The NXR Podcast - BONUS EPISODE - Head Coverings & Patriarchy ｜ A Charitable Response To Owen Strachan & Costi Hinn

00:00:00.000 In less than a year, our podcast has gone from an average of 10,000 downloads a month

00:00:04.300 to 50,000 downloads. What made the difference? You leaving us a five-star review. The more

00:00:10.260 positive reviews, the more the algorithm picks us up, and more people are confronted by the law

00:00:16.360 and gospel of Jesus Christ. Help us press forward the crown rights of King Jesus by leaving us a

00:00:23.480 five-star review on your favorite podcast platform. Thanks.

00:00:53.480 daily. But if you want to watch our long form original content right when it comes out,

00:00:59.020 it's really simple. There's three main pieces of long form original content. That's the Sunday

00:01:04.060 sermon that I preach at my local church in Central Texas, Georgetown, Texas, about 45 minutes north

00:01:10.700 of Austin. It's called Covenant Bible Church. If you're in the area or looking for a good church,

00:01:14.680 check out our website, covenantbible.org, covenantbible.org. The sermon that I preach

00:01:20.540 there each Lord's Day on Sunday. Usually the sermon hits YouTube and our podcast platform,

00:01:26.120 Spotify, iTunes, around 5 or 6 p.m. that evening on Sunday. So that's the first piece of content.

00:01:32.140 The second is what we're doing right now. Every single Monday at 2 p.m. Central Time,

00:01:37.660 we do a live video where I address certain current events, things that are cultural,

00:01:43.200 political, theological, or sometimes I'll do a response video. That's what I'm going to be

00:01:47.260 doing today, responding to Costi Hinn and Owen Strand and a video that they recently put out,

00:01:52.780 I believe it was two weeks ago at this point in regards to patriarchy. And they also briefly

00:01:58.020 addressed the topic of head coverings. So that's what I'm going to be doing today, a response

00:02:01.860 video. I'll be showing some clips from the video that they did and then going ahead and discussing

00:02:07.480 that from a distinctly biblical patriarchy view and a biblical view of head coverings.

00:02:13.340 And so Monday, it's kind of a mixed bag. You don't know really what you're going to get,

00:02:17.000 but if you want to check in, it's usually about an hour, sometimes all the way up to two hours.

00:02:20.980 That's 2 p.m. Central Time every Monday live with Pastor Joel. So Sunday's a sermon, Monday is a

00:02:26.240 live video, and then the last and third final piece of long-form original content that you can

00:02:31.640 be looking for is Tuesday. So it's Sunday, Monday, Tuesday. Tuesday is called Theology Applied.

00:02:37.180 Same thing, 2 p.m. Central Time, and that's our flagship show where I do an interview. And so

00:02:43.340 it's a discussion, a conversation back and forth between me and a notable guest, somebody who has

00:02:50.080 expertise in a particular area, usually a pastor or theologian, something that deals with the

00:02:56.920 Christian biblical worldview as it is applied to our daily lives, political issues or cultural

00:03:02.760 issues or marriage and parenting, family, all these kinds of things, economics, business,

00:03:08.020 the whole nine yards. So you can tune in on Sunday for the sermon, Monday for live where

00:03:14.000 I fly solo, live with Pastor Joel, and then Tuesday for Theology Applied where I interview

00:03:19.020 a guest. All the other videos that you'll find on Wednesday and Thursday and Friday

00:03:23.560 and Saturday are all just compiled snippets. They're clips from those other three long

00:03:29.520 form videos. All right. So we're going to go ahead and get into our response to Owen

00:03:34.600 Strand and Costi Hinn, an episode that they did on Costi's platform that's called Together for

00:03:40.560 the Gospel. Costi has put out a lot of great stuff, so I encourage you to check out Together

00:03:45.500 for the Gospel. You can subscribe to his podcast or his YouTube channel. A lot of great material.

00:03:51.180 I like Costi a lot, and I agree with probably 90% of what they said in this video, but there's a few

00:03:56.760 key points where I want to charitably push back. So that's what we're going to be doing today,

00:04:00.940 But real quick, before we do, I wanted to mention, if you haven't checked it out already,

00:04:05.260 Get Fight by Flight.

00:04:06.600 This is a book that I just published a little over a month ago.

00:04:09.800 The subtitle is Why Leaving Godless Places is Loving Godless Places.

00:04:14.340 If you're on Twitter, two weeks ago, there was, within the Reformed Church camp, there

00:04:19.060 was lots of controversy, and this was kind of the spark that started the fire.

00:04:24.820 So if you're wondering, why is everybody arguing about whether you should live in California,

00:04:28.580 whether you should live in texas uh well it's because of the book that i wrote and a particular

00:04:33.720 interview where i was discussing the book with steve days from the blaze so i went on the steve

00:04:39.080 day show with the blaze network and we were talking about political strategy and why um

00:04:45.340 why christians and conservatives to a lesser degree but especially christians bible believing

00:04:50.840 christians should consider from a political standpoint leaving a blue state and moving to

00:04:55.880 a red state as a way to love your neighbor. If you look at the book, it's much more exhaustive

00:05:00.960 than that. It's not just about political strategy. Ultimately, the lion's share of the book is just

00:05:05.940 dealing with very clear biblical commandments to men. Men as sons, honoring their father and mother.

00:05:12.280 Men as husbands with their wives. Men as fathers with their children and the obligations and duties

00:05:18.200 that God gives us. And then men as grandfathers, leaving an inheritance to your children's

00:05:22.480 children. So if you read the book, you'll find out that it's probably one of the least controversial

00:05:27.100 books that you'll be able to ever read, but it caused quite the controversy on Twitter a couple

00:05:33.280 weeks ago. So you can get that at Amazon, or you can go to rightresponseministries.com. You can go

00:05:38.800 to our website. I believe it's like $3 cheaper. So if you want to get a cheaper price, you can go to

00:05:43.040 rightresponseministries.com, go to our store. You'll see it right there at the very front,

00:05:47.200 Fight by Flight, The Fords by Doug Wilson. The subtitle is Why Leaving Godless Places is Loving

00:05:53.860 Godless Places. One more thing before we get into our video, I want us to hear a quick,

00:05:59.160 brief word from our first sponsor of the day. There are very few things as important as fellowship.

00:06:05.280 Taking the time to spread the gospel is our duty as Christians, but sharing the word over a warm

00:06:10.760 cup of Squirrely Joe's coffee. Now that is our passion. Like the caffeine coursing through their

00:06:17.040 veins, Squirrely Joe's is energized by their calling and emboldened to model their relentless

00:06:23.320 fate. Based in Olney, Illinois, their association with the endangered white squirrel isn't just a

00:06:30.940 novelty. It's a reminder that His Majesty can appear in the most unexpected places, in a humble

00:06:38.280 Squirrel, through a chance conversation, and even in a simple cup of Joe. Share coffee, serve humbly,

00:06:47.320 live faithfully. Squirrely Joes is owned and operated by Joe Morris, his wife Rachel, and

00:06:55.040 their seven children. They believe in being a truly Christian business where Christ is in the DNA

00:07:01.340 of the business. Joe also believes in living Coram Deo, that means before the face of God,

00:07:09.820 in every aspect of life. Joe is also a pastor of a small reformed church, and both Joe and Rachel

00:07:17.720 are veterans of the U.S. Marine Corps and U.S. Army, respectively. They believe that Christians

00:07:24.500 should be building a thoroughly Christian economy by doing business with other like-minded Christians.

00:07:30.660 The coffee is also fantastic.

00:07:34.280 So, don't delay. 0.91

00:07:36.280 Visit squirrelyjoes.com to order your coffee today.

00:07:40.520 Again, that's squirrelyjoes.com to order your coffee today.

00:07:46.120 Enter promo code RRM at checkout for 20% off your purchase. 0.98

00:07:52.600 All right, so I'm going to play two clips from this video with Owen Strand and Costi Hinn.

00:07:58.300 and we're going to deal with actually the latter part of the video. So this first clip is going

00:08:03.320 to be towards the end of their episode. We'll deal with that first in regards to biblical

00:08:07.680 patriarchy. What is that? But then we'll deal with head coverings, which was the first portion

00:08:14.080 of their episode together. And so I'll show a clip from the latter part of their video with

00:08:18.280 biblical patriarchy, then a clip from the beginning of their video dealing with head

00:08:21.640 coverings. So let's go ahead and play that first clip in regards to biblical patriarchy from the

00:08:26.060 latter half of their episode together there is a view now that i'm hearing in which you know women

00:08:32.740 are not even supposed to or allowed to teach women theology they only would teach homemaking 0.59

00:08:39.600 and while of course i advocate for that for a second certainly all right so we're going to

00:08:45.100 pause it um so the view that costi is hearing um my first question would be brother where

00:08:50.660 are you hearing that? I've never said that. Michael Foster has never said that. Doug Wilson

00:08:58.240 has never said that. Brian Sauve has never said that. Eric Kahn, Dan Burkholder, Dale Partridge,

00:09:03.280 anybody that I'm aware of who holds to the view of biblical patriarchy, who has at least

00:09:10.400 some shape or form, some degree of influence online. They have a podcast or they're a local

00:09:17.980 pastor and have their sermons publicly available, something like that. I don't know anybody in the

00:09:23.500 biblical patriarchy camp with any measure of influence, right? So I'm saying more than 37

00:09:30.420 followers on Twitter who would affirm what you just said. Not one. Again, for the listener,

00:09:39.840 what Kosti just said is that there's a view, he's heard of a view that doesn't allow women to teach

00:09:46.900 theology, not even to other women. And that's just categorically wrong. And so let me go ahead

00:09:55.540 and take a moment because this has been a misrepresentation that's been made not just

00:09:59.640 by Kosti in his defense. In fact, in Kosti's defense, he may be making this misrepresentation

00:10:05.520 because other Christian conservative influencers with large followings and a large platform

00:10:14.100 previously made the exact precise same misrepresentation. And he may just be,

00:10:20.580 Costi may just be taking their word for it. Because this has been said by a few people at

00:10:26.520 this point, but it's simply not true. So the position, well, I'll articulate the position,

