Welcome to the Crossview Church RU-vid channel which features our livestream services with preaching from Pastor Kris Duerksen. Every week you can expect a message that strengthens your faith and encourages your walk with God.
Join us here LIVE every Saturday for our Worship Service!
For more information about Crossview Church please visit CrossviewChurch.ca
I am always impressed at the quality of the individuals that you have on the podcast - season two looks like it's shaping up quite well - interestingly, I have an acquaintance who is writing his thesis on the ʿAqedah - much of it interplays with Middleton
I know that I'm a critic of Kris. I keep coming back to see if he changed. He doesn't say 'ok' like 200 times per message anymore, but his repeating is still very annoying. Also, why is this message called filled with the Holy Spirit??? I'm 26 min in, and there is nothing about the Holy Spirit... very misleading. Just stopped watching.
Blessings Helmut - glad you noticed that I stopped saying "okay" all the time! That was a vocal tic I've worked hard on this past year. The whole conclusion to the sermon is about what the filling of the Holy Spirit is in light of the context of Romans 8, hence the title.
Thank you. I am in my first year of my social work degree and have struggled with this topic. I would love to see a podcast on faith based social work in a new age ideological world.
That is a great question Kathy! We will put it on the list. Also, my email is kris.duerksen@crossviewchurch.ca - if you're in the area, let's connect: we could sit down and talk further about this. Blessings.
As an introverted person I admit I did panic just a tad when the "already dead" population came up and I thought for a split second it might be crowded in heaven lol
Interesting topic and one that I do not have a full understanding of. The "All Israel will be saved" of Romans 11:26 could mean all Christians and that "Israel" of the old testement were all those under the Torah or followed the Torah, whether genetic Jew or not. Without making this a long comment, there are many other verses that suggest that simply being a genetic Jew does not equate automatically to salvation. Other interesting questions come to mind: 1) did God's promises to Israel have a shelf life? and 2) regarding the old testement Jews that turned to Baal, are there any Baal worshippers in heaven?
One thing I'd point out: the understanding that "all Israel" in Romans 11:26 means "all Christians" is irreconcilable with verse 26's context in Romans 11. If you keep reading just two verse over (verse 28) "all Israel" is referenced to as "they" in the continuing statement. Consider: if "all Israel" means "all Christians” in this passage, does it make sense that "as far as the gospel is concerned, they (all Christians) are enemies for you sake" and that "they (all Christians) are loved on account of the patriarchs” (Romans 11:2)? If Christians are those who are saved because of the gospel, why would Paul be saying that "all Christians" are enemies as far as the gospel is concerned? Or consider the preceding verse (Romans 11:25). If Israel in this passage means "all Christians" (most of whom are Gentile) - does it make sense that "Israel (all Christians) has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in”? When reading Romans 11 we can’t cherry pick when Paul is talking about literal Israel and when he’s meaning all Christians. In regards to the questions: did God's promises to Israel have a shelf life - verse 29 provides an excellent answer. "God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable (Romans 11:29).” Praise God that his promises and covenants don’t have a shelf life - his unending faithfulness is the assurance of our salvation!
@@mattreimer4287 As I said, it could mean all Christians but I could be wrong. Maybe it means both literal Israel and all Christians since a lot of the old testement was a shadow of things to come under Christ and we have been grafted in after the Jews. We should probably not assume that a single word being utilized in the scriptures must always mean the same thing. For example, the word law is utilized many times in the new testement. Sometimes the writer is talking about the Mosaic law while at other times, about the law of Christ - without expressly saying Mosaic or Christ. Paul makes that distinction between the two in 1 Cor 9:20-21 but it doesn't take a lot of reading of the scriptures to figure out that the word "law" is not always referring to the same thing - even if there is obvious crossover between the two as they both come from the same God. In the case of "Israel", it can mean literal Israel because promises to the Jews would not have expired, or it can mean symbolic Israel because of Christ and non-Jews being grafted in or, I cannot see why it cannot be both sometimes.
Romans 2:14 is often used to address the main question of this sermon: "(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law."
Universalism does not have any biblical coherance. I'm actually surprised this pastor brought it up with any light of credibility. There are not a lot of ways to interpret the following verses: Matthew 7:13: “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it." Matthew 22:14: “For many are invited, but few are chosen.”
Hi Robert, thanks for your comment. We do not take a Universalist position as a church at Crossview - my point in the sermon was simply to say that Universalism has a long Christian history, and that wonderful, intelligent, Jesus-loving Christians have adhered to Universalism since the early Church. Simply quoting a couple of verses does not negate that historical fact, nor does it make Exclusivism true. There are strengths and weaknesses to each of the positions and it's too strong a statement to say that Universalism has no biblical coherance. That would be a debate you would need to have with a Universalist. Blessings!
@@krisduerksen7457 Thank you for your comment Kris. If you note what I said, I did not say that exclusivism is true. I said universalism is biblically incoherent. I don't know what happens to the "good" tribesman in Africa that gets bitten by a snake before hearing the gospel. Romans 2 might address that one. While for the sake of being practical, I provided only several verses that refute universalism in every context imaginable, the entire new testement refutes universalism and one has to throw away a large section of the new testement to support universalism. I understand that your denomination does not take the universalism stance but your denomination did still present it in a positive light with legitimate biblical backing.
Love your passion Robert! A common mistake we human beings (and Christians) sometimes make is to assume that the arguments of those who disagree with us are illegitimate. That's different than just disagreeing with another position. Your statements about Universalism being biblically incoherent is your opinion, not a fact. Many theologians have mounted biblical defenses of Universalism - Thomas Talbott, J.W. Hanson, Hans Urs von Valthasar, Gregory MacDonald, Brad Jersak, Ilaria Ramelli, and others - they would all say they've mounted biblically coherent arguments. I don't take their position personally, but that doesn't mean they haven't mounted biblically coherent arguments. Blessings! @@robertemard9452
@@krisduerksen7457Thank you Kris. We must agree to disagree on this. I don't mind saying that some positions people take that I disagree with have coherent biblical arguments. An example of this is ECT vs Annihilationism. I think that the biblical argument for ECT is clear but I also believe that annihilationism does have coherent biblical arguments. Pre-trib, intra-trib, and post trib are all positions that can have coherent biblical arguments but not all 3 can be right. But positions of "everyone will be saved" is not biblically coherent for 3 reasons: 1) it is refuted by a much of the scriptures in very clear and no uncertain terms, 2) it goes against the very nature of God and his creation of man to have free will, and 3) it is hard to imagine how universalism fits in with Christians who are Christians after making a concious decision to pick up their cross and follow Jesus when they could have refused. God will not force people into heaven against their will and the consequences of choosing to cater to the flesh and allowing sin to mature is destruction (James 1:15), This is why the "everyone will be saved" argument is biblically incoherent. The bible was never meant to be interpreted by a lawyer/theologian but rather, as a disciple of Christ lead by the Holy Spirit.
@@robertemard9452 I respect your passion - I really do! The coherence or incoherence of any said doctrine are by nature based on *personal opinion,* and as you said, we can agree to disagree! Totally fine and fair. Your 3 reasons for finding universalism (hereafter UR) ultimately incoherent are fair - I actually agree with much of it. The doctrine of Freewill is a huge reason why I am not persuaded by the case for Universalism. Most of the UR "go-to" passages are surrounded by the context of human autonomy and freewill, and there is a real tension within scripture (1 Timothy 2 is a case in point) between the heart of God and the freewill of humanity. God desires deeply that all will come to repentance, but he cannot and will not force all. That is a tension we must all wrestle with What Kris tried to convey in his sermon is the heart of God towards humanity, and how that must change our hearts towards each other. The way we think about God ultimately determines, in large part, how we then behave towards others. The heart of God that desires, intensely, for all to come to Him in repentance, must draw all of our hearts to the same desire. And in this way - we ought to have hearts that are "hopeful" for Universalism to be true even though we don't find it biblically "coherent." Whether or not Universalism is Biblically true, is sort of besides the point when we approach the topic from that standpoint. The interpretation of scripture is an inevitable process whether you are a lawyer, theologian or a disciple of Jesus led by the Holy Spirit - the true test is how one holds to a particular interpretation. The question really is: is the interpretation characterized in humility and neighbor-love? Blessings!!
NB: this is an attempt to better serve the hosts through splitting up my preivous comments Patrick Franklin was a fantastic choice of individuals for a podcast topic such as this - well done! I thoroughly appreciated the emphasis on curiosity at the beginning of the episode by Chris The joke about the "Jets" and the Maple Leafs was also fantastic! 🙂 Bang on too about not going beyond one's level of expertise within one's profession (Patrick Franklin) - so so well said!
To say things differently, despite the truth of relevance theory and divine accommodation (using Hilber's model) I do not see the assertions about the age of the earth as being 'incidental' to the 'message' of the text of Scripture (using Lamarouex's model) Veritably, “bats” are not “birds” (see Lev 11:19) but this is (only) because “we choose to define the category ‘bird’ in a certain way, and the category ‘bat’ in a certain way. We didn’t ‘discover’ that bats aren’t ‘birds’ since Lev. was written, rather we changed the meaning of ‘bird.’ The sentence ‘bats are birds’ does not necessarily assert incorrectly that bats have feathers, if the person stating it intentionally means a different thing by the category ‘bird’ than you do
To further illustrate this point, telling a younger child that they came from their mother’s tummy is equivocal language but saying that the stork brought her is simply a lie To say that the earth is young (cf. Mark 10:6 etc) when it is actually quite old seems at odds to me with John 18:37 Some people seem to confuse God’s need to accommodate to the limitations of human finiteness vs. a divine accommodation to error All that said, though, this is a RU-vid comment 🙂
To say that this was an incredible episode is an understatement - easily my favorite one so far To have such a REPUTABLE scholar (who is also SO DOWN TO EARTH) is just awesome His humor (so many witticisms) and cultural sensitivities (!!!) are just great This podcast needs more views - great job! Thank you both for your work here with this 🙂
For anyone wondering, we have an in-depth paper written on the topic of hell on the Crossview website, that looks at a huge number of Scripture passages. If you're interested, check it out under the "Our Beliefs" tab: www.crossviewchurch.ca/beliefs.
Excellent question! It is hard to make a case for postmortem salvation strictly from scripture, but some have made cases for it though theologically and historically. Dr. Jerry Walls is a good example of this (a great Theologian!). Dr. Greg Boyd is another one - but he is not dogmatic on it at all.
I have thoroughly enjoyed this informative and well developed interview. The journey discussed is rmarkable, the courage of love and faith is inspirationl. i need to move on now but will revisit later
God bless all involved in this beautiful ministry. Due to work Crossview online is my favourite way to get and stay connected with God and God’s word. Thank you pastor Kris and may God continue to bless and strengthen you in this mission.
I am always impressed and pleased with the quality of guests that you two have on your show and with the remarkable tact and charity with which you conduct yourselves as hosts - keep up the great work. I believe that the church is continuing to be blessed by your faithfulness in ministry this way 🙂
What a fantastic choice of individuals for the show and a great story of someone seeking to make a positive difference in the world - thank you (all) for your leadership and influence to the glory of God and the furtherance of His Kingdom. I appreciate it
Thank you, Chris Loewen and Kris Duerksen, for this interview with Kelvin Goertzen. I am a retired professor of philosophy. Philosophy, properly understood, is the pursuit (love) of wisdom. I appreciate Kelvin Goertzen’s wisdom. Thank you, again.