontwitter: @theologyxianFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/ahistoryofchristiantheology

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

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/  

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

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.

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.

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 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 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 - 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 - 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 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 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