00:10:33.620 but first I'm going to let Owen Strand articulate the position. And this is the beauty of this clip

00:10:38.560 because I'm going to disagree and push back on some of the things that are said about head

00:10:42.560 coverings. That's the next clip that we'll play here in a moment. But what I love about Owen

00:10:47.720 Strand's response is that he perfectly articulates the exact position that I and every other biblical

00:10:52.680 patriarchy guy holds. To the D. No difference. Owen Strand doesn't want a woman, even in a

00:11:01.060 non-mixed audience, right? So none of us, whether you're complementarian or whether you're patriarchal,

00:11:06.800 in both instances, neither of us wants a woman teaching in a mixed audience where men are 1.00

00:11:13.460 present, right? Neither one of us want Beth Moore preaching on Mother's Day with men in the room. 0.68

00:11:19.380 But Owen goes further than that. He doesn't just say, hey, women shouldn't teach men,

00:11:23.280 but they can teach theology with no disclaimer, no caveats, no specifications, just teach

00:11:28.800 theology in a general sense in whatever capacity they wish to teach it. So long as the context is

00:11:35.740 correct meaning a non-mixed audience only women being present that's not what owen strand says

00:11:41.940 so what owen strand is about to tell you is that yeah women can teach other women theology but even

00:11:49.980 with that being said there should be a particular emphasis of of what particular theology and maybe

00:11:58.520 more specifically what particular application this theology teaching should be um should be

00:12:05.740 emphasizing uh that it's not just um a woman in a woman only context no men present in the room

00:12:13.460 teaching a 17 week long course on theology proper doctrine of god owen doesn't want that

00:12:21.540 he doesn't and neither do i and in that regard we hold the very same position so both of us

00:12:28.020 Say, yeah, not only should a woman learn theology, a woman should be learning all kinds, whatever, whatever theology there is, she should be learning that because that's what first Timothy chapter two says in verse nine. It begins by saying a woman must learn. So now it quickly gets into addressing how she should learn with what posture of heart that she should learn with humility, that she should learn like, like first Peter chapter three with a quiet and gentle spirit.

00:12:55.760 So she should learn in full submission and that she should remain silent.

00:13:01.600 But the very first words that the apostle says is not regarding a woman's posture of

00:13:07.360 heart, namely submission in her learning.

00:13:09.960 But the first thing that the apostle Paul says is that she must learn.

00:13:13.340 So it's not only permissible, it's not merely allowed that a woman learns theology, but

00:13:18.120 she actually is commanded. 0.66

00:13:19.540 She must learn theology.

00:13:21.220 And where would be the implicit question?

00:13:23.540 Where does she learn theology?

00:13:24.640 Well, she learns theology right next to her husband on the same pew, sitting right next to him in the same Lord's Day gathering of the saints as the male biblically male qualified elders are preaching through whole books of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, teaching the whole counsel of God, all theology. 0.99

00:13:43.800 So women should learn all theology, and women are permitted and even commanded, older women,

00:13:50.240 which would mean more spiritually mature women, are not only commanded to learn all theology,

00:13:55.440 but then to teach theology to other women, but not 17-week-long courses of doctrine of God.

00:14:03.480 Why? Because women shouldn't know that. No. Of course they should know that, but they should 1.00

00:14:07.880 learn the 17-week courses on doctrine of God right alongside their husband on the same pew on the

00:14:14.360 Lord's Day from the male elders. That's the context. So, the male elders are teaching theology in the

00:14:20.140 broad sense, doctrine of God, those kinds of things. I'm just using that as just one example.

00:14:25.280 But then women are teaching other women theology. But the reason why you're enlisting a woman 0.97

00:14:33.460 instead of just using the male elders is because in this context of Titus chapter 2,

00:14:38.680 older women training younger women, they're not just teaching theology in general or theology

00:14:43.440 in the abstract, but they're teaching theology particularly as it pertains to those feminine

00:14:48.720 domestic virtues that women are particularly called to, like submission to husbands or loving

00:14:55.720 children or not slandering or being given too much wine or doing this or doing that,

00:15:00.940 the very things that Titus 2

00:15:02.680 lists, and that is precisely

00:15:04.880 what you're about to hear Owen Strand

00:15:06.460 communicate. He's going to convey the very

00:15:08.860 same argument that I and Michael Foster

00:15:10.900 and Brian Sauve and Eric Kahn and all these different

00:15:12.940 guys have also conveyed.

00:15:14.900 This is our position. It has been

00:15:16.680 misrepresented, but it is our position,

00:15:19.200 and so you really don't need to hear more

00:15:20.760 from me. If you'd like to be persuaded

00:15:22.680 of biblical patriarchy,

00:15:24.740 Owen Strand does a fine job. Let's hear it.

00:15:27.940 Is there a 0.97

00:15:28.880 place biblically for 0.98

00:15:30.220 godly women, and I'm going to name one. I'm thinking of Susan Heck, who, you know, if Justin

00:15:35.680 Peters thought she was off the rails, he would not go to her church. Susan Heck is beloved in the

00:15:40.480 Bible church world. She's not a Beth Moore. She's not out on the circuit with Priscilla Shire. 0.68

00:15:44.760 This is a dear sister that many of our churches have speak. I was just in dialogue with her. I'd

00:15:50.460 love for her to come and bless some of our women and our sisters here at the church. This isn't

00:15:55.780 Christine Kane or Beth Moore preaching on Mother's Day or anyone else for that matter. This is just

00:16:00.460 women teaching theology in the right format and applying it to our sisters' contentment, 1.00

00:16:06.620 all the like. Can you speak to that and the unique nuances we maybe need to be careful with

00:16:12.820 while we hold a strong view? Yes, I can. Wow. What a collection of

00:16:20.820 questions and matters there. I would say we start from what is clear and we reason out to what is

00:16:28.000 less clear. What is clear is that pastors and elders are those who are charged with theological

00:16:34.360 and spiritual oversight of the congregation. So in that sense, the women's ministry of the church

00:16:40.520 in a form is the preaching and teaching ministry of the church. We want to guard against, that is, 1.00

00:16:46.680 a form of women's ministry that is out there, very much out there, and that I and others have 0.99

00:16:51.940 reacted to in past days, where, yes, a woman has a pastor and elders, but she thinks of the women's

00:16:59.320 ministry coordinator, director, teacher, whatever it may be, and whatever staff are there as really

00:17:05.800 understanding her and really caring for her and really getting...

00:17:09.340 Like that's her real leaders. That's her real connection.

00:17:11.920 yeah she's got a formal guy who's the pastor but the one she really looks to uh for spiritual

00:17:19.280 vitality whatever you want to say is her women's ministry teacher whatever that term is let's

00:17:24.860 pause it again for just a moment i want to say so that's a fantastic point um such a fantastic

00:17:31.340 point that i myself have made it probably a dozen times over the past year um and all the other guys

00:17:37.580 who hold to biblical patriarchy have been making this exact same point as well. So I'm glad that

00:17:41.780 Kosti Hinn and Owen Strand agree with us because it is significant and it is dangerous when this

00:17:49.940 particular point that Owen is making is disregarded. There's a difference in having a

00:17:55.500 women's only ministry context, whether it's once a month or it's a women's conference or whatever

00:18:01.520 it might be, where a particular woman who has been deemed by the elders of the local

00:18:07.700 church as being spiritually mature, she is spiritually older in the faith, is granted

00:18:13.040 the opportunity, not in a mixed crowd, but with women only, to teach theology, right? 0.94

00:18:18.760 Because you can't teach about submission to husbands apart from theology. 0.81

00:18:22.780 You can't teach about loving children apart from, it is teaching theology.

00:18:27.280 Of course it's teaching theology.

00:18:28.880 For instance, let me give you an example. 0.98

00:18:30.480 my wife, probably one of the most consistent theological pieces of counsel that she regularly

00:18:37.340 gives women in our local church setting is about the sovereignty of God, the doctrine of the

00:18:44.460 sovereignty of God. But it's always in relation. This is why it always comes up. It always comes

00:18:49.280 up because it's always in relation to a woman who is struggling to submit to her husband.

00:18:54.920 Now, 1 Peter 3 talks about how Sarah even called her husband, Abraham, her Lord, lowercase

00:19:01.680 L, Lord, like saying, sir.

00:19:04.340 It was not idolatry, not saying, you know, capital L, capital O, capital R, capital D,

00:19:09.940 not Yahweh, not the Lord, not Lord of Lords, but lowercase L, Lord.

00:19:15.220 It was like referring, it would be like a woman in modern day referring to her husband

00:19:19.140 as a sir.

00:19:21.100 It was a sign of respect.

00:19:23.000 And so, um, the apostle Peter inspired by the spirit list this as an example.

00:19:27.300 And then he goes further and says, and you do well, you are her daughters, her spiritual

00:19:31.940 daughters. 0.75

00:19:32.320 You're, you're a chip off the old block. 0.64

00:19:33.860 You're following in this godly example that Sarah modeled.

00:19:37.120 Um, if you do likewise, and, and if you do not fear anything that is frightening, well,

00:19:45.700 that seems random, right?

00:19:46.660 It almost seems like Peter's just, just randomly changing the subject, right?

00:19:50.780 it's like sarah respected her husband and you are godly like sarah the women of old if you also

00:19:56.860 respect your husband and you feel like there just needs to be a period there but then the apostle

00:20:02.320 peter immediately in the same breath continues and says and you are her daughter if you do likewise

00:20:08.980 you follow her example and do not fear anything that is frightening well why are you changing the

00:20:12.960 subject well the answer is he's not he's not changing the subject the thing that is frightening

00:20:18.140 in reference in that particular text is submitting to a husband, especially because a human husband

00:20:25.860 is not Jesus. He's not infallible. He's not sinless. And so human husbands, now in the

00:20:33.120 context of 1 Peter 3, it's also talking about winning over an unbelieving husband. You might 0.86

00:20:38.340 be yoked, unequally yoked, right? You got saved. You were converted after already having been

00:20:44.780 married to a man. Both of you are unbelievers. The Lord in his sovereign grace chose to save the 1.00

00:20:50.140 wife, but for whatever reason has not chosen to save the husband, at least not yet. So now you

00:20:54.860 have this Christian woman who is married, not just a sinful husband, but a sinful, unbelieving 0.99

00:20:59.720 husband. And what Peter is saying is he's saying, yeah, that's frightening, right? To win him over 1.00

00:21:05.440 without a word, not being argumentative, not being domineering, not trying to usurp his authority,

00:21:10.160 but with your kindness and gentleness with a quiet spirit trying to display godliness and 0.70

00:21:15.800 submission to even this unbelieving sinful husband in such a way that he might see your good works 0.53

00:21:21.240 and that he might come to faith in Jesus that he might be won over that is a frightening and

00:21:26.160 daunting task because this man who is a sinful man in this particular case an unbelieving sinful

00:21:32.320 man he might abuse his authority you're being called to submit not just in this case to Jesus 0.95

00:21:39.480 but to a sinful man who is not jesus who may take advantage of your submission and who may abuse

00:21:46.200 his authority that's frightening well what's one of the things what's one of the theologies right

00:21:51.600 women teaching theology a theology a doctrine that would make this less frightening well one 0.78

00:21:56.820 thing that would make it less frightening is if standing beyond and above this sinful unbelieving 0.81

00:22:04.000 husband who is not infallible what if behind him there was an infallible god who is sinless who is 0.99

00:22:12.820 perfect and who's not just omnipowerful right omnipotent but but he is omnibenevolent all

00:22:20.160 loving and that he is he has promised you in his word in romans chapter 8 that all things work to

00:22:27.780 get together for not just the glory of god but for the good of those who who love him and have

00:22:33.200 been called according to his purpose and so you're this christian wife that god saved and god promises

00:22:38.380 in his word that you love him because he first loved you that's a first john 4 19 and so because

00:22:44.320 you now love him because you've been born again by grace alone through faith alone in christ alone

00:22:48.920 and have been called according to his salvific purposes that he is committed not just with some

00:22:54.200 things but with all things including your marriage being married to an unbelieving man to work that

00:22:59.180 not just that in such a way that he would get eternal glory but for your good not just his 0.51

00:23:05.360 glory but for your good so so what's one of the things that makes submission to a sinful man less

00:23:11.200 fearful that you don't have to fear that which is frightening because even though this guy may

00:23:15.980 be a sinner and maybe he's even an unregenerate pagan sinner standing above and beyond him

00:23:24.120 is the sovereign god who is working not just salvaging something bad happens you know life

00:23:30.160 gives you lemons right not god he's not in charge life this this abstract force like in star wars

00:23:36.500 the universe gives you lemons but god will try to make lemonade uh no no no um if life gives you

00:23:42.140 lemons it's because god himself ordained to give you lemons for the purpose of making lemonade

00:23:47.420 because lemonade is delicious and god has your good in mind so standing above and beyond your

00:23:53.620 husband is a sovereign God who is omnibenevolent. He's all good. He's committed to your good. He's

00:23:59.520 all loving and he is omnipotent. He is sovereign, right? That's the doctrine, the theology, the

00:24:05.180 sovereignty of God, meaning that behind your husband, he's making certain decisions on the

00:24:09.740 ground day to day that affect you. And some of those things may be really hard, but beyond it,

00:24:16.060 God is orchestrating all those things, not just salvaging, but orchestrating and ordaining because

00:24:21.940 God is sovereign over everything. This is R.C. Sproul, classic R.C. Sproul, not one maverick

00:24:27.320 molecule in all the universe. Likewise, if there's not one maverick molecule, there's not one maverick

00:24:33.840 husband. And so when my wife is counseling other women in the church who are struggling to submit

00:24:40.280 to their husband, often she does so by teaching them and encouraging and reminding them about the

00:24:46.860 doctrine of the sovereignty of God because submission to sinful human husbands is frightening

00:24:53.100 but they are commanded wives not to fear anything that is frightening and one of the things that

00:24:58.380 makes this frightening task less frightening is believing that God is sovereign over your husband

00:25:04.600 and he won't let that husband do a single thing that wouldn't ultimately be not only for God's

00:25:10.340 glory, but also for that wife's good. So that's a woman teaching theology, but it's not an abstract

00:25:17.240 general theology proper doctrine of God, 17 week course. It's right in line with Titus two. So a

00:25:25.580 woman must learn all theology. And I would argue a woman also must teach all theology, but for the 1.00

00:25:32.800 purpose and with a particular application of feminine virtues, which are listed in Titus

00:25:39.400 chapter two. That's my position. That's everyone who holds biblical patriarchy, who has more than

00:25:44.360 40 followers on Twitter's position. And God bless, it is Costi and Owen's position. So let's let Owen

00:25:50.580 go ahead and finish now. To a man and a woman alike, elders and pastors are the ones who are

00:25:57.620 provided by God for your spiritual oversight and feeding and edification and shepherding. Okay.

00:26:03.740 I do want to recognize with wind in my sails that in Titus 2, women are called to teach other women, older women to younger women, or to put it slightly differently, more mature women to less mature women.

00:26:17.920 And that teaching does center in the home, marriage, family, homemaking, these sorts of disciplines. It's very clear in the text in Titus 2, 3 to 5. There is that phrase that you said, teach what is good.

00:26:33.500 And I think that's where we get the charge from God for older women like a Susan Heck or like my mother-in-law, Jodi Ware, to go to different churches, let's say, and teach about contentment or godliness or prayer or something like this.

00:26:50.380 So I think we have warrant for women doing that. 0.51

00:26:53.480 They're always going to do that in a careful way. 0.99

00:26:56.600 And we are, by the way, Kosti, in some gray area here.

00:27:01.680 Probably there's going to be some room for disagreement among strong complementarians, among complementarians more broadly.

00:27:08.160 So let that be said.

00:27:10.220 I would want to affirm everything I just said about teaching what is good.

00:27:15.020 I also want to be a little more defined than some are.

00:27:18.560 I'd be a little closer to some Presbyterians, for example, who would invest, again, that theological teaching and oversight in the elder office.

00:27:27.800 um but i do think we have leeway for for a woman to teach on those topics that we were mentioning

00:27:34.240 uh the sovereignty of god and how it applies to the seasons of a woman's life or something like

00:27:39.180 this i'm good with that i i think though a godly woman a mature woman who is teaching is going to

00:27:46.100 do so in a way that is not trying to present herself as a theologian in the way that a a man

00:27:54.540 at a TMS or a GBTS or whatever it's going to be is presenting himself and an elder of the local

00:28:00.860 church is seeing himself as. So there's a lot more I could say there. I would not be one who

00:28:07.100 would be pushing women to write commentaries or works of formal theology or that sort of thing.

00:28:14.920 Again, some gray area. We have some freedom here. But I do think a godly woman is going to teach 0.99

00:28:20.700 what is good. She is also, however, going to say the mandate to teach doctrine in the clearest

00:28:27.300 sense in Scripture is not given to me. The mandate to teach doctrine is given to the elders.

00:28:33.640 I'm going to do that in my home, with my kids, in discipleship, and even, yes, in maybe a women's

00:28:40.140 ministry setting. But even as she does so, if she does so, she's making clear the one appointed

00:28:48.660 to shepherd the church

00:28:50.060 through theological teaching

00:28:51.580 and spiritual oversight

00:28:52.540 is the elk.

00:28:55.040 There you have it.

00:28:56.320 So Owen doesn't want,

00:28:57.400 I don't know if you caught that, 1.00

00:28:58.300 he doesn't want women

00:28:59.500 to write full-length commentaries

00:29:03.440 on whole books of the Bible,

00:29:05.640 which I would just respond

00:29:07.720 by saying, 0.94

00:29:08.320 you bigot, 0.96

00:29:09.500 how dare you, 0.99

00:29:11.300 you patriarchal man. 0.88

00:29:14.100 Welcome to the team, Owen. 0.81

00:29:15.860 We're glad to have you.

00:29:16.800 um yeah that's that's the position i would i'm being facetious but here i am speaking plainly

00:29:24.520 now i would wholeheartedly agree with owen in that assessment there's a difference in a woman

00:29:29.280 teaching even with only women being present so she's not exercising authority or teaching a man

00:29:35.220 but even in context that is women only there's a difference in a woman teaching theology with the

00:29:41.580 the express purpose and application towards that which is feminine, the life of a woman,

00:29:48.180 stages of life, the sovereignty of God as it applies to this, waiting for marriage,

00:29:52.140 as you long to be married, but you find yourself still single, these kinds of things. 0.51

00:29:58.060 There's a difference in a woman teaching all theology, but particularly applied to a woman's

00:30:04.340 life, which is what Titus 2 talks about, versus a woman in a general overarching manner writing

00:30:12.380 commentary on the book of Romans. And what Owen's saying is it's not even that that belongs to men

00:30:18.960 and not women, it's primarily that that belongs to pastors. And pastors, biblically speaking,

00:30:26.600 are called to be men. So the individuals who are tasked with teaching the whole counsel of God

00:30:33.760 in a general sense to both men and women that applies for all different kinds of people

00:30:39.400 going verse by verse through whole books of the Bible, writing commentary or preaching

00:30:44.460 expository series through the book of Romans. That is a distinctly male role and has been

00:30:51.780 given to the elders who are biblically qualified males. What Owen has just articulated is wonderful.

00:31:00.240 um i think for me the difficulty is seeing the contradiction and and i can't help but think at

00:31:06.640 least at some level uh that perhaps the disconnect is not what's being taught but a disagreement over

00:31:14.040 who's allowed to teach it because both owen and i would hold to patriarchy at least on this point

00:31:22.120 that is the patriarchal position and again like i said i can't do anything about there's always

00:31:28.200 going to be crazy people, right? So this isn't just, oh, well, patriarchy attracts some crazy 0.70

00:31:33.240 people. It does. That's true. That's true. But almost every theological position, there will 0.97

00:31:39.780 always be some people following that person who is articulating something that is true

00:31:44.740 and biblical, but then certain people in the camp that are on the fringes or well over the line and

00:31:50.600 just downright extreme. So again, that's why I say I'm sure there are people within the patriarchal,

00:31:56.480 I've heard random people on Twitter trying to bring back polygamy, but I'm not a fan.

00:32:03.120 And, and, and the guys that, that, that I know are not fans. Um, so that may be again, somebody 0.99

00:32:09.460 with, you know, 30 followers on Twitter, but that's, that's not somebody who is leading in

00:32:15.360 that particular position. And so all that being said on this point, I think that, uh, Costi and

00:32:20.960 Owen would agree with someone like me and Eric Kahn, for instance. Um, the difference though,

00:32:26.860 I think is not that, uh, that, that the patriarchy guys are teaching one thing and it's extreme and

00:32:33.200 it's dangerous and Owen and Costi are teaching another thing and it's careful and nuanced and

00:32:38.480 winsome. I don't think that's the issue. I don't think it's what's being taught and there being

00:32:43.540 this drastic distinction between, uh, what is being taught. I think it's kind of at some level,

00:32:49.720 just a disagreement over who's allowed to teach it costi and owen are allowed to teach it i'm not

00:32:57.720 i i think at some level and i and i'm hoping that my brothers listen to this and i'd love to have

00:33:04.520 them on my show to have a conversation but that's i could be wrong and i don't want to impute motives

00:33:09.080 but that's what it feels like and and and here i am talking about feelings feelings you know we

00:33:17.020 We don't follow our heart.

00:33:17.920 We follow Christ.

00:33:18.540 So I could be wrong.

00:33:19.920 Hear me.

00:33:20.320 I could be wrong.

00:33:21.840 But it doesn't feel like a serious concern from my brothers in regards to the actual substance and content that these guys within the biblical patriarchy camp are teaching substance that is extreme and dangerous.

00:33:38.940 Because we have the same substance.

00:33:42.280 And you can say, well, it's tone.

00:33:44.140 I don't think that's it either.

00:33:45.700 It might be.

00:33:46.300 i i don't think it is i think the big difference is not the substance it's it's not the tone or

00:33:53.180 the methodology of communicating that substance i think the big difference between us is um

00:33:59.460 i think owen just doesn't think that i should be teaching these things i think he just he would

00:34:09.040 rather do it um i don't know it feels a little bit like gatekeeping to be completely honest

00:34:15.840 it feels a little bit like it all right we're going to go ahead and get into the head covering

00:34:21.620 piece but before we do one more brief word from our last sponsor of the day with the banking

00:34:27.180 industry in another tailspin and the fed ready to raise interest rates once again many of you

00:34:33.020 are probably asking when does this madness stop if you're interested in learning how to establish

00:34:38.500 a family banking system outside of today's mainstream banking insanity then schedule a

00:34:44.280 call with our sponsors at Private Family Banking. There's a way for individuals, families, and

00:34:50.740 businesses to put their hard-earned money to work continuously accruing compounding interest

00:34:56.380 and then have those resources available as collateral for cash or for financing investments,

00:35:03.900 businesses, college, and other major life expenditures without having to go to the big

00:35:09.700 banks for loans. Income tax protected, safety from stock market losses, guaranteed rates of

00:35:17.160 compounding interest, and the ability to store up an inheritance for your children's children

00:35:22.580 and avoid the death tax on your estate. If this interests you, then email our friends at

00:35:29.300 banking at privatefamilybanking.com. Again, that's banking at privatefamilybanking.com.

00:35:37.100 Schedule your appointment today.

00:35:39.700 All right. So we're going to go ahead and look at our last clip from Kosti Hinn and Owen Strand.

00:35:47.180 This is on Kosti's platform. It's called Together for the Gospel, or I think it's just called

00:35:52.560 for the Gospel. Is that? Yeah, Nathan just confirmed. It's just for the Gospel. Check

00:35:58.160 him out. He's on Spotify, iTunes, YouTube, and a lot of his content is fantastic. Kosti and Owen

00:36:05.160 are solid brothers in the Lord with good doctrine. These are guys that you should be listening to.

00:36:11.180 They are. I don't know if they would say the same, but that's my position, that these are guys that

00:36:18.280 you should be listening to, especially, you should especially be listening to them because as we've

00:36:23.100 just discovered in the first half of our show, Owen's position is the very same as mine. So of

00:36:29.420 course I want you to listen to him because he's teaching you the same thing that I've been talking

00:36:33.860 about. So real quick, before we go into this last clip dealing with head coverings, I wanted to

00:36:38.400 share a tweet that I wrote a few weeks ago. It's a thread, but it's not very long. Where I was just,

00:36:44.320 this is before Costi and Owen's episode dropped, the one that we're discussing today. But this is

00:36:50.720 where I just tried to clear up some of the misconception that seems to come from brothers

00:36:55.020 like Costi and Owen that would say, oh, these, these, these, you know, trad wives and Theo bros.

00:37:03.860 Right. So, which doesn't feel super charitable, you know, but, um, you know, there are some,

00:37:10.620 uh, again, solid brothers and sisters for that matter, within the complementarian reformed camp.

00:37:18.300 Um, they don't, they don't like the patriarchal guys and, uh, they won't even call us, you know,

00:37:24.220 the, the patriarchy camp. Um, instead, uh, we usually, you know, get the label of, you know,

00:37:29.180 trad wives and Theo bros, um, something like that. And so there was some of that going on.

00:37:34.620 Um, I saw on online. And so I wanted to try to, uh, to clarify, uh, my position, which is again,

00:37:42.860 um, as far as I understand it, the same position that, uh, that other guys in the camp hold

00:37:48.340 themselves. And, uh, and so I wrote this and I think that, I guess my question would be if Owen

00:37:54.860 ends up listening to this, again, I'd love to have him on the show, but if Owen listens to

00:37:59.140 this, I would love to just to know from Owen directly, uh, what, what is it from what he

00:38:07.140 just articulated with Costi and what you're about to hear from what I wrote in this tweet.

00:38:14.440 What are, what are the difference? Cause I feel like kind of that meme with Pam from the office

00:38:19.820 where she's, you know, they're holding two pictures. Uh, corporate wants you to, uh,

00:38:23.420 to determine the difference between the two pictures. And she says, it's the same picture.

00:38:27.120 I feel like it's exactly the same. What Owen just articulated about Titus 2 and how he does want women learning theology for sure and teaching theology, qualified women teaching theology to other women, but he doesn't want a Jen Wilkins situation where she becomes the pseudo, the pseudo de facto pastor of the women to where, yes, there are male elders at the church that actually wear the label pastor,

00:38:53.220 But this women's minister is actually seen as the women's pastor, even though that term's not used.

00:38:59.460 And she's not just teaching doctrine as it particularly applies to that which is feminine, to wives and to mothers and single women.

00:39:08.040 But instead, she's just teaching theology in an abstract, general sense, like doctrine of God, multiple week courses that really should be done on the Lord's Day by the elders, the male elders of the church.

00:39:21.760 And that's where you get into weird things like Jen Wilkin saying that, you know, that women can better identify with penal substitutionary atonement and, you know, and the, the, the, uh, salvific work of Christ because of their menstrual cycle.

00:39:35.400 And I'm not trying to be crude here, but that's what she said, because women bleed once a month, they can better understand the bleeding savior and his penal substitutionary atonement.

00:39:47.360 That's weird.

00:39:48.960 That's weird.

00:39:49.900 and so i agree with i know owen would have a problem with that um i agree with him that that's

00:39:55.440 we don't want that we and so instead we want women if they are going to teach which is good

00:40:00.680 and right titus 2 talks about they're teaching for a particular purpose um very specific application 0.98

00:40:06.440 to the feminine the feminine life uh to submission to husbands and loving children

00:40:12.980 these kinds of things and then theology just in a general sense should be taught to the whole body

00:40:18.900 of the church, men and women alike, together primarily on the Lord's Day, and the primary

00:40:24.160 teachers of theology in that general sense is the male eldership of the church. I know we agree.

00:40:31.180 So that's what Owen just articulated. That's my position. Here's a tweet that I wrote before they

00:40:35.820 came out with this episode that I think articulates the very same thing, but I just want to be

00:40:39.740 abundantly clear. So here's the tweet. Let's go ahead and do it. There appears to be a

00:40:43.860 misunderstanding of biblical patriarchy. I'm giving the benefit of the doubt that it's not

00:40:48.380 simply blatant slander. Allow me to offer a simple explanation in an attempt to clear things up.

00:40:55.140 Biblical patriarchy insists that women should learn every bit of doctrine. Women should, 1.00

00:41:02.640 it's hard, I'm sorry, it's hard, it's small, but women should sit right alongside their husbands

00:41:09.080 on the Lord's Day, there we go, learning the meaning and application of every verse in the

00:41:15.960 Bible. A woman must learn. That's 1 Timothy chapter 2, I believe it's verse 9. Biblical 1.00

00:41:23.000 patriarchy also insists that older women should, that is, they must, train, that wouldn't be teach, 0.97

00:41:30.860 younger women. And there is no way to do this apart from teaching these women theology. However, 0.94

00:41:39.280 there is a dynamic difference between an older woman teaching younger women the feminine virtues 0.97

00:41:44.760 of Titus 2 while utilizing the doctrine of the whole of scripture and an older woman teaching

00:41:52.080 younger women a 12-week course on doctrine of God. The former example is most certainly women 0.57

00:41:59.820 teaching women theology, but with the express purpose of helping these younger women to better

00:42:07.120 understand how to live out biblical womanhood. The latter example, the 12-week course on

00:42:14.140 doctrine of God in the general sense. That would be an example. The latter example is creating

00:42:19.800 women-only contexts for a woman to function as a pseudo-pastor while still being a card-carrying 0.94

00:42:28.940 complementarian rather than simply allowing women to learn subjects such as doctrine of God from

00:42:34.940 their male pastors right alongside their husbands. My constituents and I have only

00:42:41.960 opposed the latter not the former let's let's go scroll a little bit more so when someone makes

00:42:50.380 the blatant assertion that biblical patriarchy refuses to allow women to teach other women 0.94

00:42:57.140 theology at all because that's what's been said right and i got to be clear about that

00:43:02.580 because words matter and and and slander is a big deal it's a big sin and i'm not saying in

00:43:09.940 this case, just to be clear, I'm not saying that Costi or Owen have slandered me or other guys

00:43:16.420 holding the biblical patriarchy, but there are some in the complementarian, conservative,

00:43:21.200 reformed evangelical camp who have. It has been said, it has been said that the Theobros and

00:43:29.420 Tradwives, and my name has been thrown in there along with a bunch of others, that we assert that

00:43:34.960 women should not teach theology, period. And that has never been said. Again, not by anyone with

00:43:43.820 more than 35, 40 Twitter followers. That has not been said. We have never said that women cannot,

00:43:52.260 per Titus 2, teach other women theology. What we're saying is that they should not necessarily 0.97

00:43:57.520 be writing, in a general sense, doctrine of God type theology, whole commentaries on whole books

00:44:03.500 of the Bible, those kinds of things, teaching in that sense 12-week series on theology proper,

00:44:08.980 that that ultimately belongs to the elders who are male. But women do teach theology. It is theology 0.97

00:44:16.400 and it comes from the whole Bible. It's the whole counsel of God, but through the avenue of the

00:44:22.740 express purpose and application, practical and emotional application for the life of a woman.

00:44:30.700 i even heard someone misrepresent us so far on on on their podcast that they said that the

00:44:39.360 patriarchal position and they were referring to me and i know this and i'm not going to name them

00:44:44.980 because i want to be careful but they were referring to me they were referring to eric

00:44:48.260 they were referring to a few others they said uh that that we that our position that we had

00:44:53.980 articulated that women should not not only should they not teach theology which that's a

00:44:58.060 misrepresentation as i've already demonstrated but that they they said that we uh that our

00:45:03.140 position is that women shouldn't even learn theology that's a level of slander

00:45:10.840 that is just again if it's unintentional slander if it's just a massive misunderstanding well it

00:45:20.120 was publicly said it needs to be publicly corrected but but that is so far from what

00:45:26.020 anyone in my camp is communicating um that it's it's just uh it's deception it's deceitful

00:45:34.040 it's sinful it's really it's sinful and uh and and it needs to be publicly repented of

00:45:41.700 it needs to be publicly repented of and i think that's what i see you know i i think that there's

00:45:48.560 guys in the conservative reformed camp. Complementarian Owen, as he said, would describe

00:45:56.260 himself as a hard complementarian. I appreciate that. I've often heard the language of broad

00:46:01.820 complementarianism, that the distinction of roles between men and women, that it centers in the

00:46:08.140 home of the church, but that there is a broader application of distinctly male leadership even

00:46:14.200 outside of the home of the church in society as a whole. And I think that Owen affirms that. I

00:46:19.080 think he even said that in this episode with Costi Hinn. So that's a broad complementarian

00:46:23.240 that I would say is pretty much, that is the patriarchal position, right? Going back to the

00:46:30.640 meme from the office, Pam from the office, right? Corporate wants to tell you to tell them the

00:46:34.840 difference between these two pictures, broad complementarianism and biblical patriarchy.

00:46:38.360 It's the same picture. For the most part, at least 98% of that is pretty much the same picture.

00:46:43.600 but i think there's people in in this camp that um that for a long time and and this is you know

00:46:52.440 i want to be clear with my words this is speculation so i'm going to call it what it is

00:46:56.060 it's speculation it could be true it also cannot be true um but i think there's some people who've

00:47:02.600 been in the conservative evangelical reformed complementarian camp for a while and they're

00:47:09.100 used to being kind of like the like if you think of bookends bookends of orthodoxy what what

00:47:16.260 theological positions are permissible acceptable the status quo there's a group that have have

00:47:23.460 become accustomed to being um the bookend in terms of on the right right that uh you know like

00:47:33.540 Gandalf you shall not pass I am the most biblically conservative that you are allowed to be

00:47:41.900 in the the realm of orthodoxy within the the orthodox reformed you know evangelical camp

00:47:50.240 and I and I think that that part of the problem again is not the content the substance the actual

00:47:57.060 position. I think there's just, at some level, there's a frustration, it seems like a frustration

00:48:04.460 that, no, no, no, we are the designated bookend for the right side of evangelical Reformed

00:48:14.380 Christians. That you can go this far to the left, and you can go this far to the right,

00:48:21.040 and we set the boundary, the marker, for how far you can go to the right. And now you've got to

00:48:27.040 couple guys you got a handful of guys that are kind of emerging in the province of god who are

00:48:33.020 not that extreme they're not that far right but they're but they're articulating some different

00:48:37.580 positions that would be a little bit more to the right of someone like owen strand and um

00:48:42.960 and it seems to be unwelcome and i don't know if it's because these positions are

00:48:49.640 truly just dangerous and poisonous or if it's just because

00:48:55.760 is it the position what's being said or is it just who

00:49:00.540 no no no you i could have said that in fact i think i will say that a couple

00:49:08.280 weeks from now on a podcast with costi i'll say the very

00:49:11.100 same thing that you said um but you can't say that i don't want

00:49:16.020 you saying it. That is the way it appears. A little bit. A little bit. All right, let's go

00:49:24.380 ahead and let's check out this last clip. But man, I mean, it's crazy when you get the

00:49:28.660 misrepresentation of the patriarchy guys, the Theo bros are saying that women aren't allowed

00:49:34.640 to teach theology. How do you teach submission to husbands without teaching theology? And in that,

00:49:41.400 it includes big theology like the sovereignty of God, the example that I just gave earlier.

00:49:46.020 and, and to hear the misrepresentation that is not, still hasn't been corrected. It's been over

00:49:53.460 a month. Um, but public misrepresentation that, that, uh, the, the Theo bros and trad wives,

00:49:59.040 the patriarchy guys, um, that they believe that, uh, women can't even learn theology.

00:50:04.800 Um, I mean, again, that, and that wasn't Owen, that, that wasn't a costy, but there was one

00:50:10.860 very influential individual who who said explicitly that and has not corrected it and uh that's just

00:50:17.620 i mean that's just a level of slander i it's hard to uh it's hard to articulate it's uh so deceptive

00:50:24.840 it's hard to put it into words um it could have been unintentionally slander ignorance out of

00:50:31.640 ignorance but either way man unless that person that individual is still ignorant and has no clue

00:50:37.800 that they did it um if they have if they've come to realize oh whoops i misrepresented them then

00:50:45.560 man do not delay uh in in making that right leave your gift at the altar and go and go and make that

00:50:54.540 right i lied about my brother i slandered my brother and i did it publicly to thousands and

00:51:00.860 thousands of people right that's what nathaniel jolly did right god bless him for nathaniel jolly

00:51:07.640 He misrepresented me a couple of weeks ago with, with my book, fight by flight.

00:51:11.580 He took a clip from my sermon and he took it out of context and, um, you know, 90 seconds

00:51:18.500 before he started the clip, I, I was specifically talking about Christian men in a state like

00:51:25.160 California, in a blue progressive state who are struggling to provide physically provide

00:51:30.700 for their families.

00:51:31.440 And in this hypothetical scenario, have the opportunity to move out of that state to a

00:51:36.500 place where they would be able to better provide, but are choosing not to refusing. And then I said

00:51:41.760 that a man like that is being stupid and you can't compare it to faithful Christians in North Korea 1.00

00:51:47.800 because the faithful Christians in North Korea who are struggling to provide, the difference is that 1.00

00:51:51.920 they're trapped. They can't get out. But for you, you're not trapped. You're just being stupid.

00:51:57.040 Now, I wasn't saying all Christians in California are stupid, but the context of a man deliberately 1.00

00:52:03.440 who's not providing for his family could in the example that i was giving hypothetically could 0.99

00:52:08.400 provide for his family if he made a geographic move but is deliberately choosing not to that's 0.97

00:52:13.300 the person that i was calling stupid and in that light just to be fair the apostle paul literally 0.98

00:52:18.560 says that if a man does not provide for the members of his household he's worse than an 0.99

00:52:23.500 unbeliever he's denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever so when i say stupid i'm kind 0.99

00:52:28.560 of being winsome and soft compared to the verbiage of the Apostle Paul. But you cut that context out 0.99

00:52:35.280 and then boom, you put that clip out there and boom, I just misrepresented to thousands of people

00:52:41.400 and a ton of people were jumping on me. I can't believe he said this. Look at him. He's so extreme.

00:52:46.900 I knew it. The Christian nationalists, you know, because they couldn't get me in the battle two

00:52:53.000 months prior with Christian nationalism and couldn't find the fatal flaw. It's like, he's a 0.68

00:52:58.220 racist and then we come out with a statement on you know the gospel and christian nationalism

00:53:02.360 where we explicitly you know denounce racism and you know sinful ethnic partiality and

00:53:08.480 well we couldn't get him there but we know he's bad it's not if he's wrong we know he's wrong and

00:53:14.440 we just haven't found it yet and now he came out with his book and he's calling all christians in 0.95

00:53:18.660 california stupid well my whole point in bringing it up is nathaniel jolly when that was brought to 0.97

00:53:23.820 his attention. God bless him. I appreciate this. He corrected it. He deleted the tweet and he 1.00

00:53:29.320 publicly made it right. He publicly slandered me and I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that

00:53:34.620 he did ignorantly, that he didn't know. So then he publicly clarified and said, you know what?

00:53:39.700 I still don't agree with his overall position. I still think he's wrong, which he's perfectly

00:53:44.660 permissible. Of course he can think I'm wrong. Maybe I am wrong, you know, but, but I misrepresented

00:53:50.020 him. That's not what he said. Here's the context. I'm sorry. To which I retweeted him immediately

00:53:55.200 and said, hey, you caused me a lot of grief over the last 24 hours. And what am I going to do?

00:54:01.280 Immediately forgive you because Christ has forgiven me far more. And it was done.

00:54:07.400 But the individual who said that the patriarchy, the Theobros, don't believe that women should

00:54:12.980 even learn, much less teach theology, they've never made it right. And I've got a sneaking

00:54:18.480 suspicion that they're not ignorant, that they know. So we'll see. All right, last clip. This 0.94

00:54:24.000 is from Owen and Costi. Now we're going to go to the beginning of the video dealing with

00:54:27.740 head coverings. The first question I have for you is on 1 Corinthians 11, 2-16, head coverings

00:54:35.700 and all of that. It's a hot topic these days, lots of confusion, but also what I'm hearing from

00:54:41.840 people, lots of willingness to listen and learn. I spoke with one brother recently who humbly just

00:54:45.880 said to me, hey, I come to this issue with no bias. I just want to be right with the Lord.

00:54:50.460 I want to be in line with God's Word. Is this an issue of public command or private conviction?

00:54:56.480 Big topic. It's all over the place. So could you walk us through first and foremost on the issue

00:55:02.040 of womanhood, head coverings, order, all of that? How would we apply this issue? Some people mandate

00:55:08.280 head coverings. Others don't. Help us think through this biblically. Yeah, a really tough issue,

00:55:14.220 frankly, Costi, one of the toughest in terms of exegesis. This is the kind of passage that in a

00:55:20.540 seminary classroom, in a Greek exegesis class, a professor will throw at his students, and, you

00:55:26.620 know, you try to reason it out for some time, because the passage, 1 Corinthians 11, 2-16,

00:55:31.500 takes some fascinating twists and turns. So let that be said from the outset. Second thing to say

00:55:36.900 is that at the end of this chapter, Paul tells the Corinthians that this is not something to be

00:55:42.080 contentious about. So that's a very important framing word. Paul is giving pastoral guidance,

00:55:48.080 and that matters. We're not playing that soft in terms of it not being the Word of God or

00:55:52.140 something like that. But Paul is saying, hey, just FYI, I'm speaking into your situation,

00:55:58.580 but I don't want you to freak out over this. I don't want you to divide over this. Honestly,

00:56:05.180 I think if we're reading Paul and interpreting him, he's saying, don't divide over this,

00:56:09.900 really. What I think Paul is teaching in 1 Corinthians 11 on head coverings is basically

00:56:16.220 that the Corinthian women are in a compromised culture, and Paul wants them to mark themselves 0.99

00:56:22.940 out as women. He wants men to look distinct from women. That's to the glory of God. He wants women 0.69

00:56:28.620 even to image that they are made from man in terms of Adam and Eve, and so the wife is submissive to 0.87

00:56:35.960 her husband and distinct from him in a God-glorifying way. And so if you follow the

00:56:41.440 passage all the way through, you and I could talk about this for two hours, three hours at length,

00:56:46.320 but if you follow the passage all the way through, you see at the end that Paul uses the term

00:56:51.860 covering in the noun form in verses 14 and 15 to describe the woman's long hair. We're not talking

00:56:59.040 about a woman who has cancer tragically or something like that and saying she's in sin

00:57:02.960 because she can't grow her hair long, but what Paul is laying out for the Corinthians, and I think

00:57:07.640 beyond the Corinthian church, even into our day, is that to a woman's fullest ability, she images

00:57:14.060 the glory of God, her God-given beauty and distinctiveness, and a joyful spirit by having

00:57:19.680 her hair long, and that is, I believe, what functions as her covering. Some disagree over this.

00:57:26.200 Kosti, as you know, some say no, it's kind of a shawl or a sort of distinctive covering, a scarf

00:57:31.760 for something like that, that a woman wears in her hair. I would say, honestly, from this tough

00:57:36.500 passage, that's a possible interpretation. I wouldn't want to say a woman who's doing that 0.85

00:57:40.860 is in sin or something like that. But I do think we've got to be careful about making head coverings,

00:57:46.880 whatever your view, the test of biblical womanhood. That's not what Paul does. That is what some of

00:57:52.440 our peers are doing. And they're causing some confusion along those lines. And I have real

00:57:57.320 concerns about that as i think you do i i would have real concerns about that too owen um if if 0.99

00:58:08.960 some of our peers were making head coverings the test of biblical womanhood the test um that would

00:58:17.460 be concerning again i know i don't know anybody who's doing that um i don't i'd love to know

00:58:25.260 i'd love it because if somebody's doing that i'd like to reach out to them i'd like to address that

00:58:29.460 if somebody's making head coverings the test of biblical womanhood um a woman being faithful to

00:58:35.480 the lord then uh then that needs to be addressed because there's a lot there is a lot um that would

00:58:42.700 be a test of a woman's fidelity to christ a lot beyond merely her covering her head on the lord's

00:58:49.780 day. Um, but again, these are, these are some of the things that I just, um, I think this is the 0.70

00:58:57.040 disconnect. I don't think it's what's being taught. I think it's just who's teaching it.

00:59:05.100 You're not allowed to teach that. You might be right. You know, we even said that, you know,

00:59:11.440 it's a plausible interpretation. I think it's a little bit more than plausible, but

00:59:15.340 it's a plausible. I see how you could get there. You might be right, but it's the,

00:59:19.780 it's the divisive, dangerous, extreme, the detest of biblical womanhood, whether or not she covers 0.99

00:59:31.360 her head. And I just, I don't see it. I don't see anybody doing that. I don't. So I'm a local 1.00

00:59:42.000 pastor, first and foremost, before a guy who has a podcast and those kinds of things. I'm a local

00:59:47.360 pastor, first and foremost. And you can ask every single member of my church, if you would like.

00:59:53.520 I have not taught on head coverings or mentioned it. Not just taught, like opened up 1 Corinthians

00:59:58.800 11 and done an expositional sermon for 60 minutes. I certainly haven't done that. I have not even

01:00:04.320 mentioned head coverings. And the church that I planted in April of 2021 here in Central Texas,

01:00:11.300 I have not mentioned head coverings once. It's been over two years. I have not mentioned it once.

01:00:17.360 Um, we have lots of women who do not cover their head. Now there are women who do cover their head. 1.00

01:00:24.640 My wife covers her head. My sister covers her head. Uh, so there are women in the church who 1.00

01:00:29.600 wear a head covering and there are plenty of women who don't. Um, until really recently,

01:00:36.360 I've noticed more women are covering their heads now. Uh, but until very recently, uh, I would say 1.00

01:00:42.240 it was maybe only a quarter, at most 25% of the women in the church who were covering their heads.

01:00:47.360 um now it looks as though it's maybe 40 almost half and half almost 50 but again i have not

01:00:54.680 mentioned head coverings uh in the corporate assembly a single time and even with my podcast

01:01:02.400 i have mentioned head coverings less than half a dozen times over the last two years probably i

01:01:07.940 believe maybe three this is probably the fourth or fifth time that i'm i'm actually taking some

01:01:13.020 time to address, uh, this particular topic. Um, so the idea that it's being made the test of

01:01:19.980 biblical womanhood, uh, in fact, I would agree with my friend, Michael Foster that, uh, who is

01:01:25.840 not a head covering guy, by the way, he disagrees with me on this. Um, but I would agree with him

01:01:31.560 that, um, not only is it not the test of biblical womanhood, it matters. I believe it's a command

01:01:37.100 in scripture. It matters, but not, it is not the premier test of biblical womanhood. And not only

01:01:42.280 is it not? It can be really deceiving. 1 Peter 3 says that it's not the outward beauty, right?

01:01:49.800 It's not the outward appearance of a woman, but it's the inward beauty of the heart that God finds

01:01:57.580 precious in his sight, a gentle and quiet spirit. And the irony is that I have been aware of women

01:02:04.780 who come into the position, the theological conviction, they and their husband, that they

01:02:10.120 should cover their head on the lord's day in worship and so they began covering their head

01:02:13.520 but that particular woman is still what i would describe as a loud woman not quiet and gentle

01:02:20.520 in her spirit but loud and contentious there are women who cover their heads but are marked 1.00

01:02:29.440 marked regularly marked by being argumentative with their husbands in their home so they're 1.00

01:02:36.580 wearing a sign of submission, but they don't have a submissive heart. Now, part of that is because

01:02:45.200 sanctification, internal sanctification, the heart actually being shaped more and more into

01:02:52.240 the image of Christ. Well, guess what? That takes time. It's a lifelong process from the point of

01:02:58.880 conversion to the day we breathe our last breath. And in this life, we never fully arrive, right?

01:03:04.180 This Wesleyan idea of sinless perfection, it's not a thing.

01:03:07.760 It's certainly not a biblical thing.

01:03:09.240 And so none of us are going to be fully sanctified, perfectly sanctified in this life.

01:03:14.800 We will not reach a state of sinless perfection.

01:03:17.920 This is a long and arduous process of mortifying the flesh, putting sin to death, making no

01:03:23.920 provisions for the flesh, as Owen would say, John Owen, that is.

01:03:29.280 I'm sure Owen Strand would say it too.

01:03:30.980 I know he's a big fan of John Owen and so am I.

01:03:33.440 So all that being said, the point is that sanctification of the heart, becoming a woman who is marked by a quiet and gentle spirit inwardly, the beauty of the heart, that takes years.

01:03:47.740 Coming into the conviction that you should wear a piece of cloth on your head on Sunday morning for an hour and a half, that is something that goes black to white, right?

01:03:58.960 Night and day change over the course of a week, right?

01:04:02.120 One Sunday, you're there, and then the next Sunday, you're there and your head's covered.

01:04:07.380 So you can do that in the matter of from one Sunday to the next.

01:04:10.640 You can make that transition, the external transition.

01:04:14.060 And it does matter.

01:04:15.020 If it's a command in Scripture, it matters.

01:04:17.680 But it is not the mark of biblical womanhood.

01:04:21.520 The mark of biblical womanhood, as I see it in the Scripture, is the inward beauty of the heart.

01:04:27.760 It's the inward, internal, lifelong process of sanctification, not just wearing a outward

01:04:33.960 external symbol of submission, but actually possessing a heart posture of quietness and

01:04:41.100 gentleness and submission to those that God has appointed in authority.

01:04:46.480 And so, yeah, again, I just, I don't know anybody who's making this the test of biblical

01:04:53.120 womanhood.

01:04:53.680 but what i do know is that there are again individuals who are saying i think that this

01:04:59.020 is an issue that has been lost um you look even the early 1900s less than 100 years ago

01:05:06.380 and women at church they're they're wearing a covering now most of them are wearing hats and

01:05:12.940 not necessarily a shawl some of them are wearing shawls um but it it was i mean it was just

01:05:18.920 it was the normal position it was the norm within evangelicalism in our country um in in just 70

01:05:29.660 70 years ago that women are wearing hats it wasn't until very recently that that women started i mean 0.99

01:05:36.400 some of them actually had orchestrated demonstrations where in the middle of the sermon 0.76

01:05:41.880 on a sunday all the women they had planted ahead of time they would took off their hats and threw 1.00

01:05:47.600 them down and it was a sign it was a part of the feminist movement it was a part of early kind of 0.99

01:05:52.820 like second wave uh feminism this rejection of we're not going to wear a hat anymore and cover 0.97

01:05:58.180 our head and and eventually evangelicals bought it now if if it is a command in scripture not the

01:06:08.960 mark of biblical womanhood, but a mark, a mark, one act of external obedience that the apostle

01:06:17.880 took the time to write half a chapter of the Bible about. If it is a mark and you're living

01:06:23.920 currently in a culture that is saturated in feminism, it's the air we breathe. All of us 1.00

01:06:30.260 are more feministic than we even know, including myself. And that's, you know, the sons of Issachar,

01:06:35.700 they knew the times if we know that right now um extreme abuse of biblical patriarchy there are

01:06:41.460 maybe some examples of somebody with 17 followers on twitter there are examples of that but we know 0.59

01:06:46.460 that that is true but it's the footnote and the headline right now is feminism in our culture

01:06:52.500 and in our churches and and in that the vast majority of evangelicalism i'm talking 90 plus

01:07:03.360 hasn't even entertained the idea of wearing a head covering for about 50 60 70 years

01:07:11.780 then yeah it might be worth talking about and again not as the quintessential mark of biblical

01:07:19.840 womanhood but saying hey this is a forgotten commandment in the book of the law and god's

01:07:27.360 law weren't and we should talk about it now another thing that i want to say um what i appreciate

01:07:35.640 about guys who who are in our camp we're you know not necessarily on the patriarchal side of things

01:07:43.020 we don't necessarily agree on head coverings but we're in the same camp in terms of being

01:07:47.760 reformed in terms of being conservative in terms of being evangelical and at least in terms of

01:07:54.040 views of men and women, at least complementarian. What I appreciate is that most of these guys,

01:08:00.840 if they don't hold to a head covering position that I would hold to, they at least acknowledge

01:08:07.180 that it is a command and it's a timeless command. That it's not merely cultural. It's not just that

01:08:14.040 there was something unique like temple prostitution going on in Corinth at that time, in this place,

01:08:19.440 in this time. And so Paul says, you know, you really want to stand out women from the prostitutes 0.50

01:08:25.080 who are doing this. You want to make sure that there's not, you know, that people don't wrongly,

01:08:30.840 you know, associate you with them. So you need to have a physical, in your physical appearance,

01:08:35.800 do something to distinguish yourselves. Go ahead and wear something on your heads or grow your hair

01:08:41.640 out long. What I appreciate is that most of the people in our camp more broadly, they're not

01:08:47.120 saying that. They're saying, no, it's a timeless command. And it's a timeless command because the

01:08:52.000 apostle Paul doesn't point to momentary cultural foundation or bases for his argument, for issuing

01:09:00.100 the command. Instead, what he draws on is the very same thing that the apostle Paul draws on in 1

01:09:04.420 Timothy chapter 2. He draws on the created order. He draws on man and woman, man being formed first

01:09:11.160 and then woman God's design he draws on creation before sin even entered the world and because the

01:09:17.700 created order is the basis for the command that's being issued in first corinthians 11 you must

01:09:23.540 believe that it's timeless because if you if you whatever hermeneutic you have to employ to say

01:09:29.360 that this is merely cultural for it was just for corinth and and just in that time and that place

01:09:35.440 and it doesn't apply to us today whatsoever um that same hermeneutic if consistently applied

01:09:40.780 to first timothy chapter two that's that's where you get beth more that's where you get women

01:09:44.980 preachers because it's the same argumentation it's the same basis the created order so you

01:09:52.920 you got to at least be able to say now this is a command it's not just cultural it's a timeless

01:09:57.780 command because it's rooted in the created ordinance it's for all people not just corinth

01:10:02.520 two thousand years ago but all people in all places and i like that most of the guys again

01:10:08.940 in our broader camp, they all agree with that. And I appreciate that. So then the question becomes

01:10:13.340 not, is it a command? That argument's already been dealt with. Yes, it's a command for all

01:10:18.620 people in all places. So now the question is, okay, but practically how do we obey the command?

01:10:23.920 Do we obey the command by wedding rings? That's kind of MacArthur's view. Just a symbol of

01:10:30.940 submission. It doesn't have to be on the head, you know, in our modern culture, you know, the

01:10:34.760 wedding ring is enough to suffice for married women that they're in submission to their husband 0.94

01:10:39.260 or do we obey the command by saying the hair is given to her as a covering which is what the 0.66

01:10:46.480 apostle paul says and so then we're saying okay well just long hair as long as the woman has long

01:10:53.120 hair then we're okay or are we saying that in addition to long hair that long hair is given

01:10:58.140 to her as a covering and that's a sign that even nature itself teaches that a woman the natural

01:11:03.200 covering of long hair is meant by God through nature to signify that she needs to be further

01:11:07.940 covered on the Lord's day. And that she has to, she needs, in addition to long hair, to have an

01:11:13.200 artificial covering, a hat or a shawl or some kind of covering. In all three of those cases,

01:11:20.120 the hair, the artificial covering, the wedding band, whatever it is, in all three of those cases,

01:11:25.500 what I appreciate is at least all three of those camps are acknowledging this is not something

01:11:29.780 that's just cultural. It's not something that's just particular to Corinth at that time, because

01:11:36.900 it's rooted in the created order. It's timeless. So I'm very grateful for that. The last thing that

01:11:42.760 I'll leave you with is this. I appreciate the late, great R.C. Sproul. His wife, Vesta, who's

01:11:47.880 still with us, God bless her, may she live forever, she wears a head covering. And that was Sproul's

01:11:55.780 position, that the long hair was not sufficient, but rather it indicated, which seems to be exactly

01:12:01.600 what the Apostle Paul says in 1 Corinthians 11, that the long hair is given to her as a covering,

01:12:05.980 but it indicates that she should be further covered on the Lord's Day. And so Sproul,

01:12:10.320 he had his wife, Vesta, and I'm sure she agreed, wear a shawl or some kind of covering,

01:12:16.880 artificial covering, in addition to her hair for Lord's Day worship. And as far as I know,

01:12:22.520 she's still doing that. And one of the simplest things that Sproul said, he wasn't teaching,

01:12:26.800 he wasn't a head covering guy, you know, teaching on head coverings every other week and neither am

01:12:30.580 I. I'm not. Again, as I've already said, uh, over half of the women in my church do not cover their

01:12:36.920 heads. And I have not mentioned it a single time from the pulpit, not once. Um, but Sproul, what

01:12:45.200 he would say is similar argument that I would make is this. He said, you know, I could be wrong.

01:12:50.460 maybe macarthur's position's right maybe just the long hair that's doug wilson's position

01:12:55.380 and that suffices maybe that's right um but i like the way sprawl worded he said but this is

01:13:01.160 what i know he said i know there's no command in the bible that says that a woman shall not

01:13:08.120 that she must not cover her head i know there's no commandment in the bible that says woman

01:13:14.440 thou shall not cover your head but there might be a command of the bible that says that she should

01:13:20.860 cover her head and so the last part of the clip where owen talked about well we're not going to

01:13:27.840 say it's sin um if owen is saying well i wouldn't say it's sin for those who who hold to this other

01:13:34.080 interpretation that a woman actually should wear a head covering in addition to her hair

01:13:37.420 well i appreciate that i appreciate you saying that you wouldn't call that sin

01:13:41.400 But to be fair, the reason you want to call that sin, brother, is because you can't.

01:13:46.720 You can't.

01:13:48.800 Because you and I both know there's no commandment anywhere in the Bible that says

01:13:53.100 that a woman cannot cover her head.

01:13:58.120 That's not the question. 1.00

01:13:59.240 The question isn't whether or not a woman is not allowed to cover her head. 1.00

01:14:02.660 The question is whether or not a woman may be commanded to cover her head.

01:14:06.200 And that's Sproul's argumentation.

01:14:08.380 He says, I know there's no commandment.

01:14:09.940 He said, I'm just playing it safe.

01:14:11.160 I don't know. Maybe I'm wrong. That's Paul's position. Maybe I'm wrong. But I know this,

01:14:18.580 that if Vesta covers her head on the Lord's day, one day we'll stand before God and we'll be all

01:14:24.900 right. Because nowhere in the Bible was she commanded that she couldn't do that. But in

01:14:30.040 1 Corinthians 11, she might be commanded that she should do that. So we'll take the safe position.

01:14:36.380 better to cover knowing there's no forbidding of covering and find out that you didn't need to

01:14:44.100 cover you did something extracurricular but you didn't do something that was forbidden

01:14:48.040 then to not cover and find out you were commanded to do it and you just rebelled your entire life

01:14:55.820 now my point is this if my position's right then then yes it is a sin and that's not trying to be

01:15:08.100 harsh or overly dogmatic again that's not saying that this one particular commandment and therefore

01:15:13.540 those who disregarded that one particular sin is the the end all be all the quintessential mark

01:15:19.680 of holiness. I'm not saying that, but I'm saying it is a mark. It is a commandment. And if I'm

01:15:28.100 right about the particular visible application of obedience to that commandment, that it's not just

01:15:33.440 the hair, but an additional covering on the Lord's day and worship, then to fail to do so is, I don't

01:15:41.940 know what word we would use to describe that other than sin. It would be sin. Now, if Owen's right

01:15:49.460 with his position that the long hair suffices, my wife is not sinning when she covers her head

01:15:55.040 on the Lord's day. But if my position, which is the lion's share of church history's position

01:16:01.000 up until 15 minutes ago, if that's the correct position and Owen's wife is not covering her

01:16:06.700 head, then she is in sin. That's R.C. Sproul's exact argumentation. He said, I'm just playing

01:16:13.620 the odds here. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe, you know, but even if I'm just 50-50 on the issue,

01:16:18.220 you might as well take this the safe bet there's no forbidding of covering but there might be a

01:16:24.780 commandment to cover and so here's the deal if it is just even logically not just theologically but

01:16:31.340 logically i would argue theologically it is the better exegesis but even if we disagree on that

01:16:36.500 just logically and sprawl would be on my side here it's the safer position and in terms of

01:16:43.880 historically so it's theological argument logical argument and now historical argument it is the

01:16:49.220 witness of church history the lion's share then yeah i i think it's it's maybe worth doing a

01:17:00.220 couple podcasts over it's maybe worth preaching on which again i haven't done but probably i'm

01:17:08.640 going to do it eventually. It's, and I think that's okay. That doesn't, my whole point is

01:17:14.760 why, why is that weird? Why is that extreme?

01:17:23.040 But, and I think that's just, that's my only real objection to this episode with Kosti Hinn

01:17:30.000 and Owen Strand. It's not even, it's not even their positions, right? So me and Owen disagree

01:17:36.860 on on the the application of what it is to obey the first corinthians 11 head covering command

01:17:42.540 fine me and doug wilson disagree doug wilson has owen's exact position but we both agree that it's

01:17:48.880 timeless it pulls on the created order it's not just cultural and you got to do something with

01:17:52.440 it and and doug and owen are doing one thing and i'm doing another and that's that's fine

01:17:57.420 right doug wilson disagrees with me on that point but i but but there's never been the difference

01:18:04.700 the difference is um that i've never been made to feel by doug wilson that because i think the hair

01:18:14.800 is not sufficient as a covering paul's actually referring to an artificial covering in addition

01:18:20.040 to there i've never had doug wilson or somebody you know in that camp make me feel like like i'm

01:18:27.720 out of line by taking the position that i do that i'm uh that i'm i'm walking on thin ice

01:18:35.340 that i'm treading in dangerous dangerous extreme patriarchal territory

01:18:42.180 i think that that would be my beef that's my only beef so we differ on head coverings sounds like

01:18:48.720 you know from the first clip i played we we agree entirely on in terms of women teaching women so

01:18:54.460 i brought up two issues from that podcast those are the main two that they they addressed um i

01:18:59.560 disagree with owen on on what it looks like for a woman to cover her head but we even there we

01:19:03.760 both agree that it's a timeless command pulled on the created order and um and then on in terms of

01:19:09.580 what does it look like for women to teach other women uh theology we hold the exact same position

01:19:14.780 he just calls it hard complementarianism and i call it biblical patriarchy the difference between

01:19:20.740 in substance is minor, I guess is my point. I think it's minor. But again, I'm just noticing

01:19:30.120 from some of these guys, and I don't want to just pick on Owen, but I'm noticing from some of these

01:19:34.220 guys, it's not that there's this major difference in theological substance. It's just that their

01:19:42.220 crew for lack of a better term seems really concerned about my crew

01:19:49.040 it's not so much that we're theologically just night and day massive difference between us it's

01:19:57.480 just they just i don't know we give them the heebie-jeebies we scare them they don't like

01:20:04.860 they're they're concerned right that's that's the evangelical term i'm concerned i'm concerned

01:20:10.580 so anyways those are my thoughts and i hope that we could bridge the gap i hope that we

01:20:16.760 bridge the gap um because i don't want uh if i'm wrong i want to see it and i want to repent

01:20:25.860 and i want to i want to hold the faithful position and if i'm not wrong and there's just

01:20:31.980 some slight theological differences in our positions that matter but in the big scope

01:20:39.000 of things are slight, then I'd like to be able to link arms and act like if we're only an inch

01:20:46.700 apart, I'd like us to be able to minister as though we're only an inch apart. I think my big

01:20:53.180 question is, why does it seem like we're theologically an inch apart, but relationally

01:20:59.940 a mile apart? And I can't quite figure that out. I have my thoughts. I have my thoughts.

01:21:09.000 I think it's some of the company that I keep.

01:21:12.560 I think that's a big part of it.

01:21:15.040 I think it's probably also that I never went to seminary.

01:21:18.920 And for the record, I'm not trying to throw anybody under the bus here.

01:21:24.460 I've never been to seminary, and I've never said that I have been to seminary.

01:21:29.080 I've always been very clear about that in anything I've ever written, in anything that

01:21:34.040 I've ever said, any podcast, any sermon, any bio, any this, any that. Um, I've never pretended

01:21:41.740 to have more formal education than I have. Um, I've studied hard, but I, um, I have a bachelor's

01:21:50.620 degree in business and biblical studies from Dallas Baptist university. And I transferred

01:21:56.400 into dallas baptist university um from christ for the nations which is a heretical word of faith

01:22:05.780 kind of like wizardry and witchcraft bethel type school two-year school and dallas baptist

01:22:12.020 university is just gracious enough to take the credits and i wanted to get a bachelor's because

01:22:16.020 i wanted to do some things you know outside of ministry in the business world and blah blah blah

01:22:20.540 blah, blah. So anyways, that's my formal education. And, uh, and I learned very, very,

01:22:26.780 very little. And some of the things that I learned, I needed to repent of and unlearn because they

01:22:31.540 were heretical and wrong. And then I've just submitted myself to the scripture and solid

01:22:36.360 teachers with, you know, I mean, John MacArthur and Ligonier and, uh, Doug Wilson and all these,

01:22:43.000 and just reading and reading and reading dead guys, which is really helpful. The Puritans

01:22:47.160 and the reformers and all these different calvin's institutes and just learning and learning and

01:22:52.040 learning and applying myself and knowing that i still have so much more to learn so much more to

01:22:57.120 learn um but using what i do have by the grace of god um to try to minister to others faithfully

01:23:06.280 and so all that being said i i don't know what the disconnect is i i hope that that's my my prayer is

01:23:12.260 the disconnect, that it would get fixed, that it would get sorted out. I want to be on the same

01:23:20.400 team. I really do. I really do. I want to be brothers. I want to link arms. I want to be able

01:23:25.820 to minister together, be able to agree to disagree on some of these things, but recognize that what

01:23:33.680 we agree on far outweighs what we disagree on, and be able to minister together. And whatever

01:23:40.380 it is a seriously own, I mean this, whatever it is that I'm doing, maybe, maybe I really am doing

01:23:46.320 something wrong and I'm just missing it. If that's the case, reach out to me, shoot me an email.

01:23:51.600 Let's do a phone call. I'd love to talk and just figure out, is it, did I just word something

01:23:56.920 terribly in a podcast that I'm forgetting about, you know, or, um, or is it just the company? Is

01:24:04.600 it, is it the fact that I like Doug Wilson? Is that all it is? I just, I like Doug Wilson and

01:24:08.920 You don't, you know, is it, is it, is it the boogeyman of federal vision that you're afraid

01:24:16.060 that federal vision is under my bed? Cause I, I completely denounce federal vision. I am a 1689

01:24:21.520 federalist. I am a reformed Baptist. I believe in regenerate church membership. I, you know,

01:24:27.800 I don't, I don't know how even just logically I could hold federal vision. I don't know.

01:24:32.040 So I don't know, man. If you know what it is, help me out. Help me out. All right. Thank you

01:24:39.720 guys so much for tuning in. I hope that this has been helpful for you. Last thing that I want to

01:24:43.780 announce is our upcoming conference. This is March 1st, 2nd, and 3rd. It's called Blueprints

01:24:50.040 for Christendom 2.0. The subtitle is Seven Doctrines for Ruling the World. We're going

01:24:56.700 to be talking about Reformed Confessionalism, Covenant Theology, Biblical Patriarchy,

01:25:03.700 Presuppositionalism, Kyperianism, General Equity Theonomy, and Post-Millennialism. We're going to

01:25:10.540 have some live panels going on about Biblical Patriarchy. We're going to do a live panel on

01:25:16.860 like all things, Fortean kind of unhinged things with the Haunted Cosmos guys about the Watchers

01:25:24.560 and Nephilim and giants and those kinds of things. It's going to be a great time. Our headlining

01:25:30.440 speaker is Doug Wilson. So we're excited to have Voldemort. He who must not be named will be with

01:25:36.180 us. And I encourage you to go ahead and register. We are selling tickets fast and we are about to

01:25:42.420 end our early bird pricing. That's going to end August 31st. So the end of next month, it's

01:25:48.380 already July. So you've got less than two months and the price is going to go up and it's not just

01:25:53.440 the price hike, but again, it's the seeding. I think we sold out our last conference that James

01:25:59.700 White was a part of, Theonomy and Post-Millennialism Conference. That was in May, just a couple months

01:26:06.060 ago, and that sold out six months in advance. We sold out in December of last year, six months

01:26:12.220 before that conference. And I really think that this conference, Blueprints for Christendom 2.0,

01:26:18.000 is going to sell out just as fast. So you don't want to miss the early bird pricing, but more

01:26:23.260 than that. You don't want to miss a seat. And again, the tickets are selling fast. So go to

01:26:27.260 Right Response Conference, not Right Response Ministries, but in this case, rightresponseconference.com.

01:26:34.320 Again, that's rightresponseconference.com and register today. All right. Thank you guys for

01:26:40.120 tuning in and join us tomorrow at 2 p.m. Central Time right here on YouTube or on Spotify or iTunes,

01:26:47.400 or you can always go to rightresponseministries.com, our website. We also have our free app that you

01:26:51.820 and download any of the multiple platforms that are all made available to you. Go and check out

01:26:57.420 tomorrow, 2 p.m. Central Time, our flagship show, Theology Applied. Nathan, who's our guest tomorrow?

01:27:04.960 Oh, Eric Kahn. Eric Kahn. We're talking about why the church planting movement,

01:27:10.320 not entirely, but significantly, largely in many regards, has recently seemed to fail.

01:27:18.040 it's a banger we record it ahead of time and it's awesome it is it was a really for me just

01:27:26.160 personally my soul it was a really really good conversation so tune into that 2 p.m tomorrow

01:27:31.680 theology applied me and eric con we'll see you then until then god bless

The NXR Podcast - July 14, 2023

BONUS EPISODE - Head Coverings & Patriarchy ｜ A Charitable Response To Owen Strachan & Costi Hinn

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript