Progressive Christianity: A Biblical Response (with Michael Kruger)

What are the ten commandments of progressive Christianity? Based on a list of ten principles put forth by an influential progressive Christian, Dr. Michael Kruger offers a diagnosis and critique of progressive Christianity.
READ: The Ten Commandments of Progressive Christianity, by Michael Kruger (amzn.to/3PUJYpv)
*Get a MASTERS IN APOLOGETICS or SCIENCE AND RELIGION at BIOLA (bit.ly/3LdNqKf)
*USE Discount Code [SMDCERTDISC] for $100 off the BIOLA APOLOGETICS CERTIFICATE program (bit.ly/3AzfPFM)
*See our fully online UNDERGRAD DEGREE in Bible, Theology, and Apologetics: (bit.ly/448STKK)
FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA:
Twitter: / sean_mcdowell
TikTok: @sean_mcdowell
Instagram: / seanmcdowell
Website: seanmcdowell.org

[@abrahammorales3737]

God is so timely! Found this video today and shared it with my brother in law who was asking these questions genuinely yesterday and I couldn’t answer as well as y’all did here. Thank you both!

[@Josh-he7ty]

Really gotta appreciate the generosity of Reformed Theological Seminary for putting out an app and uploading hundreds of hours of lectures and entire courses for free to the public. God bless them

[@stephenbailey914]

Didn’t know that! Thanks for sharing

[@ak_777-d5k]

Thank you for sharing this!

[@kjpesl7311]

Same with bible project app!!

[@geoffreyherman2128]

I have to so strongly disagree with your statements, "the gospel starts with sin." The gospel starts with good creation, that we are the image of God. We are profoundly valuable to God and that we are to lead the worship of Him. It's only in that context that sin can be understood as the devastating force that it is while not crushing the souls of those hurt by sin. We need a deep anthropology of sin and a deep anthropology of image of God. It's only then that we can appreciate how we are being remade into the image of Christ (God). When we start with sin we are telling people that they need to change before they belong rather than God has already done the work to allow them to belong.

[@rhondaharris398]

Yes and no. We have to be careful that we are are not enablers...so squishy that we "tolerate" everything and become peddlers of " cheap grace". Like parents of an addict who are so afraid of loosing their child they won't take decisive action in hopes of motivating them to healing.

[@nelidascott6917]

Absolutely amazing conversation! So many clarifying information, made me search inwardly in the process❤

[@thomasbrownlee9932]

Great interview! Knowing there is an element of truth in each of those 10 truth statements ironically makes it easier to see the error of each. The method of using life experiences (whether negative or positive) to pit one true doctrine against another instead of accepting both as biblical is nothing new, but it seems to have intensified and grown in sophistication. The emphasis both of you put on the importance of having correct doctrine along with an attitude of graciousness cannot be stressed enough. Can’t wait to read the book. Thank you!

[@sponsler]

Yeah, caused me to recall, 'The Spirit of Truth, and is not counterfeit'. Salvation is so totally Objective and Extrospective, whereas 'the world and it's man-made religions' are based on Not Knowing the One True God and as such by that virtue default to being based on subjective feelings, thoughts, one's own sense of righteousness, and philosophical thinking (Eve saw the Tree was Good for Wisdom - philosophy being the love of wisdom).

[@zerobyte802]

Half truths are the cornerstone of the Luciferian deception. He encourages the service and glorification of the self. That’s how to recognize his lies and half truths. Jesus taught us to serve God’s will above all else, especially our own will.

[@matthewfunk6658]

I really appreciate how well spoken Dr. Kruger was. His explanations were clear and concise without any longwinded diatribes and he spoke with grace. He's a guy I'd like to be friends with!

[@uwuben]

He also has a radio voice

[@SeanMcDowell]

Agreed. He’s VERY thoughtful and gracious.

[@WISE1]

@@SeanMcDowell Both guest 'and host' were magnificent in their roles.

[@SeanMcDowell]

@@WISE1 Wow, thanks. I enjoyed this one!

[@matthewfunk6658]

@@WISE1 As I'm sure you know, Dr. McDowell always represents Christ well!

[@lionheartapologetics4914]

Sean, please do a follow up to answer your questions about practical implications! Thanks for continuing to teach with wisdom and grace.

[@SeanMcDowell]

Good suggestion, thanks!

[@songsgardensbyjenniferlynn3242]

It makes me SO sad that we even have to have this conversation. We love You Jesus and worship You!

[@annaraeellison3417]

I really like Dr. Kruger's office design and especially the bookshelves! I've always wanted my own library...maybe sometime in the future...

[@trudijoynt6174]

Definitely worth waiting until no.10🤗 such a valuable discussion on the book. After 27 years in full-time ministry I am acutely aware of how progressive has been creeping in since the beginning of time it just changes its manifestation over time. However more so now than ever before.

[@SeanMcDowell]

I’m glad it was helpful!

[@lhart5632]

Thanks for this discussion! I understand his book so much better after listening to it being explained.

[@metapolitikgedanken612]

Unfortunately p-Christians won't be considering this. They'll brush it off as some deplorable talk of unloving bible-thumpers. They think they are great people, because they are 'so loving' and that Jesus was Great, because he 'accepted everyone'. If you show them that it ain't that easy and that they give false meanings to words like faith, love, salvation, etc. they simply dismiss out of hand... simply because it would strike their ego as foolish.

[@raevj]

@@goldoryellow6882. Many things labeled progressive is anything but improvement. It is regressive.

[@ghalbedel1]

Thanks for this Sean. I appreciate your gracious approach and willingness to listen to the other side. What I would find more helpful would be to have a representative of the other side present to rebut Dr. Kruger's points. Also a live webinar would be great where the participants could post questions. I for one had questions that would clarify for me Dr. Kruger's position and to ensure he is not mis-characterizing progressives. As was stated at the beginning "progressive" represents a range of opinions as does "conservative". For that reason I am leery of blanket labeling people in order to dismiss them and prefer to address issues on an individual basis. Thanks again.

[@royhooper8080]

This so informative…..thanks Sean for having Dr Kruger on your channel.

[@karl323]

All very timely for our time in 21st Century western Christianity. A must watch for all Christians who take the truth of the bible seriously, aren't after an 'easy life' and want to honestly live by what the Bible teaches even if it contradicts current western culture.

[@velkyn1]

Happily, the nonsense in your bible that approves of genocide, child-killing, slavery, etc has been tossed in the bin by many many people. And as for your claim of "honestly living by what the bible teaches", every Christian makes up what he wants to claim the bible teaches. Funny how you folks aren't out there killing people for working on the sabbath like your god supposedly commands. You just pick and choose your way through the commandments, ever so sure that your god surely won't want you to follow those inconvenient ones.

[@vuesweets]

Amen 🙏🏻

[@davepugh2519]

You want to live by what the bible teaches? So you think rape is a good way to get a wife, unruly children should be stoned to death, and women are worth less than men?

[@paulallen7962]

Do you mean slavery, genocide, polygamy, selling your daughter, women as property of men, concubines, stoning people for heinous crimes like gathering sticks on the sabbath and lack of proof of virginity on wedding night?

[@karenpeterson5780]

Such an excellent discussion of a timely topic. I'd love to hear round two on how to deal with family who are being seduced by Progressive "Christianity". Thank you both!

[@SeanMcDowell]

Good idea, thx.

[@richardchee4677]

@@SeanMcDowell The Relationship of Christ’s Two Natures in the Hypostatic Union First, the two natures are united without loss of separate identity. Christ’s human nature always remains human, and His divine nature always remains divine. There is no mixture of the attributes of one nature with those of the other. A mixture would cause the human nature to cease being a human nature, the divine nature to cease being a divine nature, and Christ to cease being fully God and fully Man. A mixture would change the real essence of the incarnated Christ. …the two natures are united without loss of separate identity….the two natures are united without either losing any of its attributes. Second, the two natures are united without either losing any of its attributes. When Christ became incarnated, His divine nature did not lose any of its attributes, and He did not take to Himself just a partial human nature. His divine nature remained a complete divine nature, and He took to Himself a complete human nature. Thus, He is fully God and fully Man. If either nature were minus any of its attributes, Christ’s essence would be different than it is. Third, although Christ has two complete natures, He remains one person. He is not two persons. The attributes of both natures belong to His person. While on earth, Christ performed some functions in the realm of His humanity (He walked from place to place, Jn. 4:3-6) and other functions in the realm of His deity (He held the whole universe together, Col. 1:17), but in both instances one person was acting. Thus, at the same time this one person could be physically tired and omnipotent, growing in wisdom and omniscient, finite and infinite, limited to one location and omnipresent. The Importance of Christ’s Hypostatic Union The hypostatic union of the incarnated Jesus Christ is important for at least two reasons. First, it was necessary for Christ to be the perfect revealer of God to mankind. Only deity can perfectly reveal deity, but Christ also had to be human to give that revelation in a manner that human beings could grasp (Jn. 1:18; 14:7-9; Col. 1:15; Heb. 1:3). Second, it was necessary for the work of redemption. The Redeemer had to be one person who was both human and divine. He had to be human to die and to die as mankind’s substitute. He had to be divine to die for all human beings and so that His death might have infinite value (1 Tim. 2:5-6; Heb. 2:14-18).

[@davidbelcher7097]

It’s interesting I started reading Christianity and Liberalism about 2 months ago and it is near identical to the problems we see 100 years later. Great interview!

[@SeanMcDowell]

That’s great you read Machen!

[@sheilasmith7779]

Great interview, Sean. Well done. An important subject and book.

[@elizabethryan2217]

"Reconciliation can only happen when wrongs are acknowledged .. ". *Thank you!!!!* I wish people understood this better and stopped preaching the idea of reconciliation by "grace and mercy" .. i.e. returning to toxic, dysfunctional and ultimately unhealthy situations where no change has taken place. 🥺

[@thefirsttheist8888]

Repent, and believe the Gospel. Both John the immerser and Jesus Christ had the same message. Edit: now i think about it. .. it is the message through out Scripture.

[@elizabethryan2217]

@@thefirsttheist8888 exactly. We can't even have a meaningful relationship with Jesus without acknowledging and turning from wrongs done. "Repent and believe.. "

[@conejitoist]

I would like to hear exactly how this is done? I can apologize to my son or friend or neighbor for something I personally did. Many influential leaders are taking 'reconciliation' to extremes and passing it for Gospel. As far as I understand Jesus reconcile us on the Cross, Don’t we just need to submit to Him and behave towards our neighbor just like He would do? us individually?. Am I wrong?

[@malice836]

As a practicing Catholic I appreciate Dr Kruger calling out Richard Rohr. He is a heretic from what I can tell. I wish the Catholic hierarchy would call him out and stop him from using the Catholic Church to teach his heretical views. I have the same concern as dr Kruger about my children being drawn to his ideas. Troubling.

[@kadensmith1224]

Catholicism is inherently wrong. It preaches faith AND works saves, when it's strictly faith that saves. It also adds a lot that Jesus and his disciples never said, such as indulgences, purgatory, etc.

[@malice836]

@@kadensmith1224 well how do you really feel! 🤣. Just faith then. So you don’t believe in sin and Jesus will come back to judge the living and the dead. Seems like you have been brainwashed somewhere along your life to hate the Catholic Church. Which is by the way very popular point of view. It’s called prejudice. My unscientific view is that satan comes after what is true and good , which in your case is the Catholic Church.

[@LivingEpicness1]

Your pope is saying the same things. So I guess he's a heretic too.

[@midimusicforever]

Biblical responses are the best responses!

[@berylcraig51]

Such a helpful discussion. Thank you so much for teaching deep truths in such a clear and 'simple' way.

[@SeanMcDowell]

You bet!

[@stevenwiederholt7000]

The 1st commandment CS Lewis answered that (IMO) quite effectively. "I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic - on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg - or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”

[@RangerRyke]

I disagree with CS Lewis. Many religious leaders are delusional when it comes to their claims of divinity but this does not discredit their moral teachings.

[@stevenwiederholt7000]

@@RangerRyke "Many religious leaders are delusional when it comes to their claims of divinity but this does not discredit their moral teachings." I would like to to think Real Hard about that statement. I assume you are talking about Christian Leaders. If you are talking about someone outside The Faith, then I have to ask "Whee Do You Get Your Moral Teaching?

[@catandmouse14]

What does son of g-d mean in Christianity?

[@stevenwiederholt7000]

@@catandmouse14 Cliff Notes Version: Can be found in The Apostles Creed. Why do you write g-d and not god?

[@RangerRyke]

@@stevenwiederholt7000 Christian cults, Hindu gurus, Buddhist fanatics, Ancent Greek priests. They can all be delusional about their divine importance buts still teach good morals. That doesn’t mean the all do to equal degrees but delusion and morality can be had hand in hand. My sense of morality it rooted in Christian culture but I don’t know if I’m qualified to say I know the root of my sense of morality.

[@AHSongbird27]

Dr. Krueger, thank you for your book and ensuring that Christian’s or those who will come to Christ are not mislead or confused. Amen.

[@leftykiller8344]

Awesome discussion. I’d be very interested to here what Colby Martin thinks about this and his side to it.

[@kathrynknipe6615]

Thanks! This conversation teases out the luminous beauty of Christianity. “It is finished.”

[@lisacawyer6896]

How about a show on how fundamentalist Christianity compares with Orthodox Christianity? I'm recalling that modern Evangelicalism was intended to be a third way between Fundamentalism and Progressivism.

[@darrenmiller6927]

Great instruction, very informative. Also you do a great job at interviewing people generally, and consistently. At this point I would say you have a gift Sean McDowell. God bless.

[@originalvybepromotions7269]

Very wise and well thought out discussion. Thank you

[@tonyaradcliffelovell2487]

Great show, very thoughtful.

[@Anabee3]

What an excellent, helpful convo. Ty!

[@authorpastorwilliamshiffle8424]

As a pastor I passed a copy on to a college student in my congregation who had been exposed to progressive beliefs.

[@SeanMcDowell]

It’s a great, quick book!

[@MariaKneas]

Thank you for this interview. A family member has gotten into this stuff and it's heartbreaking to see what it's doing to him.

[@trudiefreed5887]

Great interview and talking about the weakness of the church and the biblical truth. We need to be careful not to assume people are "Progressive Christians", without discussing the Creed first.

[@SeanMcDowell]

Thanks Trudie!

[@barbarakelly243]

Merci beaucoups for this conversation! It was excellent and revealing and soooo thankful and praise for for His word! My my belief is in Jesus, my King And Savior!

[@freedomhouseministries]

Several years ago, while speaking to a group of Christian women about how our culture tries to shape our world view in opposition to Scripture, I gave the example of the movie "Brokeback Mountain" as promoting the homosexual lifestyle as both normal and romantic. I received an angry comment card from a woman who made my point by defending the movie saying that it portrayed a "beautiful romance" and that I was being "close minded about love."

[@kalzone4966]

Unfortunately progressive Christians put romance ahead of loving God and his commandments with all of our heart, soul, mind and strength.

[@jonathancampbell586]

Very much Needed video!

[@denisearmstrong77]

Soooooo helpful! Thank you!

[@bellonasky2502]

The part about being able to ask questions and have doubts is amazing!!! I grew up Mormon where it was shamed to ever have doubts. They were famous for saying “doubt your doubts” and believed that you could know for certain from a feeling alone. There is a book called The CES Letter where someone who taught for the church ended up leaving because he had lots of questions about the churches teaches using their own books. They went ignored and have remained so for a decade while the church bleeds membership. Anything on their website that tries to answer these questions, including how church text teaching are hypocritical of each other, are totally white washed and the facts often made up and full of logical fallacies. So I love that I can go to a pastor with questions and it’s ok because it’s not seen as a threat of me believing still! 😃

[@gzsaliga]

Great discussion

[@JonathanGrandt]

Please be clear that there is a difference between substitutionary atonement and penal substitution. The issue isn’t that God is wrathful, the issue is that God cannot forgive without killing someone else.

[@lifemovesat24fps]

Liberalism (as it's currently defined), and progressivism, in the context of theology, or politics, or anything else is rooted in socialist/marxist ideas. The process is always the same. In order to destroy the group, country, peoples, etc they always start with the foundation. Destroy the language first. If you can change the definitions and understandings of words, by definition that word has become ill-defined. That also means the concept that word is supposed to represent also loses its structure.

[@sarahsays194]

I think this was a good concise explanation on the overall core beliefs of progressive christianity.

[@freedomhouseministries]

I have a church service with women at the jail in my town. When I meet new women who come to church, I often ask them this: "Do you know Jesus as your savior?" if they say yes, then I ask this: "can you explain what that means to you?" What they say next gives me a pretty good understanding of where they are in regards to the Gospel. For example, they might say something like this: "I have gone to church my whole life. I'm a good person." Sometimes they say, "He saved me from my sins. He died on the cross for me. I'm saved by grace." At church, there was a young man who answered the question like this: "Jesus saved me from shame. He saved me from fear. He saved me from depression." He gave a very long list that left out the most important saving of Jesus. One of the men in our church prompted, "Brother?" and the young man blurted out, "But he didn't save me from sin! I'm not a sinner!" We had a much clearer understanding of what was going on with that young man.

[@JJFrance]

Great interview!

[@arnoldgarga7073]

Good book hoping to get it soon here in philippines.

[@conejitoist]

I would like to hear Dr. Kruger explain what exactly he means by ‘fight for justice' or human reconciliation. Thanks

[@tomkeller6982]

As we talk about judgmentalism I think it's important to make the distinction that when God saves us, he gives us a new heart of love and mercy for people which continues throughout our Christian lives. The point is, "For it is God who wortheth in me, both to will and to do of His good pleasure." And, "Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ." From start to finish it is God brings us salvation and God who then perfects us from the inside out, throughout our Christian lives. This cannot be done by ourselves. Thank you both for your excellent program.

[@Lillaloppan]

Thank you so very much 😊!

[@stephenbailey914]

Kruger’s book “ heresy before orthodoxy” is most excellent

[@hoover8699]

Stephen, I think it's, The Heresy of Orthodoxy: How Contemporary Culture's Fascination with Diversity Has Reshaped Our Understanding of Early Christianity

[@anthonybarber3872]

Lovely! We must speak truth, but in love.

[@christiandatingwithadamkaren]

Thank you for producing this program

[@flavia22981]

Thank you for this!!

[@19nick57]

It would be VERY useful to folk to list the works you so often refer to. Is it Goli? Gholi? Golly? And also Mucken? Machen? Mauchen?

[@hopeful135]

A very clear and concise explanation of progressive thought. 5 stars for presentation 1 star for his personal adherence to TULIP.

[@garfieldbraithwaite8590]

Sometimes the KZbin algorithm is the Hand of God. I’ve binged on Sean all evening. What a blessing

[@rochellecaffee1417]

“Love everyone” is the first problem. Define love, define if this is being expected in the Church, which church, define if this being expected of the government teaching moralism, or is the Enemy trying to invoke guilt and shame on everyone to control them. It’s really unfortunate that the churches have bought into “socialism” or “Wokism” which a major point is that Catholicism has encouraged this lousy goosy form of love to allow NO responsibility to people or accountability for actions that ARE WRONG. An example is that we have allowed “sanctuary cities” with no justice for murderers who can hide in a church forever, and never be held accountable also the opening of our borders so that we can “love everyone” like Catholicism, and even some present day Judaism. The media, usually television has supported Catholicism wrongly, for years and years. When the Pope speaks he is lauded immediately on TV. People have not been taught that there is a Protestant point of view. Catholicism only teaches “the Pope”. The Pope does not present Jesus Christ as THE AUTHORITY. The Protestant Christian Church is not under the Law, unless you understand the the “law that gives freedom” to love in a personal way. See James 2:12-13. We should talk about sin in a way that does not manipulate to “be contrite”. Contriteness is in need of allowing a generous admitting of need for His grace and mercy which according to John 1:12. “The spiritual man judges all things, (examines all things), the mind of Christ faces the Truth to lead is closer to Christ” individually. This is a problem because you guys are trying to use “group think” when as Spiritual man in Christ, you must listen for the Spirit to guide you. The REAL PROBLEM IS that the authority of the church is being confused with the government. The Government has encroached on the church and the church has encroached upon the Constitutional government. I’m sorry but i must leave this conversation. Because you are skipping around from issue to issue. Boundaries must be respected for the Protestant Christian church, for the Constitutional government, and for relating one on one or two people. I don’t agree that you Michael are born-again because you are using human wisdom. And sorry but your arguments are all over the place.

[@jeffdowns1038]

Oh Sean, Mochen for Machen. As a pastor in the OPC, that hurt my ears. :)

[@SeanMcDowell]

Haha, yeah, I hear you!

[@justgopherit3454]

It all has a singular objective.... to remove the fear of God. And this is occurring in many many churches to varying degrees, as each kettle is at a different point of boiling the frogs.

[@6.0hhh]

Kruger is very solid.

[@fomessenger3784]

The best way to understand what is counterfeit is to have a firm grip on what is True Truth as Francis Schaeffer called it.

[@drybones5512]

What gets me is Kruger's stance toward Progressive Christianity. He draws a big line between Christians and those who are not, and then he very quickly puts Progressive Christians on the other side. So he's totally focused on "those people" and pays no attention to his own possible errors and what can be learned from other people. (I made a video about this kzbin.info/www/bejne/maKki4uLoaZ0apI). It's about how we can get along with "those" people.) One of Kruger's main premises is that Liberal Christianity and Progressive Christianity are the same things--and they are not. Liberal Christianity is an outflow of Modern thought--it's very rationalistic. A liberal Christian doesn't believe that God is active in the world--no miracles--and no resurrection. A liberal Christian doesn't consider the Bible authoritative or inspired--instead, he looks to culture, science, and experience for truth. A liberal Christian considers Jesus a great moral teacher. A liberal Christian considers salvation to be individual or social or moral or intellectual. And it considers Christ's return as mythological, in the worst use of the word. In a nutshell, Liberal Christianity is a rejection of a lot of the central tenets of orthodox Christianity--it is a tradition that grew out of the rationalism of the Enlightenment. Western Conservative Evangelicalism, as opposed to Orthodox, Christianity, too, is heavily influenced by the Enlightenment. It accepts forms of the ancillary baggage that goes along with the Enlightenment--rationalism, categorization, judgment, dichotomies, argument, clarity, hierarchy, Western, racism, patriarchy, power, Protestantism, institutions, and uniformity. Progressive Christianity is a questioning of this baggage. Will some of this questioning lead people to reject Christianity or to become Liberal Christians? Yes. Especially if there is no corrective conversation by which both Conservative and Progressive Christianity begin to meaningfully step out of the idolatrous influence of the Enlightenment--Modernism, or the idols that follow. Again, Christianity always adopts things from the culture in which it is found. This is a mixed blessing. Some of it's good. Some of it's syncretistic. --How do we sort it all out? through dialogue and conversation. Not through demonizing, dismissiveness, reductionism, or fallacious representations of either side. Through humble conversation and dialogue. For more on all this, feel free to browse this playlist: kzbin.info/aero/PL1gm0llPBjDItDG1FJbWfYIhY6-jZHrZT

[@DJ5780]

Interesting

[@inchristalone25]

I do not think this was demonizing or fallaciously representing progressive Christianity. He pointed out where there is some truth and where the evangelical church has failed (and the catholic church for that matter).

[@drybones5512]

@@inchristalone25 I think you are right about this particular video. They didn't fall into the category of demonizing, but their thinking is directed only outward, and doesn't consider enough that this movement is an honest response to some issues that need conversation. Consequently, the demonizers will find much here to affirm their demonizing. Thanks for replying. And maybe for watching the video 😉

[@Matzah1982]

In my early 20s I was a professing Christian but I was struggling with my mental health issues and the judgments ppl made about me in church and my sexual frustrations and how the church imposed celibacy on me because they reckoned with my mental health disability making me unable to work I shouldn’t get married because a man in their view must be a provider and keep his wife at home and have children so I came to the preacher I had and I told him about my frustrations and doubts about Christianity and how I felt like there is no place for me in Christianity and how I was constantly being judged and rejected and I was in tears in his office with my head bowed down and he put his finger up to my head like it was a gun and said to me ‘’if someone put a gun to your head and told you to deny Christ or they would blow your brains out what would you do?’’ I answered him that honestly idk but I probably would deny christ. He then kicked me out of the church and I haven’t attended a church in nearly 20 years. Being out of the visible church has freed me up to be in a very loving common law marriage with my common law wife Maria who is also disabled like me and neither of us have kids and with our disabilities having kids is out of the question and she has great birth control so we have great sex and her mamma supports our relationship and is wealthy and supports us financially in addition to our SSDI checks. I think that Jesus might be the Messiah and I think that the Bible though put together by fallible human tradition may contain the word of God but I have no use for organized religion

[@newreformationapologetics4953]

The best lies were originally predicated on a subtle partial truth. The devil is in the details. quite literally

[@graysonbr]

Really, really thought this was an excellent and valuable vlog.......thought the statements made at the 27:30 about the importance of good theology and Pharisees not teaching good theology, I know a very prominent Contemporary Christian singer in an interview years back mock the need of "theology" which may be explaining her liberal slide recently.

[@matiasdsalerno]

Progressive Christians don’t like to judge others, unless those others are racists, or think that egalitarianism is wrong, etc.. in those cases they are extremely judgemental. They basically pick and choose which things are to be judged based on their own preferences. Christianity won’t hesitate to judge sin where the Bible declares it, be it racism or homosexuality. Of course with judgement there is also the grace of forgiveness offered.

[@hennieelmonaviljoen]

I appreciate this

[@markpayne6436]

Hey! Where is the follow-up that you mentioned about dealing with family and friends being enticed by Progressive Christianity?

[@519921702]

My dad studied under Machen. This is so good! How do you spell the Goalie you referto?

[@stevenwiederholt7000]

Something James Lindsay says about Progressives. They use the same language, but a different dictionary.

[@peterfox7663]

Same as Calvinists

[@stevenwiederholt7000]

@@peterfox7663 What will you do when you get to Heaven and find it chock full of Calvinists?

[@SeanMcDowell]

True, just keep in mind Lindsay is probably referring to political progressives.

[@stevenwiederholt7000]

@@SeanMcDowell It appears it is infiltrating everywhere including The Church.

[@MrPanchoak]

I am very a conservative Christian. I believe with absolute certainty that The Apostle Paul meant what he said in all instances INCLUDING his castigation of the Galatian Church for turning to another Gospel. The question then arises "where did this doctrine actually originate?" The doctrine of substitutionary justification is justifiably under suspicion. Why? That position can very easily be "proven" from scripture. But so also can a denial of it. Much of the proof texts used by it's proponents must be contorted to fit the narrative. Not so with the Baptismal model loosely described as God freely forgiving the truly repentant, and empowering them through the Resurrection to live righteous and sanctified lives. Both can be readily proven but which is the actual view of the Apostle? This is definitely not any sort of a progressive position.

[@tomesplin4130]

I have given up on categories. I don’t view the Bible as the literal Word of God. To me the Bible contains Truth, not facts. The Truth is revealed by the Spirit when we meditate and ‘chew’ on the words and themes that are recorded. This is when God speaks to us. I am no longer concerned with the scientific or historical veracity of events recorded in the pages. I’m no longer concerned with trying to reconcile the contradictions of various Gospel accounts. I used to spend significant time in pursuit of these things. They are distractions. Jesus is the ultimate Truth. Relationship with our loving Father through Jesus our brother is the goal and prize. Living our lives in accordance with the words, examples and instructions attributed to Jesus is the pathway

[@philly5330]

Have you looked at the "minimal facts" related to the resurrection account presented by Gary Habermas? If so, do you find them reliable? If you don't find them reliable, can you share why? Thank you.

[@tomesplin4130]

@@philly5330 I have the book. I personally find the testimony of Paul in his letters persuasive. He experienced a dramatic encounter with the risen Jesus and his life was changed. The birth and growth of the Christian movement points to remarkable historical events happening. I find these compelling, along with my own personal encounter and experience.

[@philly5330]

@@tomesplin4130 I do as well. Thanks for replying Tom.

[@Chomper750]

A lot of what you are describing relates to the literary genres of the Bible. The "contradictions" in the Gospels are due to being Greco-Roman historiographies. The authors were not interested reporting precise facts about Jesus in chronological order. Their writings were more focused on the character of Jesus written to specific audiences. Attempts at completely objective history are a relatively modern invention.

[@inchristalone25]

@@tomesplin4130 Amen the testimony of Paul was what convinced me Jesus really did raise from the dead.

[@justingary5322]

Exactly progressive Christianity is just making a god in their own image that agrees with everything they already believe and disagree with. It's another form of idolatry which makes a god in their own image that they don't have to be morally responsible or accountable to. This has nothing and everything to do with the video but please listen if you want to otherwise leave it alone and ignore it. Hello my name is Justin and I'm a fellow Christian and Apologist but I'm also a college student. I'm not a closed minded Theist as I have nothing against Atheists or unbelievers as I speak to them often to understand their reasons for unbelief but we as Christians are convinced of God's Existence due to many real factors). I'm not trying to convert anyone or convince anyone to become Christians as that's The Holy Spirit's job to help people believe but only explain why I believe in Jesus Christ. There's actually evidence of God's Existence in Christianity. First of all there's proof that Jesus of Nazareth existed in history since the writings of Tacitus, Josephus Flavius, Pliny the younger and other historical documents prove that He was living two thousand years ago that even scholars both religious and Atheists agree with historically speaking but not that He's The Divine Son of God because obviously they don't. I'm going to give you historical and archeological evidence for God's Existence as The Scriptures have prophecies that predate the events recorded in them by several millennia including Matthew, Hosea and Zechariah which prophesy accurately of the people of Israel becoming a nation again after over 1900 years of being scattered around the nations since the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 A.D. spoken of by Christ in Matthew 23:29-24:3 and returning to their homeland after The Holocaust with Jerusalem as their capital in 1948 exactly as Jesus The Christ said. The prophets including Daniel spoke of the time where several world empires would arise and fall including the Babylonian kingdom, Medes and Persians, Roman Empire, and Saladin and the Muslims which went in consecutive order for the past few millennia. The people of Israel becoming a nation after The Holocaust in 1948 (ironically the melting point of gold as God compares Israel to gold that's tested in fire in Zechariah 13:8 and Jeremiah 16:15) exactly how Jesus The Christ said would happen since God us everything to come in The Scriptures and not just because people were working towards as Atheists claim which are impossible for any regular man to predict. Just before anyone says Christianity is a white man's religion made to oppress blacks during slavery you obviously aren't aware that the first Christians were Jews in The Middle East and that Christianity just like any religion can be used by evil and corrupt people to oppress others but you forget that the first Abolitionists/Civil Rights activists were Christians who sought to abolish slavery, racism, segregation, injustice and prejudice throughout American history. Jesus The Christ loves you enough not to give you what we all deserve which is God's Wrath by His Own Blood. Charles Darwin didn't originally come up with The Theory of Evolution over 200 years ago as it is mentioned in the writings of Ancient Greeks who believed in Demons that gave knowledge to philosophers. Evolution makes no sense when nothing has evolved after thousands of years of human history and supposedly the first creature came from primordial sludge several millions of years ago funny how they won't believe that God an Eternal Almighty Spirit Being created us from the Earth) which came from a supermassive expansion of matter at high temperature that inexplicably created everything in the known universe that supposedly came from nothing billions of years ago. How did the organs evolve before there were bones, skin, substance and how did any creatures see before eyes evolved? I've studied evolution and abiogenesis in the past and read Darwin's " Origin of The Species" I've studied evolution and abiogenesis in the past and read Darwin's " Origin of The Species" and I'm not convinced of but not macro or micro Evolution because there's no evidence of it nor clear observable examples of it where living creatures evolve into other kinds of species plus the fact that fossils don't show evidence of evolution and genetic entropy rules out evolution. The question begs how did two genders evolve from a common ancestor with a perfectly hospitable and sustainable environment with breathable oxygen and resources to survive on inexplicably? Atheists have the burden of proof to explain how everything came to be and why our existence is possible without the Existence of God from an godless perspective just as Christians have to provide evidence of God's Existence and the validity of His Word. Evolution requires life to already exist in order to take any effect in living organisms so it doesn't account for the existence of Life and reality. Also evolution is impossible because it goes against The Law of entropy and the second Law of thermodynamics because evolution makes things better whereas nothing continues to get better but decays and turns to absolute destruction in the end. Mark Ridley an Evolutionist said "No evolutionist whether gradualist or punctuationist uses the fossil record as evidence in favor of The Theory of Darwinian Evolution as opposed to special Creation". God's Existence is made perfectly known and observable in the universe as demonstrated in His Handiwork in the intelligently designed manner that Creation was made, human consciences and consciousness historical and archaeological evidence of God's Word being valid history, fulfillment of Bible Prophecies God in His Holiness and Righteousness could give us what we deserve in Hell for our since but He's merciful to give us free will to choose to accept or reject His gift of salvation by grace through faith in His Son Jesus. I don't mean this is any condescending manner but if you'd like to discuss The Scriptures with me or have me listen to your view on anything my instagram account is Savage Christian Kombatant.

[@JonathanGrandt]

36:16 it seems around this section that there is being made a distinction between the people, that is, the congregation and “the church”. Do we recognize that the church is the congregation? Or do we imply that the church is the “leadership” or the “clergy”? For how can a “church” operate in a man abusive and heavy handed way toward the people of the people themselves are in fact what comprises the church?

[@jollygreen9377]

“Progressive Christianity” is an oxymoron.

[@MrSeedi76]

Nope, it's not. Christianity is inherently progressive. Progressing towards the kingdom of God. It's a religion in which history has a goal it's progressing towards. Conservative Christianity doesn't exist. People who believe that are fooling themselves. There is nothing conservative about Christianity. The people who "reinvented" the faith were the evangelicals in the 19th century. They made a farce out of Christianity. What evangelicals believe today in the US isn't Christianity at all. It's an old testament based Jewish sect.

[@Alien1375]

Indeed, everybody knows that Christianity is always regressive.

[@jraelien5798]

Only to someone who doesn't understand either one. It is an accepted fallacy in America that Conservative and Christian is the same thing.

[@jraelien5798]

​@@davepugh2519Totally wrong. Secular is how many atheists prefer to be called. There is also a very large number of political progressive Christians.

[@jollygreen9377]

@@jraelien5798 you’re right, believing abortion is murder, men and women should be the only ones allowed to marry and men are men and women are women makes them left wing extremist I guess. Lol

[@gaynorkelly9413]

THANK YOU....I have been seriously confused on this issue as so many American churches have 'boiled' it down to a political leaning.....that progressive Christian's are 'lefties'. It seems I AM a conservative Christian who sees no contradiction with that and caring for the disenfranchised in our society...lol

[@stephencrotts2417]

After reading Charles Finney's systematic theology I decided to go to the United Church of Christ, a progressive Christian Church. They believe in the Trinity. They do believe that the Gospel should have an impact on the socially oppressed people. Freeing slave, women's suffrage, the temperance movement, the holiness movement, the civil rights are movements were all the result of their theology. The Southern Baptist Church and many of what you call historical Christian Churches have opposed social change. If you read Justin, or Clement of Alexandria, Irenaeus or others of the early Church they do not speak like you do about historic Christianity. Irenaeus believed strongly in the concept of Jesus as an example. Clement of Alexandria said that "the highest and most perfect good is when one is able to lead someone from wrongdoing to right doing which is the very function of the law". Origen believed in reincarnation. It would seem to me that you would list all early Church fathers as progressives. Charles Finney said there is only one law and that is the law of eternal benevolence. This is why they fought so hard to oppose slavery even though the Southern Baptist held their Bibles and said, "The Bible says Slave server your masters". Stop continue being a NEW evangelical look at true historic Christianity. Christianity makes progress through history.

[@machellovelivelife658]

"Inviting questions is more important than providing answers"....that doesn't make any sense, what's the point of asking the questions then. That's a frustrating exercise for the way my mind works; just sounds like chaos.

[@thimychan202]

I just purchased the book.

[@SeanMcDowell]

Great, enjoy!

[@mackinm00se]

Authority in the church has been so horrifically abused it no longer has anything to morally stand on. If they actually cared about showing understanding of how horrid they have acted, they would graciously abdicate their power both in government and in culture. They can then work to rebuild themselves as an institution worth the power they claim they ought to wield.

[@mjsmith-jones7607]

Most Christians I know are miles from these concepts. God's message is both simple and Beautifully complex.

[@JonathanGrandt]

22:29 To tell someone they are wrong for passing judgement on someone else is not a paradox, nor is it hypocritical or even a fallacy. If someone is being cruel or passing judgment or condemnation on someone, this is not their place, this is God’s place (to pass judgement, not to be cruel lol), so then correcting this bad behavior is not the same as passing judgement. I think anyone knows the difference. Got a little into the semantics weeds there, but it’s important to recognize the difference. It’s funny to smirk about those paradoxical progressives, but we absolutely ought to see the difference between discernment, judgement, judgementalism and condemnation and not just smoosh them all into one word “judge”.

[@red.362]

I just watched a movie with Dr Michael Kruger called "The God Who Speaks" right here on KZbin, great movie by the way you should check it out if you haven't seen it!

[@stevenwiederholt7000]

#Red Thanks, I'll check it out.

[@red.362]

@@stevenwiederholt7000 No problem, I hope you enjoy it.

[@SeanMcDowell]

Great suggestion, thanks!

[@sheilasmith7779]

If we add vegetables to a cake, does it remain a cake? It's human nature to be attracted to what pleases us.

[@sheilasmith7779]

@BVale No a FRUIT cake is FRUIT, not vegetables. So apparently differences are difficult for you to discern. No surprise.

[@DrKRMc22]

Or if we remove the eggs, vanilla, flour, & baking powder? If all you are left with is some sugar… maybe don’t keep calling it cake. 😎

[@Chomper750]

Carrot cake

[@sheilasmith7779]

@@Chomper750 Apparently you missed the point. Perhaps if I had used the word "dung," you'd be able to comprehend meaning.

[@rossmorgan7168]

I love Sean’s approach asking “what can we learn? ” and “what was good?” about what we being critiqued. However I happen to know that Richard Rohr is not what this podcast portrays him to be. I know he firmly believes Christ is eternal God and worthy of worship and worthy of being followed and “walked in” as Paul says. I’d love to see Sean interview Richard Rohr if he is willing to come on after this. A conversation would be much more helpful than this guests divisive, polemic, “circle the wagons” approach. I love Sean but this episode fell short of his gracious light shedding building up and unifying standard.

[@maryfitz7174]

Richard Rohr has not been effective in communicating through his writings that he believes that Jesus was truly divine and truly human. I would hope he would use his gift of authorship to make this belief crystal clear if indeed he does believe this. Too many of us who’ve read some of his work have come away with the wrong idea then. Can Rohr proclaim Emmanuel at the nativity of Jesus?

[@angelaab1892]

Something that bothers me in the gun debate which is prevalent.... would jesus have ever used a gun? Is there any circumstance where he would have? So in this regard as America is a Christian country, why are weapons made to kill allowed and revered?

[@rhondaharris398]

Jesus wasn't walking around being winsom...he wasn't walking around being rude...but he behaved in different ways for different situations. When he met a pharisees he could make Twitter posts look downright kind. Let's get honest...I mean...if Jesus had gone around being "winsom" so many people would not have hated him.

[@overthinkingchristian8732]

Hi Sean, I appreciate that out of the many conservative prominent evangelical KZbinrs out there, you're not really unfairly bashing progressive Christians. But I really think your audience would benefit from hearing from A.J. Swoboda, a very articulate guy who went through a dark period of deconstruction, encouraged others to do so, and now pleads with progressive Christians to abandon *toxic* deconstruction in place of *healthy* and biblical deconstruction. His book *After Doubt* has put words to my own experience, and he also co-hosts a podcast on the topic of deconstruction (co-hosted by NT scholar Nijay Gupta, m former proff.).

[@SeanMcDowell]

Thanks for the suggestion. I’ll check it out.

[@overthinkingchristian8732]

@@SeanMcDowell Cool! Blessings, Paul

[@inchristalone25]

What the heck is healthy deconstruction? My husband and I deconstructed and it almost led to our destruction. We questioned God and ultimately that leads us to shame and destruction. Thankfully He had a plan for us and once we humbled ourselves we found the Truth and it powerfully transformed our life.

[@overthinkingchristian8732]

@@inchristalone25 Healthy deconstruction requires discerning between unhealthy evangelical tendencies and what the Bible says. For example, during the Ravi scandals, Christians defended Ravi by using certain parts of the Bible. That in and of itself was unbiblical since the Bible never says "If a fallen leader led some to Christ, excuse his abuses and excesses."

[@inchristalone25]

@@overthinkingchristian8732 I thought that was just called discernment?

[@tomwaller1908]

So, basically, number six is the direct move toward narcissism.

[@Pfrazier43]

Isn't this one of the signs of the last days? Jesus said to not be deceived by these false teachers.

[@DJ5780]

Those signs are present in every generation.

[@caryyurk1388]

Very informative but I think Dr. Krueger could have referred to and expanded more on the CORE doctrine of creation-both male and female created in God’s image and the core doctrine of marriage between a man and woman when responding to the LGBTQ+ issues

[@m76353]

I consider myself a progressive christian (by "progressive christian" i mean i think there's a progression in the nature of christianity. I do NOT mean "progressive christian" as in like a "politically woke progressive" who also happens to be christian) for instance i think one of the distinguishing factors of judeo-christianity everyone could agree on is that it's particular brand of ethics, at least in some form of theology or another, have almost always been ethically progressive in relation to the current time and era. i see progressive christianity as maintaining the focus on this progression. for me, christianity is the belief that there is like a divine morality or ethics (which is Jesus, the word of god) that we are supposed to place above all else and that these christian ethics are slowly progressing and being revealed to us as humans. and its the belief in jesus as the teacher of these ethics that we believe above all else that we are saved. i also 'think' (not believe) that there is a physical god opposed to a immaterial god. that's how i personally see christianity: a physical god that is more focused on a spiritual world of morality. i'm told by people this is progressive christianity. whereas on the other hand, conservative christianity is more the belief in an immaterial god who is more focused on scientific claims about the material physical world than anything else. conservative christianity is almost entirely an intellectual debate about whether you get the right answers on a history test and whether or not you believe magic exists. and sure, to be fair there's a lot more too it as a religion but IF WE'RE BEING HONEST, what conservative christianity really is, is the belief that if you get the right answers on a history test and you believe in the right kinda magic then you go to heaven and live happily ever after but if you get the wrong answers you go to hell and burn for eternity. so when it really comes down to it, conservative christianity is really nothing more than just intellectualizing about the material world and historical facts and magic within the physical world. its main focus is on physical claims within the physical world rather than spiritual claims. in the modern age of science and technology i don't see how conservative christianity will ever move past being anything other than a specific metaphysical esoteric philosophic stance on history and magic. its intellectual grounding is stuck, so the debate over it becomes entirely intellectual. meanwhile progressive christianity that focuses on a spiritual morality moves on past its conservative counterpart's intellectual barriers, because the progressive version isn't grounded in intellectual arguments in the first place, its grounded in morality. it just seems like history is to buried to ever proof anything 100%, and magic just becomes more and more disproven by science as time goes on, so i think progressive christianity will pick up where the conservative version left off. imo, best thing too do is to make sure progressive christianity is steered in the right direction rather than tryna argue over the same old half baked intellectual theories of conservative christianity that just seem more like people tryna sound smart more so than what "Jesus would do". (for the record NONE OF THIS is directed at Sean McDowell, i think he's a great example of how christian conservatives can be great! i don't agree with him on a lot but think he's great and love listening to him) anyway i think it could all be summed up like this: the ultimate question in progressive christianity is "what is spiritually righteous?" the ultimate question in conservative christianity is "does magic exist?"

[@SeanMcDowell]

Thanks for weighing in. Not sure I see the main questions the same, but I agree on how important it is to define our terms!

[@justingary5322]

Then don't call yourself a progressive Christian then you're just asking for trouble from assumed controversy

[@m76353]

@@justingary5322 lol well then what should i call myself then? like are you saying i should just call myself "christian"? or not call myself a christian at all? what about "christian-ee-ish"? is that a term? i actually really like that. i'm about to just start calling myself "christian-ee-ish" from now on. its catchy! thanks!

[@justingary5322]

@@m76353 Just a Christian obviously

[@m76353]

@@justingary5322 yeah but that just causes problems. saying you're "just a christian" gives the impression that you believe the bible is a 100% factually true scientific and historic manuscript. i don't believe any claims about the physical material world with complete certainty. the only completely unwavering beliefs i have are based in morality/spirituality, but since they are beliefs based on biblical arguments, i'm pretty sure its considered "progressive christianity"

[@willtoms7209]

One thing I’d like to hear sometime is how abortion fits into Progressive religion. Certainly in Progressive politics it is an absolute necessity. Is this true in Progressive religion as well? And if so how do they justify it?

[@m76353]

i think it could all be summed up like this: the ultimate question in progressive christianity is "what is spiritually righteous?" the ultimate question in conservative christianity is "does magic exist?"

[@Samy-sx6kn]

Yes magic exists. It’s in the Bible. So problem ich with conservative Christianity.

[@tayh.6235]

The fundamental question of both is what sort of people ought we to be. Progressives would say "good" as determined by consensus. Conservatives would say "the sort that images God as intended".

[@m76353]

@@tayh.6235 i like that. idk what the difference is tho between "good" and "images of god". like objectively speaking i think the "image of god" is what we inherently know to be "good". there are bible verses about this.

[@tayh.6235]

@@m76353 that's the tricky part. I think both conservative and progressive Christians would claim they're ultimately describing the same thing. However, from what I've observed on both sides it's a difference in what's being centered. A (principled) conservative would say "I obey God no matter how much it hurts because I trust that he wouldn't have commanded it unless it's ultimately for my good." A (principled) progressive would say "If it hurts this bad, then that can't be the way for me to get closer to the good God wants for me." Both views can lead to issues: whether excusing legitimate problems because you think it's for the best end or noping out of something that ultimately would have forged you into a better version of you. For myself, the only thing I know to do is try to listen to a lot of people from different positions, be as honest as I can about my own motives and blind spots, and throw myself on the Spirit and ask for guidance.

[@spacenie]

@@tayh.6235 They are not ultimately describing the same thing when one says that Jesus is God and the other denies this. When one says that going to Heaven is of paramount importance in this life, the other says it doesn't matter. When one says that the best one can do is to personally know God, the other says that the best you can do is to be your best and that God can be a nice add on.

[@nsd37]

Nothing new here. Our Opposer has the same tricks that he used over and over and over and over again. Take the truth, but add some lie to it to achieve your goals. He did from the beginning with Eve, he did it with His Creator in the dessert, and he won't stop until he will be bound forever. That is his nature. God bless you guys and thanks Sean for for everything that you are doing!

[@Matzah1982]

It seems like how back in the 90s when I was a teenager the leftist buzz word was ‘’tolerance’’ but in reality it wasn’t tolerance being taught it was actually acceptance of all beliefs and practices and lifestyles without criticism or condemnation as if they are all equally valid because truth is relative. In reality it became essentially tolerance for all except the intolerant. The woke ppl of the 90s cancelled ‘’the intolerant’’ in a more subtle way but it was still the beginnings of cancel culture. Nowadays the leftists make no pretense of tolerance of all beliefs and practices and lifestyles but instead they clearly say only their woke progressive agenda will be tolerated

[@richardchee4677]

The Meaning of the Term Hypostatic Union as Applied to Christ The English word hypostasis is derived from a Greek word meaning “essence, actual being, reality” (William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, p. 854). Thus, it refers to the real essence of a person or thing. As applied to Christ, it is related to the issue of the real essence of the incarnated Jesus Christ. In earlier articles, we saw that He is both deity and humanity in essence. The incarnated Jesus Christ has a complete divine nature and a complete human nature inseparably united in one person. Thus, He is a theanthropic person, a God-Man. The word theanthropic is derived from the combination of two Greek words: theos (God) and anthropos (man). This union of two complete natures in Jesus Christ has been called “the hypostatic union” by theologians because it is the real essence of the incarnated Christ. The Meaning of the Term Nature The term nature, when used in expressions such as divine nature and human nature, refers to a unique combination of attributes that determines the kind of a being or thing. A divine nature is a unique combination of attributes that makes a being divine instead of an angel, an animal, a plant, or a human being. A human nature is a unique combination of attributes that makes a being a human being instead of an angel, an animal, a plant, or a divine being. Because a nature determines the kind of being, the union of a complete divine nature and a complete human nature in the incarnated Christ makes Him a God-Man. No other being possessed the union of these two natures prior to the incarnation of Christ, and no other being will possess it in the future. This means that the incarnated Jesus Christ is the only God-Man and, therefore, is a unique being. The Biblical Revelation of Christ’s Hypostatic Union At least two Old Testament passages foretold that the Messiah would be a God-Man, with deity and humanity united in the same person. Isaiah 9:6-7: By revelation of God, the Prophet Isaiah presented several names that would apply to the Messiah. According to Edward J. Young, those names “are accurate descriptions and designations of His being. In the Bible the name indicates the character, essence or nature of a person or object” (The Book of Isaiah, vol. I, p. 331). In an earlier article, we saw that two of those names (“Mighty God” [el gibbor] and “Everlasting Father”) ascribed deity to the Messiah. In addition, Isaiah declared that the Messiah would be a child born. Because deity is not born but humanity is, this declaration indicated that the Messiah would also be a human being. Isaiah foretold that the Messiah would be a God-Man and, therefore, a unique being. Thus, according to Isaiah Prophecies

[@WISE1]

I appreciated Dr Kruger's presentation. However, Christianity and Christians have been far too dogmatic in their traditional assertions. Very few would argue that both have many, many problems; all of which may be traced to misinterpretation, mishandling, and misapplicaiation of Scripture - oftentimes absurd and dangerous. Who is right? Truly no one is completely right! Who or what do we trust! Nevertheless, we can and should glean nuggets of truth from everyone [and everything under the sun]. We are - by grace - able to, invited to, and exhorted to seek, find, and recieve truth from 'The 'Spirit' of God' [God's Holy Spirit] rather than thru man's interpretations and quite limited understanding of Scripture (or the worlds' paradigms). One of the most important - and missed - teachings of Jesus Christ is His emphasis of the errors of the religious leaders of his day [ours too!] and their emphasis of traditions and accepted beliefs. We are all prone to this! Hence, we would do well to keep Jesus' emphasis in mind when holding tightly to our own traditional beliefs and paradigm. Thanks for reading.

[@important5movements]

Examples?????

[@ianpaterson4956]

The problem is that you can’t measure progressive Christianity using conservative Christianity as a benchmark, due to the massive holes that exist there as well. What is needed is middle ground where one informs the other. Also the argument cannot be argued assuming God has pre-ordained everything because that would mean that God makes progressives, progressive and conservatives, conservative.

[@ModernNatives81]

If Jesus was not God was not a good moral teacher. He would’ve been at psychopath. No one says things like deny your family, give up everything, even your life or you’re not worthy of me. That is megalomania on a scale unimaginable. If I wasn’t a believer, I wouldn’t waste my time in church. I don’t have to go to church to have community.

[@inchristalone25]

They know Jesus is God but they aren't willing to give up control.

[@gheorghebirca]

Jesus is Not God, He is the Only Beggotton Son of God, not just a good moral teacher. That's why we are listening to Him!