The NXR Podcast - THEOLOGY APPLIED - 5 Doctrines That Stunt Sanctification w The King's Hall

00:00:00 Hey guys, real quick, before we get started, I have a small request.

00:00:03 If you've been blessed by our content and you like this show,

00:00:06 would you take just a brief moment and leave us a five-star review?

00:00:09 This is quite possibly the most effective thing that you can do

00:00:12 to ensure that this content gets out to as many people as possible. Thanks.

00:00:18 Hi, and welcome to another episode of Theology Applied.

00:00:20 I am Pastor Joel Webbin, your host with Right Response Ministries,

00:00:23 and I am wishing you a very Merry Christmas.

00:00:26 For the next few weeks, we're going to do some of our most popular, and we believe also

00:00:32 most beneficial and useful episodes to date with Theology Applied.

00:00:36 This episode is with the members of the King's Hall podcast.

00:00:40 That's Brian Sauve, Dan Burkholder, and Eric Kahn, where we talk about five particular

00:00:46 doctrines that we believe pose incredible danger to the body of Christ.

00:00:51 These doctrines are not necessarily heretical in and of themselves.

00:00:56 But without a doctrine necessarily being a heresy, it can still be unbiblical, wrong,

00:01:03 and harmful.

00:01:04 Tune in now.

00:01:05 All right, all right, all right.

00:01:06 Stop twisting my arm.

00:01:07 I know you want to hear the inside scoop.

00:01:10 Here it is.

00:01:11 The glorious vision of Right Response Ministries for the first half of next year, 2023.

00:01:17 We have not one, not two, but three massive endeavors that we will accomplish by the grace

00:01:23 of God.

00:01:24 The first you already know about.

00:01:25 It's our Theonomy and Post-Millennialism Conference.

00:01:28 This is selling out incredibly fast.

00:01:31 By the time this commercial airs,

00:01:32 you may not even be able to get a ticket.

00:01:34 I really don't know.

00:01:36 So don't waste another moment.

00:01:37 Go to rightresponseconference.com,

00:01:40 rightresponseconference.com to join us

00:01:43 for the Theonomy and Post-Millennialism Conference next year.

00:01:47 Now, this is where you come in.

00:01:49 We need your help.

00:01:50 Our next two endeavors are number one,

00:01:52 a documentary-style film,

00:01:54 and number two, a brand new studio. Both of these things are seeking to accomplish one primary goal,

00:02:01 which is excellent, high quality, glorious Christian media. We are tired of as Christians

00:02:10 doing things poorly. We've done our best with what we have, but by God's grace, we want to do

00:02:16 even better. This is not going to be just another video. This is not going to be a sermon or an

00:02:22 interview or a podcast, but we're going to make a documentary-style film. And we're going to be

00:02:27 hiring Nathan Anderson, the director of On Earth As It Is In Heaven, a very, very successful

00:02:33 post-millennialism documentary that's on Amazon and YouTube, came out a couple years ago. He's

00:02:39 going to be flying in from Chile to help us direct this film. And our documentary is going to be on

00:02:45 postmillennialism and theonomy, why it's biblically valid, why it's absolutely necessary, and why,

00:02:53 by the grace of God, theonomy and postmillennialism are currently on the rise. So we're going to make

00:02:59 this film and we need your support. And not just this film, but we're going to make all of our

00:03:05 videos and podcasting and everything we do here at Right Response Ministries better. We want to

00:03:11 achieve the highest level of quality and christian excellence that we possibly can that's where the

00:03:18 new studio comes in this new film our date that we're shooting for is it would be complete and

00:03:24 publicly available in may or june of 2023 next year the studio our goal is that it would be

00:03:31 completely done in its construction and the equipment and the setup and the stage and

00:03:36 everything by January, February of 2023 next year. We need your prayers. We need your encouragement.

00:03:44 And for those of you who are willing to do so, we need your generous support. You can give towards

00:03:50 these endeavors by going to rightresponseministries.com forward slash donate. Again, that's

00:03:57 rightresponseministries.com forward slash donate. Thank you so much for all your help. God bless.

00:04:05 Applying God's word to every aspect of life. This is Theology Applied.

00:04:15 All right, welcome to another episode of Theology Applied. I am your host,

00:04:19 Pastor Joel Webman with Right Response Ministries, and today I'm very privileged to have a special

00:04:23 guest, three guests. They are the host, the co-host of the King's Hall podcast. We've got

00:04:30 Brian Sauve. You want to say Sauve or Suave or just Suave, but I've been told that it is Sauve.

00:04:37 So we've got Brian Sauve. We've got Dan. Give me your last name, Dan. How do you say it?

00:04:42 Burkholder.

00:04:43 Burkholder. Dan Burkholder. And then we have Eric Kahn, who is also the host of the Hard Man

00:04:49 podcast. And so me and Eric, we've kind of combined forces a few times now. And so I'm

00:04:55 glad to have you back on the show. So you guys tell us a little bit about yourselves and especially

00:04:59 the King's Hall podcast. Wow. This is the Brian Sauve moment. I know. This is a test of who

00:05:09 thinks they're the alpha of the King's Hall. No, no, no, no, no. It's just that you do most of the

00:05:14 talking. So we just defer to you. Well, my name is Brian Sauve, as Joel said, and you nailed the

00:05:20 pronunciation, by the way. I pastor Refuge Church in Ogden, Utah, where we all serve together

00:05:27 here in Mormon land. I've got five kids and my wife, Lexi. We are working hard and staying up

00:05:36 late with all of those wonderful duties the Lord's given us. But yeah, we have a good time

00:05:41 with the King's Hall. This season, we're primarily addressing the question of what would it take to

00:05:46 build a new Christendom? What would need to go and what would need to be established if we were

00:05:52 to build a durable, reformed, Protestant, robustly Christian Christendom that could last for a

00:06:00 thousand years or more. And so it sounds like we're thinking about a lot of the same things

00:06:04 as you think about here on this show. And we do appreciate you having us. Thanks for the invite.

00:06:10 Absolutely. So Christendom is bad, right? The Spanish Crusades. How would you respond?

00:06:15 What do you think about that?

00:06:17 well well you know we're probably we're not necessarily telling people that we're going

00:06:22 to go retake constantinople is that what it is uh i think so uh so so surely certainly there are

00:06:30 some errors in the in the old christendom but we would say that the the current thing that we have

00:06:36 now is even worse than that so yeah yeah we're we're not necessarily just uncritically trying

00:06:43 to replicate the old Christendom, but even reform and understand some of the ways that

00:06:49 failure might've been built into the foundation stones of aspects of the first Christendom

00:06:54 and build one that would continually improve and be reformed according to the scriptures

00:07:00 and, you know, bear fruit.

00:07:03 Amen.

00:07:03 Might even be better.

00:07:05 Yep. Amen.

00:07:05 Some of the things that I've really benefited from King's Hall podcast in terms of Christendom,

00:07:10 rebuilding Christendom and those kinds of things. It's just, you know, thinking in terms of, you

00:07:14 know, culture, cultus is a Latin word. It means worship. It's not so the rush to any kind of

00:07:17 thing. It's not whether, but which everybody's worshiping. Secularism is not science. It's a

00:07:22 religion, modernity, secularism, and all it's nasty, you know, offspring of feminism and all 0.66

00:07:29 these androgyny, everything that's come out of it. It is worship. It has therefore an orthodoxy. 0.61

00:07:35 It has convictions. It has beliefs, dogma, everything outside of that is blaspheming.

00:07:39 And so there are blasphemy laws, right? That's cancel culture, things that you can't say. There 0.56

00:07:43 are sacraments that go along with their worship. Um, I think it was a hardest boss that talks about

00:07:48 the Asherah poles and compares them. It reminds me of the two towers and tearing down the trees 0.99

00:07:53 of Isengard, uh, because they, they represent life and fruitfulness. And an Asherah pole is a tree

00:07:59 that's been stripped of all its limbs, all its branches. It's, it's unable to bear fruit. And

00:08:03 you think of you know chopping off um a boy's manhood you know and uh and transgenderism and 1.00

00:08:09 especially as that pertains to transing children and making them fruitless and so there you have 0.97

00:08:14 the asherah pole and then of course you have the sacrament of abortion you know and and you know

00:08:19 the false god of molek and these kinds of things so it is a religion it's not whether but which

00:08:23 and you guys do a really good job pointing that out and in terms of christendom it's it's the

00:08:28 same as the founding of America, at least in principle, um, that, you know, that, you know,

00:08:32 there are bugs and there are features. And we would say that, you know, race-based slavery was

00:08:37 a bug and the founding and our constitution and our ideals as we lived up to them, um, is precisely

00:08:45 why that bug was worked out. So the solution is not anti-Christendom. The solution is, uh, as Doug

00:08:50 Wilson would say, Christendom 2.0, and let's see if we can do it better. So, all right. Um, we'll,

00:08:55 we'll go ahead and dive in any, any, uh, response though on my little Christendom spill. Did it,

00:09:01 did I get it right? Nailed it. Yeah, that was great. Okay, great. All right. So this is what

00:09:07 we want to do in the show. We want to talk about as we're trying to restore and rebuild,

00:09:11 build back better, uh, but actually, actually, actually better, not build back worse. Um, but

00:09:20 But as we want to usher in Christodom, we, you know, re-usher that back in and do it

00:09:27 and do it better and do it out of one of the reasons we can do it better is not because

00:09:30 we're better men, but we're standing on the shoulders of giants and those wonderful men

00:09:34 who came before us.

00:09:35 And so, you know, one of the ways that God, you know, whether it be a nation and empires

00:09:41 or Christodom or whatever it might be, is that God uses those failed empires, all that

00:09:47 was good in it, right? You know, removing the sin, but all that was good in it, it functions as the

00:09:53 manure. Toby Sumter talks about this, you know, that makes the ground more fertile in order to

00:09:57 produce something better the next time. And so as we're seeking to do that, we want to look at

00:10:02 things that went wrong and we want to look at things that need to be revised. How can we do

00:10:05 this better? And so my thesis, I want to frame up the show like this. My thesis is I feel like

00:10:11 over the past 20 to 30 years um in the evangelical world there's been a reformed resurgence right you

00:10:19 know a lot of guys became calvinists now a lot of them never really became calvinists like you know

00:10:23 rc sprawl says what do you call a four-point calvinist an arminian you know and so uh so guys

00:10:28 like mark driscoll never really became uh reformed you know but but some guys actually did and then

00:10:34 you know god has just over the last few years taken his winnowing fork and and just separating

00:10:38 the wheat and the chaff. And so some guys went from, you know, young reformed restless to

00:10:43 full blown apostasy. And then other guys have gone to a four full orbed confessional reformed

00:10:49 position, not just Calvinistic, you know, Baptist, you know, but, but actually really embracing,

00:10:55 you know, whether it be Sabbatarianism or patriarchy or like a general equity theonomy,

00:11:02 you know, or post-millennialism, like more of a full or mature reformed theology. So God took this

00:11:07 Calvinistic resurgence and half of it went apostate and the other half of it is maturing

00:11:13 and growing up and not just, you know, boys, but men. And so we thank God for that. And I think

00:11:19 that what the Lord has done, I'm thinking of not just the young reformed and restless, but thinking

00:11:23 of just the reformed movement over the last 30 years combined. Ligonier, grace to you. Think of

00:11:27 like Paul Washer, you know, all these different guys, Votie Bauckham. It seems like what the Lord

00:11:32 used these men to do in our own lives, and we're exceedingly grateful for it, is really expose

00:11:38 heresy. So you can have a false doctrine that's unbiblical, but orthodox, that meaning it's wrong.

