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

Amen. I moved to Moscow to be under him.

@@jacobmaier8993 I wish I could..

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

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

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?

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

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.

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

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

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

@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.

​@@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

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

The rest of the 2020's

Hilarious

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

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

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.

@@theeternalsbeliever1779 Yeah, sad but true.

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.

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.

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

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

@@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.

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

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.

@@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.

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

@@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

@@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.

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

@@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."

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.

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

@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.

🤓

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

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.

It's Rembrandt's painting _The Apostle Paul_

@@MagnificentFiend Thank you cultured stranger

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

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

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.

@@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.

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

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

​@@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.

@@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!

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

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.

@@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

@@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?

@@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.

:]

end of Zech 11 Habakkuk 2

They're wearing sweater vests

How loving

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)

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

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).

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

@@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.

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

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.

No one cares.

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

Gotta still love White. A brother in CHRIST

@@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.

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