Paul, Romans, & Textual Variants | Doug Wilson & James White

In this episode of The Sweater Vest Dialogues, Pastor Doug Wilson and Dr. James White of Alpha and Omega Ministries discuss the issues surrounding Paul, Romans, and textual variants
Order Pastor Wilson's commentary on Romans today!
canonpress.com...
The Sweater Vest Dialogues are presented by Canon Press.

[@TheInnerParty]

I will need to pick a copy of this up. I love Doug Wilson. I liked him even when I was an atheist for the last few decades, but I love him now that I'm a Christian.

[@jacobmaier8993]

Amen. I moved to Moscow to be under him.

[@imdilyn]

@@jacobmaier8993 I wish I could..

[@truthseeker7867]

Why were you an atheist? Were you ever a skeptic?

[@JesusProtects]

If only he could stop believing textual criticism lies he would be amazing. First step is to stay away from James.

[@dadsonworldwide3238]

I'm not catholic and I think I have a cause for why humanist or athiest are so easily able to become a priest or just practicing catholic but what makes it appealing for you ? What allows it to be an easy transition?

[@zacharyjames881]

I could genuinely listen to 10hrs of this conversation 🔥

[@CHRISTS-Gang]

When These two Brothers dialogue -It IS [Alwayz] Profitable for The SAINTS!!-) ~ sDg

[@jaylonbachman]

I love Doug’s commentary on Romans and Revelation! Both are very succinct and easy page turners.

[@brucekyer5530]

I like to make observational comments as I go through the conversation. 1) James white does his best "dog hearing a high pitched noise" impression was fab. 2) " because sometimes an incomplete sentence is exactly what you need" brilliant.

[@laurak791]

I'm loving the sweater vest dialogues! Seems like casual conversations between two friends that like to talk about the things of God! 😊

[@craigchambers4183]

Love these men of God; might could buy Pastor Wilson's Romans but I spent my annual allowance buying three more of Dr. White's books last week. I think they will take me a year to properly get through anyway. :-)

[@JesusProtects]

The guy with a white beard claims the bible is incorrect and we need to rediscover it, just like his other textual critic friends, spitting in the face of God's preservation of scripture. I don't think is very nice or trustworthy? I don't understand how someone who says that still has an audience. I think we christians are way, way too soft sometimes. This is not a joke.

[@TheDareD3vil]

@@JesusProtectshe doesn’t claim anything of the sort. Don’t lie.

[@nicholasgeorge7825]

This is what our Reformed brothers need to be doing, tackling the truths of the Pauline revelation. Social commentary can wait.

[@catmanbluz]

friendly, brilliant and witty

[@franklyle8767]

Thank you for a warm and godly discussion brothers

[@vaekkriinhart4347]

I had wondered for a long time why when an apostle would quote the Old Testament, it didn't always perfectly line up with what is actually there in my Old Testament. Now I know :) Valuable info So blessed in this day n age to be able to access such good, insightful teaching bc of internet! I love you guys! I've learned so much from Dr. White and Doug Wilson.. and also Steve Gregg (although Steve doesn't interpret things as Romans 8, 9, Ephesians 1, John 6, 10, etc. as we do).. and a much lesser known minister, Jim McClarty (Sovereign Grace, Smyrna, TN). These guys are treasures! We are blessed to have such men as these. They are RARE. ps. Jim McClarty is here on youtube also. He has a channel. (for anyone who cares.. he's top knotch, too)

[@vaekkriinhart4347]

wow, just a few days ago me n a friend were discussing Paul's "thorn." I speculated it was a physical ailment. I asked God about it, and now this vid where it is talked about. That's a pretty compelling argument concerning Paul's eyesight and lines up with my speculation being a physical disability of sorts. I love listening to these two. These men are exceptional.

[@gregoryfrankland9057]

A commentary for the layman is something Michael Heiser has been doing for years. As a scholar himself he took scholarly articles and books and brought them to life for the layman. Heiser has weeks to live barring a miracle.

[@johnmays2486]

Great discussion brothers!

[@jakerinehold9697]

I found the end of the talk about the Canonicity of textual variants quite an interesting idea. Also, I remember back in some Sunday school class, I quipped that Peter never went to Rome. Peter said that he was in Babylon [code name for Jerusalem]. But the Sunday school teacher disagreed and said that Babylon was Rome.

[@Rhantismos23]

How is Babylon code name for Jerusalem? where did you get that idea from?

[@andrewilkens7131]

@@Rhantismos23 Revelation. Mystery Babylon and the Whore is Jerusalem

[@calebhein2788]

@Rhantismos23 The harlot of revelation is the kingdom of Israel, making jerusalem the new babylon. The dragon with her is rome, both persecute the church. When he turns on her it's thd great tribulation, or the destruction of Jerusalem in ad 70. This idea comes from preterism. I am a partial preterist. This isn't a perfect explanation. But it's as good of one as I can give without discussing it in person.

[@vaekkriinhart4347]

​@@Rhantismos23 From Revelation. And he's not wrong. It's also called Sodom. Who else would be drunk with the blood of the saints and prophets? Jesus said they killed all the "prophets from Abel to Zechariah.. for surely no prophet can die outside Jerusalem." It's all right there in Revelation 17:5, 6 "Babylon the great..drunk with the blood of the prophets." Rome didn't kill the prophets, Jerusalem did. And all of Revelation 18 "dressed in purple and scarlet" (18:16 same colors used in the temple and tent of meeting).. "who killed all the saints and prophets" (18:24).. Destroyed in one day.. This happened in the Jewish War of a.d.70, as Jerusalem was annihilated by Rome, temple and all; not even a tree was left standing. You may hold the prevalent view that Revelation is futuristic, but that's just not true. It has all been fulfilled in the past, save Revelation 21. But this is a whole other topic you didn't ask about, sorry. :) But both James and Doug agree with me on this eschatological viewpoint, as does Steve Gregg. Same with Matthew 24, Luke 21, Mark 13, all about Jerusalem that was destroyed a generation (40 years) after Jesus foretold

[@jamessheffield4173]

The tradition is that Mark recorded Peter's sermon. We have all been in a sermon when the preacher realizes that he has gone on to long and finishes up fast which fits Mark 16:9 -20. Blessings

[@johnwhoissavedbygrace9975]

Man you guys did James dirty with the thumbnail lol! I kept scrolling past the video but I had to eventually click because of his face lol

[@JonJaeden]

The fact that a variant that can be explained by a scribal error can be perpetuated over the centuries is testimony to scribes' and copyists' faithfulness to the text. This dichotomy between Jeremiah and Hebrews wasn't going unnoticed for centuries, yet no one claimed the authority to "correct" it. Better to live humbly with ignorance than arrogance.

[@LauPineda]

I didn't know you guys made a book! Thank you for mentioning 😂

[@solochristo65]

Strange channel you have.....great biblical content then leethe4th?

[@ogloc6308]

love both of you brothers

[@joshsimpson10]

This is so based I could barely contain myself

[@samueljimenez7420]

THEYRE BACK!

[@Pilgrim1985]

Thank you for this

[@imdilyn]

My two hero’s 💖

[@Eversmith]

The main Mormons are going off into lala land? James, my man. Mormonism IS lala land

[@byronbesherse3703]

Yes he should have said they are moving to secular land.

[@theeternalsbeliever1779]

Mormonism is no more wackier than the world of mainstream Protestantism or Catholicism.

[@jackuber7358]

Yes, to extend the analogy, Mormons are like a brick to the face with their false teachings in contrast to the many and varied false teachings, heresies, and apostacies of the contemporary not-so-Christian assembly halls (I won't call them churches) across the land like so many infected blisters and sores being more like death by thousand slaps.

[@aljuric5887]

@@theeternalsbeliever1779 Yeah, sad but true.

[@tomceman4451]

The Catholics say, "When the New Testament talks about brothers and sisters, it means cousins." Brothers and sisters do not mean brothers and sisters. It could mean “Uncle” or “Nephew.” The Catholics do not believe in Genesis 1&2. They start believing Genesis 3.

[@lawrencestanley8989]

A commentary on Romans? Oh boy... How long do you think Leighton Flowers will spend on this one??

[@unbredbeast]

The rest of the 2020's

[@matthewwalton8994]

Hilarious

[@kreendurron]

Keep em comin! Great stuff!

[@spiritandtruth4716]

I recently read Norman Cantor’s “Medieval Lives” and he brings out the baseline level of anti-semitism very well in that work. Throughout the centuries it was present and palpable in many aristocratic circles

[@jonathan-frank]

58:34 "History is messy. And it's a good thing that God is perfect - not a perfectionist. God uses messy processes to give us His word."

[@zacdredge3859]

16:50 Having studied editing it's actually an important skill to know when to leave something that preserves the writers voice. Depends whether you're editing for style or just copyediting as mentioned but getting the best outcome involves understanding the rules well enough to see where discrepancies actually create better prose or a more authentic final product.

[@PlantChrist]

Hey Canon Press I am going to help create subtitles for videos in Spanish to reach the Latin American community. If you would like this opportunity, let me know!

[@jackuber7358]

Thank you for throwing up the option of Apollos being at least the scibe for Hebrews. I have made that argument to much guffaws and kindly, head-patting correction. Now, I don't so much feel as though I am a lone voice in the wilderness.

[@joshualister8362]

I think we need to be careful with saying things like "Christians should condemn all forms of anti-Semitism". Anti-semitism, like the term "racism", has been used beyond the point of having a significant moral meaning. Is anti-semitism defined by what the ADL says? Then every Christian ought to be condemned as an anti-semite. Simply being against Jewish people, is not enough to determine if the "against" is for good reasons or bad reasons.

[@conceptualclarity]

Yeah some people say it's anti-semitism to criticize a CEO who happens to be Jewish. Others say it's anti-semitism to urge a Jew to accept Jesus.

[@alexivonkuciak3786]

''I want to write commentaries for the average well-read, well-educated Christian layman'' When I heard that comment I was like: ''wow.. this is probably the best definition of who I am! hehe'' average well-read, well-educated Christian layman... I'll remember that one!

[@jrhemmerich]

So, regarding finding a lost letter by Paul to a church (55:00). Since scripture is inspired from the moment given and the church simply recognizes it. It seems that our acceptance of it as scripture would depend greatly upon how it represented itself. If it says clearly that it was from Paul, and that it was to be received as the word of God (as in 1 Thessalonians) and it substantially confirmed to his known teaching, then there would be reason to say that it was God breathed. True, God willed that it not be available to many churches for a great period of time, but that is no more an argument against inspiration then the fact that some of the smaller letters were not widely circulated for a certain period of time. To say it can’t be God breathed just because the Church generally did not have it to give its approval to, might be confusing the church as witness with the church as authoritative decider. It is the case that chain of custody would potentially be an issue, but this would be one of the factors of authenticity, and should not be the deciding factor. And if it was scripture, then most of the churches would come to accept it on the basis of what it says and it’s conformity to the known Apostolic deposit by testimony of the Spirit. So it would be the same as the rest of the scriptures, it would just be a bumpy ride for a few hundred years as it worked itself out.

[@bharathp5660]

37 minutes - textual criticism interesting conversation

[@detached]

Could someone please direct me to a resource that deals with defending the textual variants they discussed apologetically?

[@bharathp5660]

48:29 - Mark's longer ending 49:44 - Enlightenment Error

[@craigchambers4183]

Amos 5:27 is quite different than Acts 7:43. In this case (according to me) Stephen is quoting the Septuagint, and the Jews 1200 years before the 'canonical' had the same Hebrew and chose to translate rather than transliterate 'Sikkuth' (tent) and 'Kiyyun' (image), the latter being a euphemism for the Egyptian god Rhempham/Remphan that the Jews carried around in the wilderness. So, Stephen is quoting the translated Hebrew that the Jews 1,000 years after him chose to translate differently and we have followed that for whatever reason. Also, the ancient Jews translated as the proper name Molech while the later Jews well after Christ translate the name rather than use it. So, altogether, I take it as indicating that Molech and Ramphan were essentially the idol and the demon behind them were one in the same; that is, each were the gods that gave the king his sovereignty, just like Marduk was the head of the pantheon in Babylon as the snake-dragon god using the Magi to anoint their kings. To put it simply, the Jews were worshiping the gods of government, as they did when they asked for a human king from God. They grew tired of His sovereign discipline and wanted to figure out a better defense against the people around them. Additionally, Stephen substitutes "Babylon" for "Damascus" which is in both the Septuagint and the Masoretic. I take this as Stephen, knowing the ultimate destination of both the northern and southern kingdoms as Babylon, simply was proclaiming the ultimate intent of "beyond" Damascus, so giving a message that explained things to those stoning him. Both Assyria and Babylon were, after all, 'beyond Damascus,' beyond the boarder along the east of Israel. I say this just to indicate that I lean more toward the Septuagint when the texts vary, and that often it takes more work to figure out some things.

[@seansimpson1133]

Why should we think the Septuagint we have today is what they had back then though? Obviously they weren’t using the masoretic text but why can’t we just believe they were using a text much earlier than both that at times agrees with both which is why their quotes of scripture line up with both the MT and the Septuagint at times?

[@christisgreaterthanculture9255]

42:55 I agree. If the author of hebrews which is 100% God inspired, is using a variant in a quote then we can assume that that variant is theologically correct, even if its not necessarily exactly the same as the original.

[@ianrhodes83]

“Christians should condemn all forms of antisemitism.” What about the kind that points out that mainstream Judaism affirms abortion as a religious practice to be protected under the 1st amendment. Or how about the kind that notes synagogues fielding rabbis to protect and affirm drag shows in NYC? Do we have to condemn that antisemitism too?

[@briancasey4917]

How about condemning abortion and drag shows as there are "christians" as well as Jews who support those evils?

[@EyeToob]

At 52:10 Doug Wilson said, "If some archaeologist found the letter to the Laodiceans or something that Paul wrote that is not in the canon, we have in our possession and have had in our possession the whole time the Word of God.... there are no gaps. So if a missing letter showed up I think it would be of great interest, ... but I wouldn't want to incorporate it into the canon." How do we know Doug Wilson's conclusion is correct? How did the New Testament Church know if a letter or gospel was from God or not? God had equipped the Church with prophets who could inform the Church what came from God and what did not come from God. Look at what Paul wrote to the church in Corinth : *"If anyone thinks they are a prophet or otherwise gifted by the Spirit, let them acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command. But if anyone ignores this, they will themselves be ignored."* 1 Corinthians 14 : 37 - 38 Since prophecy disappeared in 70 AD the Church no longer has prophets to verify or disqualify the origin of a document being from God or not. This is why we know the canon is closed, and any new discovery cannot be allowed in the canon because we are not equipped with prophets and have not been equipped for the last 1,950 years.

[@TheDareD3vil]

Prophecy disappeared in 70 ad? That’s a statement without a shred of evidence behind it.

[@mosesking2923]

"Since prophecy disappeared in 70 AD" your question is based on a false premise.

[@EyeToob]

@@mosesking2923 How do we know prophecy disappeared in 70 AD? 1 Corinthians 13 : 8 - 11 "Love never fails. *But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears.* When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me." Based on Paul's teaching we know when completeness comes what is in part (prophecy & knowledge) disappears. Does the Bible have anything to say about when completeness will occur in history? Yes. Matthew 5 : 18 "...not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." Completeness = when everything is accomplished Everything will be accomplished when the smallest letter or least stroke of a pen disappears from the Law. Does the Bible say when in history the Law would disappear? Yes. Hebrews 8 : 13 "By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one [the Law] obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear." This prophecy points out the Law would soon disappear in the first century which lines up perfectly with the prophecy's fulfillment at the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in 70 AD. This means in 70 AD the Law disappeared which means everything was accomplished which means completeness had come which results in prophecy and knowledge disappearing. Are there other Scriptures that line up with this conclusion? Yes. Luke 21 : 20 - 22 “When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those in the city get out, and let those in the country not enter the city. For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written." The fulfillment of all that has been written = completeness Notice this passage is part of the Olivet Discourse of Jesus concerning the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem that was fulfilled in 70 AD. This passage says the desolation of Jerusalem is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written. This lines up with completeness having come in 70 AD. Are there other Scriptures that state when prophecy will be taken away? Yes. Daniel 9 : 24 - 27 “Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, *to seal up vision and prophecy* and to anoint the Most Holy Place. “Know and understand this: From the time the word goes out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven ‘sevens,’ and sixty-two ‘sevens.’ It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble. After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing. *The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary.* The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed. He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ *In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation,* until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.” Prophecy would be sealed up and no longer available after the seventy sevens Daniel prophesied about. During the last seven of the seventy sevens an abomination that causes desolation would be set up at the temple and Jerusalem and the sanctuary (the temple) would be destroyed. Let's look at the teachings of Jesus to find out when this prophecy would take place. Matthew 24 : 15 - 16 and 34 “So when you see standing in the holy place *‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel-let the reader understand-* then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains." "Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened." Jesus told his disciples that the fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy would take place before their generation passed away. With the last seven of the seventy sevens taking place during the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD we can conclude that prophecy (and visions) were sealed up and were no longer available after 73 AD (the last seven was from 66 to 73 since the middle of the last seven occurred when sacrifice and offering were put to an end in 70 AD due to the temple in Jerusalem being destroyed). Both Daniel's prediction and Paul's prediction about prophecy being sealed up and disappearing are connected to the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple. The end of the the Law (the Old covenant of Moses) brought the end of the childhood (incompleteness / the partial) and therefore the childish things (the Spiritual gifts) passed away and God's people grew into the adulthood of the New covenant of Christ. Completeness came in the first century and therefore prophecy and knowledge disappeared in the first century. The seventy sevens came to an end in the first century and therefore prophecy and visions were sealed up in the first century.

[@MrTValleyguy]

John Piper took something like 10 Years to Preach through Romans. How long did you take?

[@treybarnes5549]

DW sure danced around asking JW to stop slamming the end of Mark. only we plow boys are not scared to call a goose, a goose.

[@jeremiclement5723]

I'm just here because of James White's face on the thumbnail.

[@jonnyw82]

12:00 how on earth do we know this is how Hebrews was authored?

[@wishyouthebest9222]

Hello siblings in CHRIST, I have a question for arminians (not related to the topic) wich I was once asked indirectly by a calvinist in the past. Would you believe in GOD if calvinist got it right? GOD bless

[@Knightfall21]

I am not an Arminian, but I am also not a Calvinist. the best answer i can give you is while seeking God's face in his word, Calvinism is not correct doctrine. if it was, i would absolutely believe.

[@wishyouthebest9222]

@@Knightfall21 That's how I view it too. Arminianism shifts the burden a bit further but in the end GOD creates people he knows who are rejecting HIM. We have many reasons that GOD don't have to decree all in a manner how calvinist put it but we shouldn't despise them for thinking so.

[@Knightfall21]

@@wishyouthebest9222 God does create people who he knows will reject him, but he doesn't create people with the inability to accept him.

[@wishyouthebest9222]

@@Knightfall21 Foreknowing the outcome and still allowing it. It's not that far from calvinism. I could've have as much free will as imaginable if I can't change the outcome of my demise I'm not really able to accept the gift of life

[@Knightfall21]

@@wishyouthebest9222 foreknowing the outcome and intervening to enforce his sovereignty would be closer to Calvinism. 1Ti 2:3-4 KJV 3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; 4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

[@MrTValleyguy]

Oddly if I had in the thorn in the flesh it would be my eyesight.

[@patriotnate7568]

Juggernauts

[@lawrencestanley8989]

At 41:25, I'm confused... And it makes me angry that it happens very easy these days, but, how can someone have faith in BOTH readings (Jeremiah 31:32 and Hebrews 8:9) when they each say something completely different? "I was a husband to them," and "I did not care for them" are not the same thing - clearly SOMEONE made a copy mistake, right? Inspired editing? So God needed correcting?? I am so confused...

[@wishuhadmyname]

All English OT translations come from a handful of manuscripts (collectively called the Masoretic Text) from no earlier than the 9th century AD. When the NT writers quote the OT differently than what we have, it's a sign of the Hebrew text being corrupted over time. We should correct our OT translations according to the NT's knowledge of it

[@lawrencestanley8989]

@@wishuhadmyname I agree wholeheartedly with you; I'm just trying to understand Wilson's position where he believes that we should believe BOTH to be inspired, and that we should believe in what he calls "inspired editing."

[@detached]

He's basically saying the variant is inspired as well as the original. Technically, I agree insofar as God is sovereign over all things; the text we have is what we were meant to have. Of course, critics would see that as a convenient cop-out, so that argument could never be used apologetically.

[@lawrencestanley8989]

@@detached The variant is inspired? I don't think I'll ever be able to agree to that one... Ordained? Yes. But "inspired?" No.

[@detached]

@Lawrence Stanley Me neither. Ordained, yes. It seems like the problem he's trying to avoid is, how else do you call what you're holding in your hand the word of God if there is even one uninspired letter? I'd like an answer to that myself tbh.

[@mypath4healthyliving533]

yeh the church has recognised the 22 books of scripture with the 27 scriptures of the apostolic age equaling the 49 scriptures being 7 times 7.. even if we find others through archeology it will just bolster the 49 7 times 7 witness to all men in all places for all time. good chat brothers.

[@everettlunday8855]

Will it be made into an audiobook?

[@donaldedmond4117]

Why would Paul write do the Hebrews when Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles? Where is his usual greeting?

[@cosmictreason2242]

Why would Jesus engage with gentiles as much as he did if he was only sent to the lost sheep of Israel?

[@theeternalsbeliever1779]

Traditional Christianity often overlooks this very important fact, but read Acts 9:15. Jesus stated that Paul was commissioned to preach to Gentiles _and_ Israelites.

[@danbrown586]

47:10 I've never understood this argument by Dr. White. If we believe in plenary verbal inspiration, we believe that God providentially ensured that the autographs would contain precisely what he intended them to contain, down to the least stroke. We don't believe God accomplished that by automatic writing, dictation, or by striking anyone dead before they could write something incorrect. If the autographs were thus perfect, and made so without any of those interventions, why dismiss _a priori_ the possibility that God *could have* similarly preserved the text in the mss.? Now, it's manifestly the case that God did not do this, and I don't see any reason to believe, as Ehrman claims to, that God would necessarily have perfectly preserved his word in each of the mss. if he had inspired it in the first place. But the dismissal of the question seems misplaced.

[@imdilyn]

🤓

[@willstatham2389]

Dr. Martyn Lloyd Jones had 366 sermons on Romans 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@WINOFFICIAL]

Who’s the one painted in the thumbnail?

[@MagnificentFiend]

It's Rembrandt's painting _The Apostle Paul_

[@WINOFFICIAL]

@@MagnificentFiend Thank you cultured stranger

[@therealkillerb7643]

A comment.

[@junkerjorg6310]

Yay

[@eholgrem8300]

Barnabas wrote pauls sermon to the jews in Asia minor which was eventually named Hebrews.

[@craigchambers4183]

Not important to most, but Apollos is the prime candidate for being the writer of Hebrews in my opinion.

[@cosmictreason2242]

I agree with White that the style is Paul and the vocabulary is Luke. Paul preached Hebrews and Luke was the stenographer

[@craigchambers4183]

@@cosmictreason2242 That could be, and so could Apollos, but not Pricilla or Aunt Dorcus. 🙂

[@theeternalsbeliever1779]

Apollos couldn't have been the author of Hebrews because the author clearly shows an understanding of the Sinai Covenant and the Law that only a well educated Pharisee could possess.

[@craigchambers4183]

@@theeternalsbeliever1779 Apollos clearly knew the Scriptures well, ie, well educated in the Scriptures and able to conduct an argument with any Jewish leader anywhere in the world he went. Acts 18:24. Paul considered him an equal. I Corinthians 3:6, 4:6 and throughout.

[@macrofuture]

Doug needs to debate Bart erhman.

[@macrofuture]

It would be such a different type of debate for both men

[@andrewbrowne5557]

Why? Erhman is a non believer posing as a scholar…

[@macrofuture]

​@@andrewbrowne5557 Are you saying Doug shouldn't debate a non believer? Not like he hasn't done that before (Many times). Also Bart is not posing as a scholar he is a scholar, I just don't think his arguments happen to be that good. It would be really interesting to see how Doug interacts with him. Bart is having a large influence and will continue too until someone tears down his arguments. I would love to see the two debate the dating of the Gospels, late vs early. This seems to be one of the foundations Bart and others rest on but its shakey ground.

[@andrewbrowne5557]

@@macrofuture I’m going to deduce that you are much younger than I am…time, for me, is a commodity, and MY time is precious! The minutes spent listening to Doug dismantle Bart’s flimsy positions could never be redeemed…I dismantled Bart’s arguments (with the help of some actual scholarship of course) myself the first time I heard him some 20 yrs ago…Ive heard Doug ‘react’ to non believers, but I haven’t heard him debate any, could you source your assertion please? One’s worldview, be it creationism or materialism, is a ‘faith’ system, but not the faith founded on empiricism. For us, faith is the ‘evidence’ that leads to Peace with God (Heb 11:1, Romans 51), for the non believer, faith is that which continues to give them the strength necessary to suppress the truth (Romans 1:18). Btw, the few minutes I took to respond to you was time well spent, but, FOR ME, listening to Doug dismantle Bart’s dogmatic assertions would be a waste of time…time that could be spent reading Christianity and Liberalism by J Gresham Machen! Peace of Christ to you!

[@goldenreel]

Part of why there was such distaste for the Jews in the time that James White brings up isn’t due to random unbridled hatred from Christians. The Christians didn’t have any tolerance for the Talmudic practices and heretical/blasphemous teachings. It wasn’t until a little after Maimonides that the Jews finally took his advice to abandon those processes and remain peaceful by blending the better parts of Judaism with Greek philosophy.

[@hassanmirza2392]

Given the fact that Christianity is in irreversible decline in the West, James white should cry and not laugh.

[@kestreljc1559]

Hebrews was written by Barnabas.

[@conformitytofact5224]

Let the text stand on its own, what the Holy Spirit gave Paul by inspiration (Romans) is sufficient, search the scriptures, the Holy Ghost knows best, he is GOD.

[@dadsonworldwide3238]

alexander the greats Helenistic enlightenment that took place before both of our main codex , is what gets ignored by all of the textual critics and scholars. . Even though its not new letters is new ways of defintion in far off lands in 350 bc brought in to be used when updating old decaying goat skin scrolls. The detailed words of colors is a great example of this definitely forcing a revisional update along with the new tech of manufacturing paper that began in the old testament before th real preist was replaced with pharacee and moving to the lunar calender. As dead seas scrolls and qumran tell us.

[@ehudsdagger5619]

Wait? Where are the Sweater Vests? This is nonsense!

[@PurePuritan]

They're wearing sweater vests

[@treybarnes5549]

Of course, Paul wrote Hebrews. Duh? If Paul did not write Hebrews, he was certainly in the room.

[@wishuhadmyname]

Yes. He delivered it in Aramaic and Luke wrote it down, translating it into Greek

[@interestedmeow]

In the same universe where Tolkien wrote ‘The Horse and His Boy’ It’s almost like y’all believe the New Perspective and that the rest of the disciples and early followers of Christ were illiterate bumpkins. Can’t possibly imagine how anyone but Paul (who clearly identifies himself in every other writing of his) would be smart enough to write a commentary on the Tanakh.

[@wishuhadmyname]

@@interestedmeow It's not a question of whether Paul was smart enough to write Hebrews. It's that there is a significant difference in the style of Greek writing between Hebrews and Paul's epistles. The theology and subject matter are very Pauline, but he did not write it nor did he dictate it in Greek, as he did with most if not all of his actual epistles

[@robertlewis6915]

@@interestedmeow I'd never heard of the New Perspective thingie until a few months ago, and I'd always thought Paul a possible author for Hebrews (not that I worried much about it). It's a book that has a lot of crossover with his common fare. I actually find the 'somebody else wrote it, but they were listening to Paul when they did so' hypothesis quite workable, though obviously only a theory. Maybe it's James, trying to trip us all up, you know?

[@interestedmeow]

@@wishuhadmyname which is odd, don’t you think, given that the Jews he’s writing to (in your theory) would be the Hellenistic Jews of the dispersion? Here’s a real interesting knot in this rope: was Paul’s proclamation of the Gospel in the Jewish synagogues of Anatolia and Greece done in Aramaic or Greek? I’ve been convinced by the evidence that there are too many cultural and theological markers that are non-Pauline to make it an open and shut case. I agree that portions are very Pauline indeed, but it seems more likely that the writer was: a well educated Jew, had deep understanding of how the entire OT pointed to the Yeshua as the Messiah, had spent time with Christ, had spent time with Paul but approached the proclamation of the Gospel, to Jews, very differently that Paul did. There is indeed very few people this could be. I’d highly recommend FF Bruce’s commentary for his take; it has been helpful, though not on its own, in orienting my rest in the mystery of this question.

[@peterengland8131]

If Paul picked up his style from Gamaliel, maybe other former pharisees could have too.

[@redeemtheruins]

Can we really trust bearded men from Idaho ?

[@hudsontd7778]

Dumb and Dumber what a treat, Cringe Heaven Thanks Guys for being a great example of what NOT to believe.

[@choicemeatrandy6572]

How loving

[@bigwhale5840]

Paul ...the 13th apostle..in place of judas.....numbers 12

[@AnHebrewChild]

:]

[@AnHebrewChild]

end of Zech 11 Habakkuk 2

[@chimmy___]

Doesn't a husband care for his wife?

[@yoshkebenstadapandora1181]

I love so much about James White but his defense of minority critical text Bibles baffles me. Give me a KJV or a Geneva majority text Bible. Luther and Calvin would turn over in their graves to find out he is defending these Bibles.

[@johnwurfel2862]

Because YHWH uses 2 or three witnesses, and because Sa'ul is EXTREMELY NUANCED depending on the circumstance being addressed and also difficult to understand, I don't rely on him for doctrine. All I've needed I've found elsewhere, in Torah, Prophets, Poets, Gospels, or James, John, Hebrews, Jude, Peter, etc. THEN I go back and through THAT lens, read Sa'ul. Sa'ul continually seems to contradict himself, Christ, or other Scriptures, unless you understand the specific TOPIC/issue he is addressing, to specific people, in specific circumstances. Paul is not here to elaborate commentary on what he meant.

[@johnwurfel2862]

The issue of "though I was a husband to them (44:00) is cleared up in this manner. Read Hosea. Read about all of the constant idolatry. Israel was an adulterous bride. Wedding language. Just like Y'eshua's constant bridal language, or John's Wedding feast of the Lamb, or Sukkot, the 7 day wedding feast where "God with Us" tabernacles with mankind, and all the nations flock to Him in Worship (Leviticus 23/Zechariah 14/Isaiah 66.) All witnesses of the same events. He is the Husband and we are marrying into His family. Don't be an adultress. Don't sin and seek to be like your bridegroom. Multiple witnesses are required to establish a matter. Even Christ confirms this at the Baptism of John, the transfiguration, and the argument with Pharisees about Christ only speaking what His Father / Moses said as witnesses, while they are of their father Satan. (John 8:38-39)

[@cosmictreason2242]

There’s no contradiction in Paul’s letters. Confess your own ignorance and don’t demean the inerrancy of the Bible

[@lauras683]

Do you believe the Bible is the infallible Word of God? If so, you should believe that all Scripture is Inspired, and that Paul is not so much the author (though he is, in a sense), but the _conduit_ of God’s message. To not rely on him for doctrine is very sad, because to neglect Paul’s Epistles is to neglect the most important part of Scripture for believers today - because they apply to this present _dispensation,_ and contain God’s instructions for the Church, the Body of Christ, which is currently being formed. His epistles can’t make sense in the light of the rest of Scripture, because they’re fundamentally different. Nowhere else do you read about salvation through grace alone, without works, Jews and Gentiles being on the same level, believers being part of a Body (as opposed to part of a kingdom), Christ being the living Head (as opposed to the King), believers having “all spiritual blessings in heavenly places” (Eph 1:3, Col 3:1-3), etc. etc. That’s because whereas Genesis - John concern Prophesy / Law, and Hebrews - Revelation concern Prophesy / Law, Paul’s Epistles concern the Mystery / Grace. It’s a different program, called “the revelation of the mystery;” because it was “kept secret since the world began,” kept “hid in God,” which “in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men”, “but is now made manifest” (see Romans 16:25, Ephesians 3:2-9).

[@wingedlion17]

Romans is a mess because the original letter has been redacted within an inch of its life. "Paul" is constantly arguing against what he just said a few verses earlier

[@TheRomans6]

Pretty concerning comments from Wilson 43:02 re: Mosaic authorship and Biblical inspiration

[@josiahkeen]

Do you think the stories of Genesis weren’t written down in any form until Moses?

[@TheRomans6]

@@josiahkeen Possibly, but the autograph of Genesis was authored by Moses. Making him a mere editor is a view that comes from higher critical scholars who undermine Biblical inspiration.

[@conceptualclarity]

There is a distinct terse literary style in the Pentateuch. As far as I'm concerned, it is Moses' style.

[@TheDareD3vil]

There is undeniable evidence that Moses was not the final author of Genesis. He might have composed portions, but not all of it, and not in its final form.

[@Christo-Fascist]

Define antisemitism.

[@JD-xz1mx]

Love Wilson. Used to love White until he made an absolute anti-Christian donkey out of himself extremely consistently on twitter over a long period of time.

[@cesarchavez9897]

No one cares.

[@traceylok675]

Your statement about James White doesn't make any sense. 🤔

[@wishyouthebest9222]

Gotta still love White. A brother in CHRIST

[@JD-xz1mx]

@@traceylok675 Your statement against my statement requires the evidence in order to be coherent..... which you don't have because I didn't cite the basis of my opinion. Though your sinful idolatry is well noted.

[@traceylok675]

@@JD-xz1mx lol, this makes even less sense.