00:11:45 We're not relativists, right? So it's like, all right, it's not heresy, but it's still wrong.

00:11:49 It's still unbiblical. And then you can have doctrines that they're not merely unbiblical,

00:11:52 but they're outside of the realm of orthodoxy. And it seems like the last 20, 30 years,

00:11:56 the Lord has used reformed guys primarily, but other guys as well, to expose some of these

00:12:01 things that are straight up heresy, that will damn you to hell. Things like the prosperity gospel,

00:12:07 things like Roman Catholicism, things like, you know, that would deny the gospel. And, you know,

00:12:12 so all these different things, prosperity gospel, I feel like every conference for the last 30 years

00:12:16 was, you know, it's like half of the speakers would say, this is why Catholicism is bad.

00:12:22 This is why charismatics are bad. This is why Catholicism is bad. And this is why charismatics 0.60

00:12:27 are bad. And so it's like, great. We appreciate that. American gospel, the documentary they put

00:12:32 out, I appreciate it. Thank you. But we want to press on to maturity. And so basically for this

00:12:38 episode, what I want to do is list some doctrines that aren't necessarily prosperity gospel. They're

00:12:44 not necessarily heresy, but I think they're still unbiblical. I'm going to give my list in order of 0.99

00:12:48 what I think is most dangerous, stunting the maturity of the church to least dangerous, 0.85

00:12:54 but all five being what I would consider orthodox but again wrong unbiblical and unhelpful stunting

00:13:04 the church's growth and then I want to see if you guys agree with my list if you want to add

00:13:08 something to the list take something off the list what would be your list of the top five and then

00:13:13 at minimum I think you guys would disagree maybe with the order of my list so here's my list no

00:13:17 without further ado number one radical two kingdom theology and in parentheses I'm putting

00:13:23 there pietism, an idea that it's just the home of the church, the home of the church, the home of

00:13:28 the church. And so, you know, there's not a single square inch of all of creation that Christ doesn't

00:13:36 cry out mine. This would be, you know, anti-Kyper, the all of Christ for all of life. They want some 0.99

00:13:42 of Christ for some of life. So a radical two kingdom theology, I think is number one. I think

00:13:47 it's the worst. Second, dispensationalism, anti-covenant theology. I think dispensationalism,

00:13:53 that's second on my list of most dangerous. Then I put complementarianism in that. Yeah,

00:13:59 sure. You know, egalitarianism, you know, but complementarianism, it seeks to make roles,

00:14:05 God assigning roles to men and women arbitrary in my assessment. And so it lends towards sexual

00:14:10 androgyny that men and women are really the same. But for whatever reason, God's just determined

00:14:15 that we have different roles. And I think that's led to a lot of sexual chaos. Number four,

00:14:20 all millennialism. I think that that's worse in my assessment in terms of stunting the growth

00:14:26 of the church than pre-millennialism. And so pre-millennialism is number five.

00:14:31 My last one, the reason why I'm putting all millennialism as more dangerous than pre-millennialism

00:14:35 is I found, I don't know if it's your experience, but I found that there are more dispensational

00:14:40 pre-millennial guys, especially the historic guys, but even dispensational pre-mill guys who are

00:14:46 willing to actually fight in the culture war, that actually want to see all of Christ for all

00:14:51 of life, that actually think, you know, basic things like Christians should vote. And whereas 0.85

00:14:57 all millennials, I always say, you know, all millennialism and post-millennialism, we agree

00:15:02 on the timing of the millennium, but pre-mill and post-mill agree on the nature. And I feel like the

00:15:10 timing is important, but the nature seems to be more important. Pre-mill guys actually think that 0.99

00:15:15 Jesus reigning has an effect on earth, even if he's not reigning yet. Whereas it seems like some

00:15:21 of the all male guys, not all of them, but a decent amount, the reign of Christ is in terms

00:15:27 of earthly, tangible, physical effects is inconsequential. And I think that that's a 0.85

00:15:32 bigger problem. So number one, radical two kingdom theology. Number two, dispensationalism. Number

00:15:36 three, complementarianism, add androgyny, egalitarianism in there. Number four,

00:15:42 all millennialism, which I think can be another form of pietism and the number five pre millennialism,

00:15:48 which is just the eschatological pessimism. What do you guys think?

00:15:54 Yeah, well, I was going to say, Joel, it's overall, I think a good list, like any good

00:15:58 Presbyterian, you know, we always take our exceptions. It's what struck me is, first of all,

00:16:06 there should be a picture somewhere on here of Tim Keller. You know, he's been in the news lately.

00:16:12 been on Twitter. What I would say about his stuff is sort of, I don't know what exactly you call it,

00:16:18 but sort of the middle way ism. I would definitely put that on this list. That's a good one.

00:16:24 It's interesting, too, because sort of, in my mind, the two flavors that run through everything

00:16:28 on the list are sort of like Gnosticism and Pietism. And so like, maybe it shows up in

00:16:34 eschatology, maybe it shows up in, you know, your sexual theology, complementarianism, for example.

00:16:40 but fundamentally it's kind of these two undergirding things of pietism and

00:16:44 Gnosticism that sort of plague everything. You know,

00:16:47 we don't think that physical bodies and physical realities really matter.

00:16:52 And so these two things tend to downplay all of them. I don't,

00:16:56 I don't really have a disagreement I think on any of these. You know,

00:17:00 we recently did a podcast on our top books and we had about 50 picks for the

00:17:06 top five so that was my fault i'm very indecisive as these other men yeah eric all the sudden is

00:17:12 like in my number four cluster is and we're like number four cluster well they're not even like

00:17:18 connected they're not even connected it was so sneaky but then we all were like okay if that's

00:17:24 what we're doing that's funny yeah okay so what do you guys think brian dan you know i would i

00:17:30 would agree with your list in uh everything that's on there i would find similar issues and i think

00:17:36 The way that you framed the ones that I think people might have the most issue with who are closer to us would be amillennialism and complementarianism, where they might agree with a lot of the other stuff, but maybe not see what's happening in the amillennial instinct that we would object to and say, from the foundations, you are making yourself impotent.

00:17:58 And it is pietism. It's this instinct where I agree, the premillennialist actually takes these texts more seriously. And they just say, well, we don't think that's happening now, but we do think it's going to happen.

00:18:12 You know, like Christ reigning from sea to sea, from the river to the ends of the earth. Well, that's the spiritual kingdom, the amillennialist would say. And so I do have a lot of respect for those who are, you know, I'm a premillennialist, historic premillennialist, they might say, but it's because I take these texts so seriously.

00:18:31 Right. So I agree with that. I think complementarianism on the list. Again, what we're talking about and the reason that we need to object to it is because we're basically removing, we're making it arbitrary by removing the reason for which men ought to rule in the home and the church.

00:18:53 and we're just saying it was a coin flip instead of no god actually made something in the the nature

00:19:00 of maleness and in the nature of femaleness that will show up everywhere in every sphere of the

00:19:08 world right and when you lose that principle you've lost you've really lost i mean everything

00:19:14 in principle and you're going to end up egalitarian eventually i always tell people i always tell

00:19:19 people with a home in the church you know because it limits it to the home of the church i always

00:19:22 tell people, you know, an amazing thing happened the other day. It was the Lord's day and my wife

00:19:26 and I were leaving church and we, you know, we pulled out of the parking lot and she still had 0.92

00:19:31 breast. It blew my mind. It was unbelievable. And I, for one, you know, when I looked over at my 0.56

00:19:38 wife in the seat, I was happy. Praise God. I praise, I sang the doxology again. You weren't

00:19:45 even in the sanctuary one thing for your other podcast bro i think you're welcome

00:19:50 one thing i would add to the list um and and i i don't think you actually missed it i think you

00:19:57 included it in your things we've dealt with in like the prosperity gospel and charismania

00:20:03 but i i would still add some kind of um instinct of revivalism where where the church is conflating

00:20:12 emotional response to spiritual things with spiritual maturity.

00:20:18 And you would add to that like the decisionism, right?

00:20:20 Yeah, revivalism, decisionism. And I think that while we've probably in a lot of reform circles

00:20:27 dealt with the formal issues of prosperity gospel and hyper charismania, I don't think that we've

00:20:33 properly or adequately dealt with the instinct that would say, well, how's your quiet time?

00:20:40 And what they mean is like, how are your emotions rather than where the more mature Christian

00:20:49 instinct, which would be to say, my faith is in the objectivity of God's work and his promises

00:20:54 to me. I'm going to believe them and do my duties before God with as cheerful a heart as I can

00:21:00 muster today by the grace of God. And I'm going to tell my emotions, kneel to King Jesus. So I

00:21:07 still think that's that's part of it's all wrapped up in effeminacy this kind of like designing of

00:21:13 the church service around emotionalistic responses so there's a lot of these that the threads are

00:21:18 interwoven yeah and i would definitely add that and and with that you know i always think of

00:21:24 federal vision and doug wilson so i i don't prescribe to federal vision but um i think i

00:21:29 think that was the heart behind it you know and doug wilson you know in his defense i think good

00:21:34 intentions. And I think he's backed off. And I think there's also a spectrum within the federal

00:21:38 vision camp. And there are guys who are much more hardcore than Doug would be. So all that being

00:21:43 said, all the disclaimers out there, I think the heart behind it, the intent was working against

00:21:50 the revivalism and decisionism of all these people wrestling with assurance of salvation,

00:21:55 myself for several years being one of them, like, well, I'm probably not saved. I'm probably not

00:21:58 saved. I'm probably like every day having to re-decide to be a Christian, having to

00:22:03 you know, feel something and work something up. And I think Doug was just a lot of different

00:22:08 aspects, but I really think that that was like the core intention of the federal vision movement

00:22:12 was just to try to provide some kind of clear, tangible, you know, fruits, evidence, proof of

00:22:21 like, this is in, this is out. Yeah. This is living faith. Yeah. Objectivity of the covenant.

00:22:26 Right. And, you know, Joel, after you said that, I'm wondering, maybe you should get baptized

00:22:30 again. Sounds like you've maybe sinned since we were baptized. So I don't know. You should

00:22:35 consider that. I don't think it's by accident that we saw a rise in dispensationalism and

00:22:43 denying the covenants, along with revivalism. And so that emotionalism and the denying of the

00:22:51 objectivity of the covenant, like Brian said, have gone hand in hand. And so you're positionally

00:22:57 always unsure because you're you don't have this framework of god's covenants right working but god

00:23:02 has actually declared over you because you are responsible then for your standing essentially

00:23:08 in you know apart from these covenants right and so i you know that's not really a surprise

00:23:13 right and that becomes the motivation the motivation is uh fear-based rather than uh

00:23:18 confidence in christ and and and it makes sense that pre-mill you know would would go right right

00:23:24 there with dispensationalism it's like every day i need to make you know so it's it's a diluting of

00:23:29 the covenantal promises um and and a removal of the objective reality of being in christ and and

00:23:36 it becomes more of a subjective personal individual feeling and and a decision that needs to be made

00:23:41 and remade and remade and so there's the fear there fear incentive and then on top of it um

00:23:47 jesus you know is you know could come back tomorrow you know and and uh things are going

00:23:52 going to get worse and worse until he does. So you better be resolute. You better be standing

00:23:56 strong. So it really feels like fear, fear-based. Yeah. And I think, I think another thing that

00:24:02 could be on the list would be denying legacy, which is a fruit. It's not exactly a category

00:24:08 in itself, but it's definitely a fruit of all of these because Brian said, this is, you know,

00:24:13 impotent theology. And this morning I was, I was thinking through this list and I was like,

00:24:18 this is really castrated Christianity. This is fruitless Christianity. If it was a house,

00:24:22 it would be like issues with the foundation, with the roof and the HVAC. That's what all of these

00:24:28 are. And you're not thinking like, oh man, I, I'm, you know, I better attend this so that I can pass

00:24:33 it on to the next generation. You're like, man, I hope this thing doesn't fall apart in the next

00:24:37 15 minutes. Right. Yeah. And that's kind of, um, so, so all of these theologies are not looking

00:24:44 past themselves in, in a lot of ways. You're not going to be passing this on to the next generation,

00:24:49 like a robust covenant theology, post-mill, Calvinistic theology, passing it on to the

00:24:58 next generations. It really does deny your legacy. And so just looking through your list,

00:25:03 I was ready to disagree with you. I really wanted to pick a fight somewhere. And I was talking to

00:25:09 Brian. I'm like, I think complementarianism should be number one. It's not necessarily

00:25:13 like my least favorite. Like if I R2K theology, radical two kingdoms, man, I loathe that theology.

00:25:20 I absolutely loathe it. And I was making an argument to Brian about complementarianism

00:25:25 being so dangerous because there's so much gravity in our culture towards sexual, sexual

00:25:32 androgyny, you know, it's towards this like grayness of gray blob humanity, you know, denying

00:25:38 the image bearingness of God into self-definition of the person. And he said, well, that's really

00:25:48 kind of the same thing that R2K theology does. It's just another category of it. They're so 0.90

00:25:53 connected. But this, and tying it all together within pietism, the roots of pietism, another

00:26:01 reason why I would say it's castrated is because pietism in its essence was this pietist movement

00:26:07 was founded because of how tired they were of fighting this Lutheran pietistic movement.

00:26:13 They didn't want to fight anymore. And a Christianity that does not fight will ultimately 0.91

00:26:19 lose. They will be swallowed up. It won't produce fruit. I mean, the Bible, the scriptures are just 0.99

00:26:26 chock full of language of fighting, you know, in this, in this cosmic battle. And so it really does

00:26:34 this list, I think I would put it in the same order you did, even all-mill over pre-mill,

00:26:40 because we've found the same thing is that we will gladly link arms with pre-mill brothers

00:26:46 because they're willing, even if our eschatologies are radically different, our motivations,

00:26:53 you know, you say like, hey, we should go fight. We should go take that hill. And they're like,

00:26:56 okay, yeah, let's do it. You know, whereas the all-mill guy is like, well, that's a spiritual

00:27:00 hill it's like no actually the hill's right there it's real we should go take it we can take it we

00:27:05 should go take it no we should have taken it like jesus is ruling spiritually over the spiritual

00:27:11 hills right he owns the spiritual cattle on all yeah no they spiritualized jesus right out of his

00:27:17 lordship for for sure and jesus becomes sequestered his his king kingship becomes sequestered

00:27:23 and quarantined to the heart right we used to say jesus is lord of all now we say jesus is lord of

00:27:27 my sweet little heart and and so it's a confinement of of his lordship so i know i think that's great

00:27:33 dan so real quick can you do this dan let's i think we need to define some of our terms because

00:27:37 otherwise um people are going to just think that we're egotistical you know just spouting all these

00:27:42 things we don't actually know what they mean and for me the guiding force of ministry is always

00:27:46 what people think so uh so uh it shows so i want everybody to like me so let's define our terms

00:27:53 and, uh, and try not to be, uh, try not to be presumptuous. So, uh, Dan, can you take pietism?

00:27:59 What would is pietism? Yeah, sure. I can give you, uh, some of the historic roots of pietism and 0.65

00:28:05 then, uh, you know, kind of define it. So really the roots of pietism came out of the 17th century.

00:28:11 Um, there were folks that were sick of this in this infighting within Protestantism and with,

00:28:18 uh the catholics you know so the protestant catholic fighting uh was pretty intense i mean

00:28:24 like you know there's a reason that bloody mary got her name that way because she killed

00:28:29 protestants i mean so within this uh debating doctrine and and um desire to hammer out truth

00:28:36 and to figure out like you know what is this reformation what are we reforming what did the

00:28:41 past say they this pietistic movement the roots of the pietists they grew sick of this this fighting

00:28:47 And so this led to some movements that is distinct from Lutheranism. It came out of Lutheranism, but it's not necessarily the doctrines of Lutheran, you know, conservative, reformed Lutheran theology today.

00:29:01 but it's really a distinction between, uh, the head and the heart. And so it became, um, they

00:29:08 have this really strong distinction between head and heart, uh, of emotion, how you feel and this,

00:29:15 um, this somewhat disdain for, uh, theology proper. Uh, and so this led to, for example,

00:29:24 in Bible studies, uh, became very introspective instead of what is true. The question is asked,

00:29:30 how does this make you feel or what does this mean to you? Uh, and so that's how I would

00:29:35 describe some of the roots of pietism. And so you can see that, you know, the mega church Ted talk

00:29:43 sermon is all about how to, how does this make you feel? That is really one of the root questions.

00:29:50 So even you, you joke, like you care what people think that's, that's a pietistic impulse,

00:29:56 you know as far as emotions being very important in that movement right yeah no i completely agree

00:30:04 i would add to that like i you know if i could you just do a two-word definition i say pietism

00:30:08 is privatized lordship right that jesus is just it's just this personal and so it's this emphasis

00:30:14 on quiet time right so how do i know i'm doing well in in the christian faith well i have a

00:30:18 quiet time every single day i've been doing it for 40 years it's great great awesome um so so

00:30:24 what's the fruit of your quiet time well my my children have gone apostate and um you know and

00:30:29 uh this and that you know and so it's like yeah okay well faith without works is dead like what

00:30:35 there should be there should be some fruit of this 40 year quiet time um yeah so thank you it ends up

00:30:41 being like christianity is a cesspool instead of as a stream yeah you know and so everything gets

00:30:46 damned up and it becomes rotten instead of having an outflow i like your definition better than mine 0.95

00:30:52 No, no, no. Yeah, it's short. Okay. So Brian, and then I'll go to you, Eric. I want you to do 0.98

00:30:57 complementarianism. Because people are like, complementarianism, why is that bad? But Brian,

00:31:02 first, can you do radical two kingdom theology? Explain a little bit of that.

00:31:07 Yeah. Radical two kingdom theology, very briefly, at the heart, it's making a division between

00:31:14 the common kingdom and the spiritual kingdom. So that's really the sine qua non of radical

00:31:20 two kingdom theology. It's saying there's this kingdom that Christ rules over. It's his spiritual

00:31:24 kingdom. It's his church. And so whenever they look at passages of scripture about the spread

00:31:30 of the kingdom, like the mustard seed, Daniel and the stone in the mountain, they're saying,

00:31:36 yes, we believe that the church is going to spread through the whole world. We absolutely

00:31:40 believe that. But then they divorce that from the effect of leaven being present everywhere in the

00:31:47 world. And they say, well, there's this other kingdom. It's called the common kingdom. It was

00:31:52 established in the Noahic covenant, Genesis 9. And it basically is just ruled through natural law

00:31:58 and human reason. So it sounds pretty straightforward. You're like, oh, that doesn't

00:32:04 sound too bad as long as you believe Christ is going to rule over the church, the spiritual

00:32:07 kingdom through the whole world. The problem is that as soon as you take that common kingdom and

00:32:13 say it's not ruled by scripture, and Christians aren't necessarily therefore going to have a

00:32:18 leavening effect on any of it, you've actually just divorced the transformational effect of

00:32:24 Christianity from everything outside of the four walls of the church. And that's why what you

00:32:30 described in complementarianism, with your wife still having breasts when she drove out of the

00:32:35 church parking lot, really you can see that it's the same instinct. That's what Dan was talking

00:32:40 about it's the reason that uh i would agree to put radical two kingdom at the top is because

00:32:47 what's bad about complementarianism is just an outworking of the principles of radical two

00:32:52 kingdom theology so you know you'll hear people say like um those there's this neutral politics

00:32:59 is this neutral common kingdom sort of issue um you can read i think brian mattson and another

00:33:06 guy wrote a book on this where they were talking about how you know two kingdoms guys will say

00:33:11 yeah so how does the bible affect how you'd make a stir fry and that's like their point of trying

00:33:16 to say see there are all these neutral things the bible has nothing to do with and their rejoinder 0.72

00:33:21 was like really have you tried making dinner in india where they worship cows right does it does

00:33:28 your christianity affect the food there food how about deeply religious yeah islam yeah all of

00:33:34 christ for all of life rather than what you said earlier again great pithy summary some of christ

00:33:40 for some of life right that's how i would describe radical two kingdom i completely agree and it's

00:33:45 everything i like i think of art so like um i think it's pollock is his name the guy who just

00:33:49 splatters paint you know and yeah jackson jackson pollock right exactly yeah jackson pollock and

00:33:54 it's kind of you know you think of like the you know uh the emperor has no clothes right the little

00:33:59 boys like the only one who actually has the audacity to say he's naked you know and uh and

00:34:04 and and i feel like that happens like you know you you go into an art museum and it's the little 0.99

00:34:08 kids who actually have like the gravity to be able to say um i could do this painting this is stupid 0.65

00:34:13 you know and i think what's your favorite painting the storm on the sea of galilee like 0.91

00:34:17 look at all the colors and the people in the boat and they look at this like reader response

00:34:22 splattering and they're like but that but that came from that secular sacred divide um and and

00:34:27 everything in the secular realm became subjective. And so art was, was, was secular and, and then it

00:34:33 became subjective. And then you have, you know, we, we get expressions like beauty is in the eye

00:34:37 of the beholder. Right. And then you see that even with, you know, pertaining to complementarianism

00:34:41 and sexual ethics, you know, so now it's like, we, we got to get the fattest chick we can find

00:34:46 on the cover of a beauty magazine to say this is right. Because there is no objective standards 0.95

00:34:51 of physical beauty. And so like, I think, you know, from a post-millennial framework, I think

00:34:56 that we're going to have jason pollock paintings in museums uh hundreds of years from now maybe

00:35:00 it'll be a couple thousand years from now um but but they'll be there so that that society can go

00:35:05 and kids will go on field trips and stuff like that from their classical christian schools and

00:35:08 they'll go and and and they'll go and the point will be to go and laugh and make fun of jason

00:35:13 like and it'll be this glorious god glorifying thing like we'll go and we'll laugh and say isn't 0.98

00:35:18 that stupid like this is what happens when we reject christ um that you know that like we 0.93

00:35:23 actually there were people who actually thought that this was a good painting and the kids will 1.00

00:35:26 laugh and pat each other on the backs we'll all have a good time you know eat a hot dog and go

00:35:30 home and laugh at jason pollock and it'll be a beautiful thing and you know and we'll laugh at

00:35:34 you know uh the fat girls on the covers of beauty magazines and all those kind of things and not

00:35:38 saying that we're making fun of people who are fat but but what we're doing is we're saying we're

00:35:42 making fun of of the culture that tried to to force us to say that this is beautiful um that

00:35:48 said beauty is completely subjective no no it's not yes there are there's there's some measure of

00:35:52 personal preference, but there is a guiding universal transcendent standard of what is

00:35:58 beautiful. And the same way that, you know, so it's like engineering, right? It's not like a

00:36:03 free for all. Well, I think that, you know, that the foundation should be built. Like, no, it's

00:36:07 like there are things at work, right? There are standards and rules for building a suspension

00:36:11 bridge. And likewise with art, there is a universal standard to be able to say, yeah, that this guy

00:36:18 is artistic. This guy is talented. This guy, music, right? That guy can't sing. That guy can

00:36:24 sing. And we continue as a culture to gravitate away from that because ultimately we're gravitating

00:36:31 away from transcendent standards. What I would say with the two kingdom thing, so that was super

00:36:34 helpful, Brian. I like to say, maybe you guys will disagree with it. I think you'll agree.

00:36:39 But I like to say, just to make it real short, three spheres, two kingdoms, one king. Three

00:36:45 spheres two kingdoms one king and uh because what what's been helped so the lutheran um you know

00:36:50 perspective like martin luther himself kind of made the kingdoms um relegated them to the church

00:36:55 and the state you know and then you have you know long long time before him augustine right you know

00:37:00 the city of god and city of man um but but it seems as though that you know joe boot i think

00:37:05 is really helpful on this his mission of god and the work that he's done but um we do all four of

00:37:10 us just for the record for the listener we believe that there are two kingdoms the question is what's

00:37:15 the dividing line what's the distinction um and so we would say it's not two kingdoms as church

00:37:19 and state i i would use sovereign sphere language uh for that and say okay there's the home the

00:37:25 church and the state these are spheres uh the kingdoms is not church and state and it's not

00:37:29 secular and sacred um or or sacred and common um so it's it's not a secular sacred divide it's not

00:37:36 church and state divide that's a sphere thing not a kingdom thing um it's light and dark and and the

00:37:42 thing that blows people's minds, that really blew my mind in the last couple of years as I've been

00:37:47 studying these things, is that there is the kingdom of light within the civil magistrate.

00:37:53 And there's most certainly the kingdom of darkness within the church. What do you call

00:37:58 false teachers will arise from among you, right? What do you call apostates? What do you call,

00:38:05 that's the kingdom of darkness in the church. And what do you call Constantine, right? Or what do

00:38:11 you call a christian governor or or mayor or uh what do you call the overturning of roe and there's

00:38:17 obviously a lot more work to be done um we should have been functioning as roe never existed in the

00:38:22 first place right why are they desperately trying to codify it and not just codify roe but way beyond

00:38:26 that all the way to the moment of birth blah blah blah but you know it was never law but the point

00:38:31 is if if roe is overturned and i think it will be um that that is a a win um there's a lot more wins

00:38:37 that we need, but that is a win in terms of outside of the church, in the civil sphere,

00:38:43 the kingdom of light breaking through. If we cure cancer, right? All these things is pushing

00:38:49 back the kingdom of darkness, but it's not just because someone got saved. And so Joe Boots says

00:38:56 the church and the kingdom are not synonymous. There's massive overlap, but they're not a one

00:39:01 to one ratio synonymous. The church only numerically grows one way, conversion. But

00:39:07 the kingdom of God grows every time the good, the true, and the beautiful, those things which

00:39:12 align with the law of God and the gospel of God are furthered and pressed forward in any sphere

00:39:20 of human society. And so nobody could get saved. Now, I believe it would lend towards salvation,

00:39:26 but initially no one could actually get saved. So the church did not numerically grow.

00:39:31 but a good law was passed. The kingdom is advancing. And the kingdom advancing in these

00:39:38 other spheres in all of life, it lends towards the advancement of the church. And to be fair,

00:39:45 to play the devil's advocate, you know, the blood of the martyrs is also the seedbed of the church.

00:39:49 So the church grows under persecution, but we act as though that's the only way. And so then we do

00:39:54 these self-fulfilling prophecies where we rig the game to make us lose because we think that that's

00:39:59 going to be what's the church, the church grows when it's persecuted. But the church also does

00:40:04 really great, really great. When, when you have Christian rulers put in place, it explodes that 1.00

00:40:10 way too. So any thoughts on that? Briefly look at the growth of the, of the Christian church 0.99

00:40:16 through the Roman empire. And I think we were under 5% at about 300, five to under 10% for sure

00:40:24 within a century of Constantine, that number had grown to over 50%.

00:40:29 So the results of Christian governance, or you could argue about Constantine's genuineness or

00:40:36 whatever, but the fact remains, objectively, Constantine was claiming Christ and giving

00:40:43 freedom and decriminalizing Christianity. And the result was explosive growth. So a lot of the time

00:40:51 people want to universalize that, like you said, that principle of winning by losing.

00:40:55 Well, yeah, death, burial, and resurrection is true, but on the other side of resurrection,

00:41:00 there's 30, 60, 100-fold growth, and that's from the seed going into the ground and dying,

00:41:06 which is going to happen in families and nations. In God's story, it's going to happen over and

00:41:11 over, but the result, they want to take away the actual results of the seed being planted,

00:41:16 dying, and coming up. You're like, well, what about the 30, 60, and 100-fold?

00:41:20 Right. They want to die a million times between now and the return of Christ, but only resurrect once. And we see it as, no, we're going to die and resurrect and die and resurrect. They want to die over and over again, but only resurrect once. And we want to die and resurrect again and again and again as individuals, as families, as households, as nations, all those kinds of things.

00:41:39 So, yeah, I 100% agree with you.

00:41:41 And I think, you know, I forgot what it was.

00:41:46 Oh, I was going to say, you know, one of the things with the civil magistrate operating

00:41:50 by divine law, moral law, and personally, this might be another thing that we might

00:41:54 disagree on, but I see natural law and divine law as synonymous.

00:41:59 So I think that the combination of natural revelation in Romans 1 and natural law in

00:42:03 Romans 2, A plus B equals the Ten Commandments.

00:42:07 I think we can get all 10 commandments, including the Sabbath from natural revelation, right?

00:42:11 That people who are pagans with agriculture really, oh, well, if we break the land, you

00:42:15 know, in a one in seven year pattern, then you can grow crops better, you know, these

00:42:19 guys and, and, and, you know, natural revelation, you know, you know, there's a God in heaven.

00:42:23 Therefore, I think you can naturally and logically conclude that he alone is worthy of worship.

00:42:27 There's the first commandment that he's the invisible God.

00:42:30 So we shouldn't worship the creature, make his image, you know, engraven.

00:42:33 So there's the second commandment.

00:42:34 And obviously we should worship him with sincerity and truth and not make it vain and trivial

00:42:39 and trite.

00:42:40 There's a third commandment, the Sabbath, I've already talked about that, just seasons

00:42:43 and patterns and day and night and these kinds of things.

00:42:45 And then certainly the second table of the law, how we love our neighbor, commandment

00:42:49 five through 10, I think certainly comes from a natural law written on the hearts of men, 0.79

00:42:54 the Gentiles, without any special revelation. 1.00

00:42:56 You know, Paul says you're a law unto yourself, your consciences bear witness against you. 1.00

00:43:00 You're guilty of murder because you know that you shouldn't have murdered, even though

00:43:03 you've never had a preacher.

00:43:04 So personally, I would say moral law and natural law, divine law are synonymous. 0.99

00:43:10 And that's why every single pagan, every unbeliever is held accountable. 1.00

00:43:15 They are without an excuse, not just without an excuse to know the mere existence of God, 1.00

00:43:20 but without an excuse to know that this God who exists is also a holy God and that he's

00:43:24 written his law on tablets of human hearts and therefore they're accountable to obey

00:43:29 these things.

00:43:29 But all that being said, when the civil magistrate does a good job, when it's influenced and

00:43:33 discipled, when the church is discipling the civil magistrate, the state, and then the state

00:43:38 begins to actually produce justice and make good laws, that flows back into the church. One of the

00:43:45 reasons why the state is antinomian is because the church is antinomian. And one of the reasons 0.87

00:43:52 that the church is antinomian is because the state is antinomian. If you live in a society with a

00:43:56 state that is actually upholding justice according to God's justice, God's law, theonomy,

00:44:05 then it makes the church's job easier, in a sense, to preach the gospel, right? Because people

00:44:10 instinctively, so people are like, you don't need to tell people that they're sinners. They already

00:44:14 know. I would say, no, they did know. They did know. I think there was a time in America where,

00:44:19 you know, if somebody was a drunk, you didn't need to tell them that it was bad. I think you still

00:44:23 should have, but there was less of a need to tell them this is bad. But today, one of the unique

00:44:29 things, right, is when you call evil good and good evil, I think one of the unique things as we've

00:44:34 pulled back the blessing of God, as it's been pulled back on our nation and we've leant towards

00:44:40 this antinomianism, now it's not just preaching what God says about sin and the free grace that's

00:44:48 found in christ alone but we we actually have to make arguments for sin being sin because people

00:44:54 do instinctively know but there is a progressive um denial a progressive deception that comes by

00:45:00 suppressing the truth and deeds of unrighteousness and i think culturally where we're at as a society

00:45:05 as a whole is um with there there are people who are legitimately saying like no that abortion is

00:45:10 not sin and and i don't think they these at an individual level i don't think they actually

00:45:15 believe that. But, but that's, that's where as I would say the church has to preach sin more than

00:45:20 ever before, because in part, my point is because the civil magistrate has not been doing its job

00:45:25 because the church has failed to disciple the civil magistrate. So as the, as the state becomes

00:45:29 more and more lawless, the church has to pick up the slack and preach more and more law. And there

00:45:34 is, my point is there is overlap and they function in, in tandem in some sense, the state does matter.

00:45:40 It should be Christian and it has a benefit to the church when it is. So.

00:45:44 You know, Joe, that's a really good point. And we saw a microcosm of that example of

00:45:49 the state passing a righteous law or threatening to pass a righteous law and overturning Roe versus

00:45:55 Wade. And then the reaction to it producing actually righteousness on social media where

00:45:59 there were a bunch of women that are like, fine, if I can't kill my baby, then I'm going on a sex 1.00

00:46:03 strike. Right. You're right. No more fornication. Great. So righteous laws actually produce 1.00

00:46:10 righteousness, even, even in amongst the unrighteous, you know, but that's what righteous

00:46:15 laws are supposed to do is to produce righteousness, to, to restrain evil. And so we even saw that just

00:46:22 recently. You're right. You're right. Eric, complementarianism. What do you think? You like

00:46:26 it? You love it? Love it. Let's do it. Let's, let's just have it everywhere. Yeah, I know. I think,

00:46:32 you know, what's interesting is you guys were breaking these down. I think whether you're

00:46:37 talking radical two kingdoms whatever it is to your point joel uh what joe boot has said it's

00:46:43 really about churchianity right we want to keep the churchy things in the church and we want to

00:46:48 keep you know the so-called secular pagan things out there i think really what complementarian

00:46:53 complementarian is first of all is really hard to pronounce which is why it's a terrible theology

00:47:01 It's also hard to spell.

00:47:03 It is.

00:47:04 It is.

00:47:05 So it really comes out of the late 1980s, and you're getting a response to feminism and egalitarianism.

00:47:13 So really just feminism.

00:47:15 And so you get a lot of evangelical thinkers, Wayne Grudem and John Piper, Mary Cassian, some people like this.

00:47:22 They get together.

00:47:22 They say, how do we combat the feminism that's going on?

00:47:28 And really what they do is they say, well, let's really what we want to stress is that men and women complement each other.

00:47:36 So this is a couple of things. Number one, it's a downplaying of hierarchical order as found in like Ephesians five and six.

00:47:44 They're trying to stress, hey, look, you guys are, you know, you're different, but you complement each other.

00:47:50 And they really typically are going to want to downplay the fact that there's, you know, a wife has to submit, a husband is Lord, he is the authority.

00:48:00 And so even Mary Cassian has written on the Gospel Coalition, she's explained this, she said, we intentionally chose anti-hierarchical language.

00:48:10 And really, she comes out and says it.

00:48:14 It was a lot of the, like, Marxist thought that was influencing that decision.

00:48:18 John Piper will say the same thing.

00:48:21 Him and Grudem will say the same thing in their book, Recovering Biblical Womanhood and Manhood.

00:48:26 So how does it play out today?

00:48:28 Generally, you have a few camps of complementarianism.

00:48:31 You've got soft and harder.

00:48:33 And, you know, typically, though, what you're going to end up with is men and women, yeah, they kind of have some roles, but it's mostly relegated to family and the church.

00:48:44 um some uh they've been kind of picked on uh but the john pipers of the world he would be harder

00:48:52 in this camp where he's saying look i and he won't even honestly he won't even really be that 0.88

00:48:57 hard in my view he won't just come out and say look absolutely not women should not be serving

00:49:02 in law enforcement women should not be um serving in these like combat roles police officers john

00:49:09 will say, yeah, that's probably maybe not the best idea. Let's talk. And then you get the Amy 0.98

00:49:15 Byrd, Carl Truman camp, and they were actually ridiculing John Piper for this. So I think

00:49:20 fundamentally what's happening here, it's a war on biblical sexuality. And I think this one is

00:49:26 particularly dangerous. I've gone after it a lot because it is such a Trojan horse. It looks like, 0.97

00:49:32 many times is faithful reformed-ish guys who are saying yeah i'm complementarianism you know i'm

00:49:40 complementarian and and for a long time i would have said that too um i thought well i thought

00:49:45 that was the conservative position uh because really nobody at the time so like late 90s early

00:49:51 2000s nobody was really defending patriarchy right it was like well this is horrible except

00:49:57 for russell moore obviously yeah except for russell moore god bless him yeah that's right

00:50:03 so i think really it's a war on all of sexuality we have to recognize it as such

00:50:10 um it's a war against women as well it's not doing women any favors and we can also look at

00:50:16 the fruit of complementarianism it's been really bad for the church most of the people who've

00:50:21 defended it uh have given ground pretty quickly to the left and to false sexual ideology yeah i

00:50:29 completely agree what would you say to somebody who says but we find complementarian principles

00:50:34 within the trinity right there's a there's a hierarchy in the trinity you know um so like i

00:50:39 think of like eternal subordination of the son you know so i'm you know you know spoiler alert i'm i

00:50:44 would adhere to classical theism but for those who would say all right well you know the father

00:50:49 and the Son are equal in terms of the divine essence, nature, that the Son is fully God,

00:50:56 not partly God of the same substance, not just a similar substance, but the same substance.

00:51:01 So their essence and nature is equally worthy of worship and honor. And yet the Son plays a role

00:51:09 of submission to the Father. And then they would argue, and this continues beyond just his earthly

00:51:14 ministry, but that he is still subjected to the Father in terms of role, but equal to the Father

00:51:19 in terms of nature. And if we can see that within the Trinity, then we can do that within

00:51:23 gender roles with men and women. Yeah, I would say part of the issue here,

00:51:30 so, you know, like Bruce Ware, I've had him as a professor, you know, friends with Owen Strand,

00:51:36 a lot of the ESS debate. The way that I look at it is like, why do we even have to go there?

00:51:42 god said there's authority structures there's hierarchy it's very plain and very clear from

00:51:48 scripture let's base our arguments on the things that we know and are clear and not on the things

00:51:54 that are like conjecture about some hypothetical you know it's it's a it's a tough area when you're

00:51:59 like well how exactly does the um you know certain structure and i think that's typically what's

00:52:05 going to happen when you spend most of your time studying and researching doctrine of god not that

00:52:10 it's not important but i think sometimes you can you can miss the obvious like just read ephesians

00:52:16 5 and it is hyper crystal clear you can read genesis 1 and 2 and you see that i mean any it

00:52:22 pretty much any honest old testament scholar will tell you the act of naming which god delegates to

00:52:28 adam is de facto authority and who does he name the woman he clearly has authority over her you

00:52:38 know submission and obedience i mean these so that's what i would say just go to what's clear

00:52:43 and it is crystal clear and let's deal with that no that's super helpful just saying you don't have

00:52:48 to be a master on the trinity to um to be obedient in your marriage yes the trinity matters but uh

00:52:54 but yeah that's i i didn't even i mean that's super simple but i never thought of it that way

00:52:58 in the sense that like the the subliminal statement that's being made is um you you have to you have

00:53:03 to master one of the most difficult doctrines, you know, that we have, doctrine of God, theology

00:53:08 proper in order to have a position on the nature of men and women. When it's like, well, the secret

00:53:16 things belong to God. Let's do, you know, Trinitarian work, but some of these things are

00:53:20 secret things, but the things he's revealed to us belong to us and our children forever. And yeah,

00:53:26 that's really good. Any thoughts from Dan, Brian on complementarianism or two kingdom or any of

00:53:32 these things? I do think the urge in the complementarian world to eliminate the

00:53:41 language of hierarchy is just another example of that egalitarian spirit that runs through

00:53:49 everything. We're an atomistic, individualistic society where we really want to make every man

00:53:56 his own Pope, every man his own God. And what that means is that nobody can be an authority

00:54:01 external to me so then you're stealing from the woman what makes her a person if you put her under

00:54:10 any kind of hierarchical authority in this if if you buy that presupposition where scripture says

00:54:15 no everybody is in hierarchical relationships with superiors and inferiors and that doesn't

00:54:21 that language itself we would object to but historically that's just normal language of

00:54:26 if you're in a military unit you have a superior it we're not talking about your ontology we're

00:54:34 not talking about your you know that you're less of an image bearer of god we're saying you're in

00:54:40 authority and that authority is real and therefore it's a hierarchy like this just terror at the

00:54:46 language of hierarchy is completely the result of rationalistic individualistic modernism not

00:54:54 biblical covenantal thinking so another grounds that i would just say interrogate your presuppositions

00:55:01 modern man and understand that your framework is already from the beginning flawed in the

00:55:08 foundations so your instincts as you build doctrines on top of it are going to be flawed

00:55:13 you need to go back to a covenantal hierarchical type of thinking yeah i think the other thing

00:55:20 there brian it's a fantastic point but the other thing is when you create a theology because you

00:55:27 want to soften the word of god or appease the culture even if it's just an instinct like well

00:55:33 how do we make this this thing that's been around forever hierarchy and marriage we how do we make

00:55:37 that more palatable i think whenever you start there you've already lost it may take 20 years

00:55:42 to get to the full fruit of it but you already lost the game yep yep yeah what i would say so

00:55:48 you're right it's this um this obsession with uh egalitarianism and when egal i would say it like

00:55:53 this when egalitarianism is the goal uh androgyny is the the result um because the only way that

00:56:00 you can really say that we're equal is um is it's not enough to say we're equal it has to be sameness

00:56:06 we have to be the same right so that's like for women to actually be equal with men well men can't 1.00

00:56:10 get pregnant you know so i mean that's a part of egalitarianism feminism was you know women allegedly 1.00

00:56:16 right right right birthing persons yeah exactly but but that's when you think like where does 1.00

00:56:23 this come from it comes from feminism and it comes from you know feminism wanting to be equal 1.00

00:56:27 um but realizing we will never be equal unless we're the same but the reality is like god created

00:56:32 the world uh with divisions and distinctions and he did so um on purpose so we live in a world that

00:56:38 is designed um with a hierarchical structure and and so it's it's this um the desire for for

00:56:45 egalitarianism uh leads to the fruit of androgyny and and what it what it's opposing is hierarchy

00:56:52 you're absolutely right and the the opposition of hierarchy really is an opposition of authority so

00:56:57 it's a hatred of authority a desire for anarchy um and and that can be applied to a million

00:57:02 different things so we're just applying it right now to the the sexual ethic but that can be applied

00:57:06 to economics right so so what do you see happening you see um a hatred of patriarchy oh but you also

00:57:11 to see a hatred of capitalism right you want socialism which is you know and that so so the

00:57:15 goal of egalitarianism produces the fruit of androgyny well the goal of socialism produces

00:57:19 the fruit of communism you know so like um you know and so in all these different levels and

00:57:23 and and then you see that like in the church i would argue that this hatred of hierarchy and

00:57:27 these kinds of things um i think that's even been applied to sin right all sin is equal

00:57:31 nope oh right no it's not no it's not right all sin is equal in the sense that that all sin even

00:57:37 the smallest sin, whatever a small sin would be, is fully capable of separating you from God and

00:57:43 placing you under his eternal wrath forever. So all sin is equal in that sense. But Jesus

00:57:47 pronounces woes on certain cities saying it will be worse for you than it was for Sodom and Gomorrah.

00:57:56 Woe to you, this Israelite city, you know, and this is, and why? Well, I would say there's two 0.67

00:58:02 things. One, so Jesus says, so talk about hierarchy. There's a hierarchy on earth and the

00:58:06 world that god made but there's also a hierarchy in hell according to jesus and i would argue

00:58:10 along with jonathan edwards and guys for a hierarchy in heaven i think it'll be unlike

00:58:15 any earthly hierarchy that we're well aware of um but but i do think that in heaven there are

00:58:19 seats of honor right like when when uh the sons of zebedee you know who granted to us lord that

00:58:24 to sit at your right jesus doesn't say well that's not a thing that's not his response he's like can

00:58:29 you can you drink the cup that so he's like that is a thing is what he's implying that is a thing

00:58:34 but I don't know if you'll make the cut because I don't know if you're good

00:58:38 enough. Right. And which, which is a profound thing. So, so with, with how,

00:58:43 you know, Jesus even says, but you know,

00:58:44 to one will be given a light beating to the other will be given a severe

00:58:48 beating. And that's based on, in my exegesis, it's based on two things.

00:58:52 Him pronouncing greater woes on, on the Israelite cities is in one sense,

00:58:57 because they were given greater revelation.

00:58:59 I think he says that explicitly, right?

00:59:01 If the signs, if the miracles performed by me in these towns were performed in Sodom and Gomorrah, they would have repented a long time ago.

00:59:09 So one thing that makes their sin worse is their sin in the midst of a higher degree of God's grace.

00:59:15 If there's more grace in revelation from God and sin persists versus another scenario where there's less grace and sin persists, well, the sin that persists in the greater context of grace is a greater sin.

00:59:29 And then I think you can talk about, so one is degrees of revelation, and then the others is just degrees of sin.

00:59:35 There are some, and we know this from just the law of God, and there being varying penalties, varying penalties on earth for different sins.

00:59:43 Eye, eye, like God has proportional justice, right? Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, life for a life.

00:59:50 So, you know, so my point is different degrees of sin, also different degrees of grace, particularly in the form of revelation, creates a hierarchy of sin.

00:59:58 All sin, again, capable apart from saving salvation by grace alone, through faith alone,

01:00:04 and Christ alone.

01:00:04 Apart from that, all sin is equal in the sense that it'll get you to hell.

01:00:08 But even in hell, it seems as though there are worse torments in hell than others, according

01:00:16 to Jesus.

01:00:17 So there's a hierarchy of sin, hierarchy of hell, hierarchy of heaven, heavenly rewards,

01:00:21 right?

01:00:21 That's another thing that you notice in the last 30 years, guys, pushing back on, like

01:00:25 there are no heavenly rewards, you know, because we got to all be the same. We all got to be equal.

01:00:30 And I just, I would disagree with that. Like we're not saved by our works. We are saved by

01:00:35 works, but the works of Christ. But it does seem as though our works do receive varying degrees of

01:00:42 reward. So it's faith alone that gets us eternity with God. But it seems like they're based off of

01:00:50 the fruit in our lives that there will be varying degrees of reward in, in heaven. And so anyway,

01:00:57 but we're just anti-hierarchy. And I think it's because we're anti-authority. And, and so it can

01:01:02 be applied to the sexual ethic. It can be applied to heaven, your view of heaven, your view of hell,

01:01:06 your view of sin, your view of economics, like at every single level, part of why we're falling

01:01:11 apart is because we're so committed to have egalitarianism across the board, which, which

01:01:16 seeks to do androgyny across the board, which always works against God's design because God's

01:01:20 design contains distinctions. Yeah, that's right, Joel. And I think when you look at creation,

01:01:26 creation, what is God doing? He's creating order by division. And then that division is crowned

01:01:33 with the hierarchy of man. And then that's the crowning glory where God says, that is the

01:01:38 hierarchical glory. And then I think you look at androgyny, as you're saying, it's bringing about 0.98

01:01:44 through uncreation this great act of uncreation tearing down the divisions and now we're bringing 0.98

01:01:51 chaos back into the world so i think that's actually you know you might put this as one of

01:01:56 the top ones on the list just that this is where the two kingdoms are colliding yeah um you know

01:02:01 one saying division is good and beautiful and glorious this is the way god made the world

01:02:05 versus you know what's our culture trying to do tear down every division and what you get is this

01:02:12 chaotic hellhole this hellscape right because all all it can ever do is bring it down to the lowest

01:02:17 common denominator like socialism can succeed in making everybody have the same amount of wealth

01:02:22 yep um by making everybody dirt poor but that's that's all it can do it's the because against all

01:02:29 of that god made a world where there is um you know tom brady and you and god made a world where

01:02:37 there is. What are you trying to say?

01:02:39 When you said you, are you talking

01:02:41 about me? When I say you, I mean

01:02:43 I'm talking to a Chinese man named you

01:02:45 over here. Oh, gotcha, gotcha. Particularly not 1.00

01:02:46 you guys. Yeah, I know you.

01:02:49 He's a great guy. No, God

01:02:51 made a world where he gives... No Tom Brady.

01:02:53 No Tom Brady. Tom and I are close.

01:02:55 He made a world where

01:02:57 he gives one talent and five talents and ten talents.

01:02:59 He made a world where he made

01:03:01 some people with 180

01:03:03 IQ and some people with

01:03:05 75 IQ and he

01:03:07 calls them all to faithfulness with the measure of faith and gifting he's given them. Egalitarianism

01:03:13 hates that because it rejects the authority of God in giving his gifts. It wants a world that's

01:03:17 fair, meaning equal. And the thing is, God did not make a fair world. Jesus even said that to those

01:03:25 who have little, even what little they have will be taken and given to the one who has much. And

01:03:29 he's talking specifically about this issue that we're describing. I would say Arminianism has a

01:03:36 very similar error where it wants to say that God can't make from one lump vessels for honorable

01:03:41 use and dishonorable use, but that everyone has to have equal opportunity to respond, that

01:03:47 prevenient grace must go out and make everybody equally able to respond and have the same

01:03:53 opportunity. And it's like, no, God judges, as you demonstrated, God judges individuals differently

01:04:00 based on the light of revelation that they had i think that's beyond dispute in scripture which

01:04:06 that right there assumes that there god doesn't reveal himself equally to everyone exactly that

01:04:11 doesn't sound fair you can't say that my son had the exact same opportunity to bend the knee to

01:04:18 christ as lord as the son of some muslim kid right in you know some muslim guy in saudi arabia they 0.51

01:04:25 didn't yeah and christians that try to argue and like come up with elaborate gymnastics to make it 0.91

01:04:31 seem as if that's the case through natural revelation or whatnot we're all responsible

01:04:35 because of that absolutely but it's just not the world god made god made a world that wherein one

01:04:42 of the glories would be this massive differentiation and and it's like it is it is far more glorious

01:04:50 that Tom Brady exists, this sounds really gay now that I say it. But it is. It's far more 0.86

01:04:58 good. Should I call you mister? Why are you gay? No, it's true though. I mean, the fact that there

01:05:05 are people that can sit down and can intuitively understand engineering and design and build

01:05:13 things like, you know, guys working on quantum computing right now. I don't even understand the

01:05:19 terms that you need to understand to get even the concept. And there are people that God made and

01:05:26 he gave them minds that they do what is the glory of Kings, which is to search out the mysteries

01:05:32 that God has hidden in the world. And so it's like egalitarianism just wants to make this

01:05:37 big gray homogenous lump out of everything. And the prop one argument against it isn't just

01:05:43 theological it's just well that's boring it's the argument from boringness and and god didn't make

01:05:50 a boring world god made it because god himself is interesting god made an interesting world yeah

01:05:55 and he the the creator maintains the rights like the master of the house the owner he maintains

01:06:01 the rights um to to be generous with what he has and to give to one and i always you know that the

01:06:07 parable like you said that you know the one one talent two talents five you know and the two talent

01:06:11 guy doubles to four and the five doubles to 10. And, you know, but the one, he buries it, you

01:06:16 know, in the sand, he hides it. And, you know, I always thought, I think a lot of Christians think

01:06:21 that that's, you know, an expression of what's coming across as he's fearful. He was driven by 0.86

01:06:27 fear and that's why he buried it. Whereas I would say that he was driven by hatred of the master

01:06:31 because he didn't think the master was fair. So, because ultimately, so when he says the master

01:06:36 returns and he's like, you know, what have you done? What fruit have you produced? And he says,

01:06:41 why I hid, uh, the talent that you gave me because, um, and, and what he's, what he's

01:06:46 ultimately saying, what he's implying is because you gave me so little, uh, you gave me such a

01:06:51 small investment that if I was to try to, you know, invest this in the markets and do this

01:06:56 and that, it was so little that, um, I probably would have lost it. Right. That's, that's what

01:07:00 he's saying. And, um, and, but beyond that, he says, I knew you to be a hard master reaping

01:07:05 where you did not sow, right? And, and, and the master, you know, responds by saying, if you knew

01:07:11 me to be like that, this is what you would have done. You would have at least, right? So you're

01:07:17 saying it's not, it's not hatred. It's just fear. And it's really my fault because I gave you too

01:07:21 little. And I'm also not, not only was I stingy and gave you too little, but I'm also unjust. I

01:07:27 try to reap where I don't sow. And, and so what the way he's responding is he's saying, okay,

01:07:32 I'll accept your premise. And I'm going to prove that you're a liar. If your premise was true, 0.99

01:07:41 this is how somebody who actually believes that would have behaved. You would have at least

01:07:46 invested with the bankers so that I might receive interest. So you buried my talent,

01:07:51 not because you were afraid, because I gave you too little. You buried my talent because you

01:07:56 didn't want me to get a single dime of return because you hate me. And you hate me because

01:08:01 your two peers over here, I gave them more and I, and you didn't like that. You know? And so I think

01:08:07 that that's what, cause it's like, you knew me to be, you know, we, we look at the master's

01:08:11 response. Well, if you knew me to be a man like this, then this is what, and we look at it almost

01:08:15 like if we don't read carefully, we look at it as like, like Jesus is actually affirming his view

01:08:20 of the master. And that's not what's happening because his view is you reap where you do not

01:08:25 sow. And we know that God doesn't affirm that view because where has God not sown? God never

01:08:30 reaps where he doesn't sow god sowed everything he created everything that exists is his doing

01:08:35 you know and so so he he has rights he has king rights to reap from anywhere and anyone at any

01:08:44 time because it's all his doing it all came from him every good and perfect gift comes from him

01:08:50 he created ex nihilo so even when all we ever do is we cultivate we steward you know we and we

01:08:55 multiply resources. And in that sense, we are creators in the lowercase C kind of, but God's

01:09:00 the one who, who provides all the materials. God's the one who created the cosmos and the,

01:09:05 and the world that we live in. And so in that sense, he is the original investor. He's the,

01:09:11 you know, he has rights to reap from, from everyone. And, and so anyway, so I, you know,

01:09:17 even with that, and the last thing I'll say on that, a talent, you know, part of it is we don't

01:09:21 understand the culture and how much a talent was. It doesn't say if it was a talent of silver,

01:09:24 or bronze or gold but um but if it was a talent of gold it would be in our dollars i think the

01:09:30 equivalent of of about two uh two plus billion dollars um is you know if it was a talent of

01:09:36 gold and even if it was even if it was silver it still would be it would be you know like 50

01:09:40 million dollars um and so you know the the point is like he gave him it it was it was massive it

01:09:46 was a lot of resources and so that that reading of the text saying oh he was just he was given so

01:09:52 little, you know, and he was fearful. He didn't want to make a bad, like, it's just not, not an

01:09:57 accurate reading of the text. So, all right. Um, any, any other thoughts you guys got? If not,

01:10:02 um, can, can somebody, I think the last one that I'd really like to do is can one of you guys

01:10:06 just, uh, describe, define dispensationalism? Uh, I hate to interrupt. I've got to jump off

01:10:12 for the next meeting. That's fine. You guys are more than good. We'll take it. We'll take it.

01:10:17 Yeah. Thank you much. Thanks. See Eric. Yep. Yeah. But Brian or Dan, you want to just

01:10:22 knock out dispensationalism. We'll talk about that and then call it a day.

01:10:26 You know, I think I'll let Brian define dispensationalism. I mean, he taught a college

01:10:30 class on dispensationalism. So I think he's the preeminent expert on this subject.

01:10:36 That was when I was a dispensationalist as well. When I, you know, obviously like many of us,

01:10:42 I grew up in a dispensationalist assumed environment. You know, I read all the Walvoord

01:10:49 commentaries on Daniel and Revelation and, you know, the whole nine yards. So, dispensationalism,

01:10:55 some of the core tenets, or I guess the first thing to understand about dispensationalism

01:11:01 is it's a whole Bible theology. It's a way of attempting to understand how the whole story of

01:11:07 the scriptures fits together. How do Israel, the promises, the land relate to Christ, relate to

01:11:14 the church it's like covenant theology or new covenant theology or you know some of these other

01:11:19 systems it's trying to establish this meta narrative or this great grand uh coherent

01:11:25 understanding of all of scripture and so it basically uh answers that question first it's

01:11:31 very recent uh it's you know finds its roots in the 19th century so very very recent uh but it

01:11:37 it essentially tries to answer that question by dividing god's story that he's telling into

01:11:42 different dispensations. And there's no real agreement on how many or what the delineations

01:11:49 are. But the way that I heard, like, for example, David Guzik of Calvary Chapel describe it is that

01:11:55 each of these dispensations was essentially God governing his household in a certain way.

01:12:03 And that those, you know, each dispensation was governed differently. So you have the age of

01:12:07 innocence, you know, you have different ages that go through. And then what that gives you is a

01:12:13 story of a lot of discontinuity. So dispensationalism is marked by discontinuity, where God

01:12:19 changes how he's governing his household at different steps. He has different rules for

01:12:23 different people. Israel are his, you know, his special people that he's made special promises to

01:12:29 that he's given them the land. A lot of dispensational premillennialism is founded on

01:12:34 the idea that those promises were not fulfilled in the Old Testament period. The land promises

01:12:41 even weren't fulfilled. And so those are waiting for a future fulfillment because when Christ came,

01:12:47 the idea is that Israel rejected their king. And so what God did is he hit pause on the

01:12:54 fulfillment of all of his promises. And he turned aside for a time to a different people and a

01:13:00 different plan. And that's the Gentiles and the church. So the church are different people 0.98

01:13:04 from Israel. They have different promises. They have a whole lot of different managing of the 0.99

01:13:10 household. And that's the age we live in. But that at the end, God is going to restart his plan

01:13:19 for Israel. He's going to return to his plan for Israel. There'll be a great tribulation, 0.79

01:13:24 rapture of the church, remove the church from the world before that so that he can turn back to 1.00

01:13:28 Israel. He'll save a lot of Israel through this tribulation period. Then Christ will return 0.95

01:13:33 physically to the earth and he will establish the Davidic kingdom again. And he will physically rule 0.98

01:13:40 from Israel from Mount Zion for a thousand, literally a thousand years. And that's when 0.96

01:13:44 he will fulfill all of these great old Testament promises before there's a final rebellion and an

01:13:50 end period in which Christ will make a final end of evil, cast Satan into hell. He'd been bound

01:13:57 during this thousand year period. And he'll return. He'll then, you know, usher in the new

01:14:02 heavens and the new earth, the eternal state and the great white throne judgment. The dead will be

01:14:07 raised. That's when death will die. So, you know, a lot of the differences between that reading of 0.97

01:14:14 scripture and, for example, a covenant theological reading of scripture, whether baptistic or

01:14:20 pedo-baptistic would really come down to that difference of continuity discontinuity and uh

01:14:27 you know so a lot of the differences that you'll find when you're talking to dispensationalists

01:14:31 will be things like you know do you believe that the promises to israel are given to the church

01:14:38 in some meaningful way the promises and patterns of blessing and cursing and a lot of these things

01:14:42 dispensationalist has to say no uh those aren't for you in the same way those are for israel

01:14:48 because they're expecting at any time for this cataclysmic great tribulation to happen.

01:14:56 They don't really believe that the church age is the age where we're going to see

01:15:01 the fulfillment of these promises in any sense.

01:15:04 Christ reigning from sea to sea, the rivers to the end of the earth.

01:15:07 They don't see that as being about this time in history.

01:15:10 So if you go to a dispensationalist and you say,

01:15:12 Christ is reigning as king over all of the earth, they'll say, not yet.

01:15:17 You know, not yet. He will. And he's reigning in heaven right now. And they might even say something similar to the amillennial. He has spiritual authority, but he's not aiming to fulfill those promises right now. That's happening in the future. So that discontinuity does introduce quite a few problems.

01:15:34 I'm trying to be charitable to the dispensationalists and not just dunk on them, but it does lead to a lot of issues with legacy, with, you know, building, expecting long future still to happen.

01:15:45 There's a lot of expectation of the rapture of the church at any moment.

01:15:49 So you have a lot of newspaper exegesis associated over the last 50 years with dispensationalism.

01:15:55 There's a handbasket of problems that really come back to that discontinuity idea, I think.

01:16:00 Yep, that was super helpful.

01:16:01 Thank you.

01:16:01 I completely agree.

01:16:02 um it seems like the like the pre you know a dispensational pre-millennial would say like

01:16:07 uh so so we would say already not yet we would we would agree with that um something is happening

01:16:13 the leaven is actually in the dough it's doing something it's you know um the the mustard seed

01:16:17 is planted and it's growing um something is happening and so the mountain is growing you

01:16:22 know all the all these different things and and we would look at you know part of what i would

01:16:26 reject uh kenneth gentry talks about this but you know with the dispensational pre-millennial you

01:16:30 secret rapture, right? There's nothing that talks about a secret rapture, but the secret

01:16:35 rapture that the world, the whole world somehow misses, but all the Christians see it. It's 1.00

01:16:40 cataclysmic. I think he uses the word, it's catastrophic and sudden, sudden and catastrophic

01:16:46 rather than what we see as kind of a common theme and pattern throughout scripture is

01:16:52 gradualistic. So when you think of even creation, right? I would hold to six literal

01:16:59 days, you know, cause I'm not a heretic, but you know, so I would hold to, you know, young earth

01:17:04 and six literal days, but still like God could have done it all at once, but he does it, he does

01:17:09 it gradually over six days. So creation, sanctification, right? God is, it's a process,

01:17:14 right? And so like it's, it's gradual revelation. I mean, we have, we have this, you know, this

01:17:20 progression of revealing the Messiah, Adam and Eve knew him as the snake crusher, you know,

01:17:25 Abraham knows him as the seed, you know, and just further and further, you know, David knows him as 0.55

01:17:29 a king you know of the increase of his government there'll be no end so now we see that you know the

01:17:32 and then you know but then we know him with greater clarity and god has only saved a people

01:17:37 for himself in one way old testament saints and new testament saints the new covenant being

01:17:41 you know well we might disagree there but you know whether it be one covenant of grace one

01:17:45 substance with two administrations you know or whether it be the new covenant you know being

01:17:48 the only saving covenant covenant synonymous with the covenant of grace is where i would be at

01:17:52 retroactively applied but the point is that god has only ever saved people one way but there is

01:17:56 the distinction since that we have greater revelation us on this side of the cross we know

01:18:01 christ to a much uh fuller degree than than david um knew new christ um but but we were both saved

01:18:08 by faith in the same person in christ and so all that is gradual right but the the pre-mill

01:18:14 dispensation it's it's sudden and catastrophic you know whereas post-millennialism it's it's

01:18:20 it's keeping in the pattern of what what god did in the old testament what god did in creation what

01:18:25 god does individually in sanctification it's keeping with this this gradualistic um it's it's

01:18:31 small it starts small it grows slowly but it becomes significant it's dominant yeah yeah you

01:18:37 can see this in in daniel with uh nebuchadnezzar's statue representing kingdoms that will be destroyed

01:18:43 by a small stone that then grows into a mountain that swallows a whole earth yeah he's those

01:18:48 kingdom parables you know yeast is not exactly like a speedster you know and a mustard seed that

01:18:55 as a small seed and it grows to be the biggest tree where birds nest in it and it overshadows

01:18:59 everything so that's even a theme throughout these pictures that god gives us of the dominion of

01:19:04 christ over the whole world so i would i would agree with that yeah and and i think some of the

01:19:10 the because a dispensationalist they hear us talking about this and they say but there is

01:19:15 cataclysmic immediate huge judgment language and and we would say look the error that's being made

01:19:20 that was fundamentally made in darby's writings and you know expanded in the 19th and 20th century

01:19:26 with some of these ideas of the the future seven-year great tribulation that daniel's 70 70th

01:19:32 week is you know we're still waiting for it a lot of these ideas really it comes from a failure to

01:19:38 read the text literally right which is funny when you think about it because that's funny that's

01:19:44 the essence of the dispensationalist hermeneutic is a literalistic uh historical grammatical

01:19:50 approach is what they're saying but the problem is take the olivet discourse or take the book of

01:19:57 revelation both of those sections that deal with this great tribulation coming language

01:20:03 are emphatically clear that it is coming upon this generation of israel that is living at the

01:20:09 time that those works were given. I mean, emphatically clear. It is the most clearly

01:20:14 literal part of all of those passages. You will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds and

01:20:23 clouds being judgment. And when you see Daniel and you understand that the Son of Man being

01:20:28 presented to the Ancient of Days in the heavens as a sign of his judgment, coming judgment upon 0.55

01:20:33 Israel. When you see that the book of Revelation was not sealed up because these things were soon

01:20:41 to take place, and yet the prophecies of Daniel and Daniel 12 were sealed up because they weren't

01:20:47 going to happen for 700 years. Well, why would Daniel be sealed up because the time wasn't near

01:20:51 in 700 years and then Revelation not sealed up because they're near if we've already had 2,000

01:20:58 years of church history after that? Well, it's because they were near. God was going to judge

01:21:04 apostate Israel for her covenant breaking, which happened in 70 AD, just as Christ said it would, 0.50

01:21:11 that not one stone would be left standing on the temple, that the end would come with a flood. 0.65

01:21:16 In Daniel, that essentially God would come and he would judge his house. He would knock it down

01:21:22 because he was building a house no longer of stone. He was building a house of living stones

01:21:27 And no longer would he call the nations to worship at this physical temple.

01:21:31 He would send his temple to the nations, the living stones, and he would build a temple that swallows the world out of those living stones.

01:21:39 So, I mean, you just have a lot of a failure to read the Bible biblically, to read it apostolically, to read it in its types and shadows and its language and its prophetic imagery.

01:21:51 You have a failure to take literally what ought to be taken literally in those passages.

01:21:56 And the errors compound on top of that.

01:22:00 So, you know, dispensationalism, I love dispensationalist brothers.

01:22:04 Again, pre-millennialists, we've found to be great partners in a lot of work.

01:22:09 And not all pre-mill are dispensationalists.

01:22:12 But it is an error.

01:22:13 And it's an error with compounding implications.

01:22:17 Agreed.

01:22:17 Yeah, it's a serious error.

01:22:18 But same with me. 0.82

01:22:19 I found my pre-mill brothers are more willing to fight together and link arms than the all-mill. 0.75

01:22:26 So I would say like this, you know, the already not yet that you were mentioning,

01:22:29 I would say the pre-mill, especially the dispensational pre-mill,

01:22:33 is they would be not yet, but not yet.

01:22:36 No, really, not yet.

01:22:37 So they're like, not yet, not yet.

01:22:39 We're already not yet.

01:22:41 And then the all-mill, and especially the two kingdom,

01:22:44 radical two kingdom all-mill guys would be already, but not really.

01:22:48 so so it's like so you have not yet not yet um already and not really um you know and then we

01:22:54 are already and not yet and and that that was eye-opening for me and i want my listeners to

01:22:58 hear that that post-millennialism ironically i think the covenantal rather than dispensational

01:23:04 post-millennial rather than pre-millennial that position is and this is kind of out of character

01:23:09 for me because i usually take you know the the quote-unquote extreme position also known as you

01:23:15 know the biblically faithful position but in the case of post-millennialism it's funny that um i

01:23:20 would say it's it's the middle position it's we think like pre-mill all-mill post-mill but i think

01:23:25 more accurately it's pre-mill all-mill post-mill post-mill is actually i think the moderate

01:23:30 position what i mean by that is um post-mill a pre-mill and all-mill have nothing in common

01:23:35 so the pre-mill and the all-mill disagree about the nature of christ's reign yeah right one says

01:23:41 it's it's ethereal on they'll just ethereal it's just you know magical mystical you know whatever

01:23:45 um you know it's all the pietism kind of stuff and then the premio is like no no no this is a

01:23:49 kingdom it's real it's gonna happen jesus is actually king right so they they disagree over

01:23:53 the nature of the kingdom um and they disagree over the timing right so the the um the omel is

01:23:59 like uh it's happening right now and it's uh and don't you worry it is absolutely impotent

01:24:03 um and then you know and then do absolutely nothing yeah it does absolutely nothing it is

01:24:09 in full force right now doing nothing. So it's already, but not really. And then the pre-mill

01:24:15 is, it is serious, but we're in this parenthetical moment of dispensationalism with the church age,

01:24:23 and so it's completely on pause. But as soon as God hits play, and it'll probably be before we

01:24:28 finish this episode, it could be any second, boom, it's going to be serious. And stuff will happen.

01:24:33 Exactly. So they disagree on the nature of the kingdom and the timing of the kingdom,

01:24:37 nature and timing post mill is the moderate middle position we agree with the pre-mill

01:24:41 in terms of the nature of the kingdom we're like yeah it's real it's physical yeah it's it has

01:24:45 practical implications it's jesus actually king it's not just a spiritual kingship it's it's real

01:24:49 and we agree with the all mill on the timing of the kingdom um post if you want to be a moderate

01:24:55 be a postman yeah if you want a reasonable position yeah middle of the road not

01:25:01 join us in our post-millennial moderatism the post-mill folks are really known for being like

01:25:08 a moderate gentile absolutely winsome nuanced i think we're winsome they've won me yeah i think

01:25:15 it's the most attractive position it should be called win win none instead of win none you know

01:25:20 we want to win all so all right anyway so yeah so i i think that that's you know so the covenants

01:25:26 and, you know, versus dispensationalism and post-millennialism versus all-mill and pre-mill.

01:25:32 It matters in the sense of the pietism thing that we were talking about earlier.

01:25:36 But what I found, it sounds like you guys have found the same, that the pre-mill guys, 0.94

01:25:40 even though they're like, okay, we're waiting on God to push play again. 0.98

01:25:44 What I've noticed is even though they're like, we're not in the kingdom,

01:25:49 maybe it's because of that grammatical, historical, literal hermeneutic.

01:25:52 They just, they take the Bible seriously.

01:25:53 So they're like, yeah, the Bible affects how I should vote.

01:25:57 The Bible affects, you know, how, you know, so they actually, the pre-mill guy, even though

01:26:02 they think that in the big picture, we're on pause in their individual lives, they actually

01:26:08 believe in practical obedience, practical obedience beyond just the home of the church,

01:26:12 but that the Bible actually speaks to other aspects of life with, with real tangible,

01:26:17 practical obedience.

01:26:18 And they just don't think that obedience will be effective.

01:26:21 they don't think that it'll be successful but they still do think that we should obey and christ

01:26:26 calls us to to do things um and then the all mill is like we're in the kingdom um but the all mill

01:26:33 is i think the bigger problem not all of them i know there's there's a spectrum of differences

01:26:36 in pre-mill all mill postman but um but you know i i was in san diego for a long time and so i'm

01:26:41 right next to escondido you know westminster and stuff and and that that all millennial two kingdom

01:26:46 the radical two kingdom kind of mindset is, is just,

01:26:50 I think that's the one that's more dangerous. 0.84

01:26:52 That's the one that lends more towards pietism than like John MacArthur.

01:26:55 John MacArthur will do something. Now, I mean, I, you know,

01:26:58 he'll especially do something when it affects him personally. Right.

01:27:01 So like 52 years on record that America shouldn't exist because it wasn't

01:27:04 submitting to the civil magistrates in England. You know,

01:27:07 but then as soon as his church got closed down, boom, he became a theonomist. 0.78

01:27:11 So, um, so if I had the gif of the black kids running across the camera, like that's what 0.73

01:27:20 I'd play.

01:27:21 But my, but my point is like John MacArthur, you know, um, if it, when it came, when it

01:27:26 came to his front doorstep, this, this insane tyranny, um, John MacArthur fought and, and

01:27:33 to be fair, and he's fought other things for 50 years to be fair because of that little

01:27:37 and, and in his defense, just like I said, you know, tried to say, I think this is the

01:27:41 intention behind doug wilson's federal vision well here's the the intention i think behind

01:27:45 john mccarthur's leaky dispensational premillennialism uh give him the benefit of the

01:27:50 doubt i think his intention is 50 years of watching liberal theology ravage the church

01:27:54 with sexual ethic and and gay mirage and all these kind of things and he's like

01:27:58 no analytical typological hermeneutic whatsoever we just can't open the door and that i you know

01:28:06 so to give him the benefit of the doubt i think that's where his heart is is just give me the

01:28:09 the Bible and so but that guy who's just give me the Bible and let's practically obey and do what

01:28:14 it says I got way more in common with him than the other guy who has the analogical typological

01:28:18 Christological piece in their hermeneutic and can read certain portions of Isaiah actually speaking

01:28:23 of Christ without an apostolic New Testament author explicitly saying so but doesn't want to

01:28:29 do anything that's so true so anyways all right any final thoughts I hear my kids are about to

01:28:36 come in as a, like a wrecking ball, but any final thoughts? Thanks for having us on. I learned a

01:28:42 lot. I learned a lot. Me too, guys. I've, I've learned a lot of what I'm doing is repeating

01:28:46 back to you. Um, things that I've learned by listening to, I've listened to some of the

01:28:51 episodes. I rarely do this, but I've listened to some of the episodes twice on the Kings Hall

01:28:55 podcast. Cause it just, thank you. It's fantastic. What you guys are doing is awesome. So one of

01:28:59 these days, I'd love to get you guys to come out here and maybe we could do a conference together

01:29:02 or something like that, so.

01:29:04 Oh man, what a weekend that would be.

01:29:06 That'd be fun.

01:29:07 All right, thank you guys so much

01:29:09 and I hope you guys listening, we're blessed.

01:29:11 Tune in next week for another episode of Theology Apply.

01:29:14 Thanks so much for listening, but real quick,

01:29:16 before you go, do us a small favor, take a moment

01:29:19 and leave us a five-star review if you enjoyed the show.

01:29:22 This is undoubtedly the best way

01:29:25 that you can help us get this biblically faithful content

01:29:28 to as many people as possible.

01:29:30 Thanks so much.

`witch hunt`	Both words, anywhere in the episode.
`"witch hunt"`	The exact phrase.
`witch OR hunt`	Either word.
`"alpha male" -"high value"`	The first phrase, but not the second.
`(feminist OR feminism) AND (marriage OR divorce)`	Parentheses group alternatives.
`"decline civilization"~5`	Both words within 5 words of each other.

`misogyn*`	Any word starting with "misogyn": misogyny, misogynist, misogynistic…
`feminizm~1`	Words one letter off: catches typos and transcription errors.

`person:"Andrew Tate"`	Episodes where they host, guest, or are mentioned.
`host:"Glenn Beck"`	Episodes they host.
`guest:"Jordan Peterson"`	Episodes they appear on as a guest.
`mentioned:"Andrew Tate" -host:"Andrew Tate"`	Talked about on other people's shows.
`show:"Bannon's War Room"`	Episodes from one show.

`topics:abortion`	Episodes tagged with a topic (see the Topics page).
`summary:"Andrew Tate"`	Words in the episode summary. Summaries are machine-written and can be wrong.

`"great replacement" AND episode_date:[NOW-1YEAR TO NOW]`	From the past 12 months.
`lockdown AND episode_date:[2020-01-01T00:00:00Z TO 2020-12-31T23:59:59Z]`	From one year. Dates need the full time, as shown.
`"high value" AND misogyny_count:[100 TO *]`	Episodes with 100 or more sentences flagged as misogynistic. Also: hate_speech_count, toxicity_count, word_count.

The NXR Podcast - December 20, 2022

THEOLOGY APPLIED - 5 Doctrines That Stunt Sanctification w The King's Hall

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript