Restitutio

Last week we examined what the bible teaches about heaven. This week we’ll see what it says about hell. John Cortright explains there are three meanings of hell in scripture, including tartarus where fallen angels are temporarily imprisoned, hades/sheol where the dead remain until resurrection, and gehenna where the wicked are destroyed in the final judgment. —— Links —— More Restitutio podcasts with John Cortright Also, get more of Cortright’s sermons, classes, and articles at Living Hope Community Church Listen to an excellent debate on hell (eternal conscious torment vs. annihilationism) Podcast 10: Is Hell Forever? Chris Date vs. Phil Fernandez Check out the kingdom of God class podcasts Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.  

What is heaven? Throughout the bible we find different layers of meaning, including (1) heaven as sky, (2) heaven as God’s throne, and (3) heaven as God’s realm or dimension. Although heaven is a reality, it is not where we go when we die. Rather the bible teaches that the dead are asleep until the resurrection when they inherit the earth, renewed and restored. —— Notes —— Louis Armstrong and Ella Fitzgerald famously sang about heaven: Heaven, I’m in heaven And my heart beats so that I can hardly speak And I seem to find the happiness I seek When we’re out together dancing cheek to cheek Yes, heaven, I’m in heaven And the cares that hung around me through the week Seem to vanish like a gambler’s lucky streak When we’re out together dancing cheek to cheek[1] 2 Samuel 18.9 9 And Absalom happened to meet the servants of David. Absalom was riding on his mule, and the mule went under the thick branches of a great oak, and his head caught fast in the oak, and he was suspended between heaven and earth, while the mule that was under him went on. he was between heaven and earth what does that mean? he was between the sky and the land heaven is the sky Heaven as Sky (Realm of the Birds) Genesis 1.14-20 14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night. And let them be for signs and for seasons, and for days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light upon the earth.” And it was so. 16 And God made the two great lights– the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night– and the stars. 17 And God set them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, 18 to rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening and there was morning, the fourth day. 20 And God said, “Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the heavens.” Genesis 1.28 28 And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” this is where my title comes from heaven’s for the birds! Matthew 6.26 26 Look at the birds of the air [οὐρανός]: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? so heaven’s for the birds but, it’s more than that! Heaven as God’s Throne Isaiah 66.1-2 1 Thus says the LORD: “Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool; what is the house that you would build for me, and what is the place of my rest? 2 All these things my hand has made, and so all these things came to be, declares the LORD. But this is the one to whom I will look: he who is humble and contrite in spirit and trembles at my word. control room (throne): where God makes plans/decisions storehouse: where rewards are stored up w/ God Jesus says to lay up treasures in heaven where moth and rust cannot destroy (Mt 6.20) Peter says we have an inheritance imperishable kept in heaven (1 Pet 1.4) Paul says our citizenship is in heaven (Phil 3.20) N. T. Wright: “What then do the New Testament writers mean when they speak of an inheritance waiting for us in heaven? This has been much misunderstood…The point of such passages, as in 1 Peter 1.4, 2 Corinthians 5.1, Philippians 3.20, and so forth, is not that one must ‘go to heaven’, as in much-popular imagination, in o

Robin Todd has faithfully served as the director of the Worldwide Scattered Brethren Network for the last 10 years.  He helps biblical unitarians find each other all over the United States as well as some other countries.  In this interview, we talk about how he got started, what it takes to get on his list, and how he sees the future of the network. —— Links —— Visit the Worldwide Scattered Brethren Network or email Todd to get on his list or to volunteer to help with the website: robinsings4u@comcast.net If you live in Europe and you’d like to get in touch with Werner Bartl, you can reach him at redaktion@filmreif.at For more about virtual church, see Interview 32: Virtual Fellowship for Isolated Believers (John Truitt) To tune into Living Hope’s weekly live webcast, go to lhim.org/webcast on Sundays from 10:30 am – 12:00 pm EST Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.    

In this concluding teaching of our apologetics conference, John Truitt gleans from Christ’s example key ways that we can imitate him in our own evangelistic efforts today.  He begins by looking how Jesus was completely obedient to God and how he prepared himself (both in knowledge and experience).  Next Truitt urges us to get moving, expecting God to direct us as we are obedient.  Lastly, he emphasizes the importance of radical love to our neighbors and the need for community. Here now is podcast 148 Evangelism, Jesus’ Way with John Truitt —— Links —— To find out how to join John Truitt’ s virtual church online watch this video or contact him directly at jtruitt@kalleo.net Check out the podcast episode with Truitt: “Virtual Fellowship for Isolated Believers“ Check out the other talks in this Apologetics Conference For more, here’s an entire Apologetics Class Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

Have you ever been in a corn maze?  The reason they work is because you can only see right in front of you.  If you had a live drone feed, you could easily orient yourself and find the way out.  This is the benefit of history.  We live in a postmodern culture, but it’s hard to see or understand what that means since we’re surrounded with it.  In this exceptional presentation, Kegan Chandler guides us through the history of premodernism, modernism, and postmodernism so that we can orient ourselves to how many people in our world think and approach life.  Not only will this give you a drones-eye perspective of our current situation, but it also will help you understand how to better share your faith with postmodern people. —— Notes —— Metanarratives and Postmodernism (Kegan Chandler) What is postmodernism? How in the world did we get here? Where do we go from here? Postmodernism is a worldview based on French philosophers, Derrida, Foucault, Lyotard w/ these four characteristics: no objective truth (Derrida) only interpretations (Derrida) no meta-narrative (Lyotard) interpretation in society results from power not truth (Foulcault) meta-narrative: overarching account that provides a pattern or structure for ppls beliefs and experiences postmodernist mission: deconstruction identify social constructs in the world and break them down if everything is deconstructed, what do we fill it with? our experiences community First Star Wars w/ Luke vs. last star wars w/ Luke, deconstructs everything premodernism belief in objective truth problem: priestly class determines truth problem: superstition authority structure suffocated learning and creativity Renaissance was a way to recover art and classics that the church had suppressed premodernism crumbles Reformation Galileo defeats Aristotle (dropping 2 lead balls from leaning tower of Piza) this challenges authority of Aristotle heliocentricity also challenges church’s imprimatur of Ptolemaic geocentricity modernism rejection of authority time and numbers don’t guarantee truth reason alone can find truth naïve optimism (holocaust, communism, eugenics) epistemological revolution, exalting empiricism, which reduced miraculous to superstition we can save the world if we just apply reason and science postmodernism glad that modernism rejected authority reject the idea that human institutions and states can save us only the individual can be free get rid of objective truth to build our own realities rejection of meta-narratives distrust that reason can bring enlightenment or satisfaction pomo is good for Christianity b/c it defeat naïve secular utopian dreams defeats empiricisms accepts supernatural, transcendent ennobles the individual’s journey of discovery problems w/ postmodernism the statement “there is no objective truth” is self-defeating you can always disagree, saying “that’s just your interpretation” I can just say “pomo is wrong” and no one can disagree b/c then they would have to appeal to objective reality just b/c everyone has their own interpretation doesn’t mean that there isn’t one correct one on any given subject a post-postmodernism worldview belief in objective truth belief in the right authoritative sources of truth (scripture) value

How should we think through the different major religions of our time? Are they all the same? What are their differences? In this presentation, philosopher of religion, Dale Tuggy, works through key questions that can help us differentiate and distinguish religions from each other. In the second half of his talk, he invites the audience to diagnose various quasi-religious perspectives popular in our culture, before offering comments on each.   Loading... Taking too long? Reload document | Open in new tab   —— Notes —— aspects of religion practical & ritual experiential & emotional narrative doctrinal & philosophical ethical & legal social & institutional material religious diversity vs. religious pluralism diversity: people are loyal to different religions pluralism: all religions are equally valuable on moral questions, major religions have a lot of common-sense overlap if they weren’t plausible and didn’t help they wouldn’t have gotten so popular four core claims diagnosis: fundamental problem facing humanity cure: how to positively and permanently resolve the problem methods: what to do to get the cure exemplar: actual person(s) whose lives show us how to live out the methods, getting the cure Christianity is more focused on truth than any other religion this is why we’re so quarrelsome this is why we write and read so many books shouldn’t assume other religions care about doctrine like we do there’s one theology/teaching per religion not even w/in Christianity Christianity on the four core claims we are fallen and sin, which causes dysfunction, harm, and death Christ died to pay for sin conversion, disciplines, follow Christ Jesus, apostles, Christian heroes over time   —— Links —— Visit Dale Tuggy’s website and podcast at trinities.org Listen to other podcasts with Dale Tuggy Check out the other talks in this Apologetics Conference For more, here’s an entire Apologetics Class Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

How do you know the difference between what's right and wrong?  Do morals have an absolute source or does society determine them?  In this talk, Kenny Willenburg explains the classic moral argument as well as how we can use this approach to "turn the tables" when people object to Christianity on moral grounds.  I've also left in a fair amount of discussion following Willenburg's presentation. —— Notes —— if morals are objective then they are obligatorythere must be a source for moralsthe most reasonable source is God if there is no God, there couldn't be objective morality Richard Dawkins (God Delusion)- God of the OT is jealous, petty, control freak, etc. three problems saying God is immoral doesn't disprove God's existence○ Hitler didn't exist b/c the things he did were too badsaying the creator is evil is arrogant○ if there is a creator then he would have the right to interact w/ creation however he wantedcan't claim God is immoral b/c w/o God's existence there's no standard by which to judge God relativism is taught in our culture as the only absolute truth tolerant of anything but intolerancecan't push religious ideas on others, but that is pushing secularism on usno one is allowed to criticize anyone's actions sources for morality morality can't be individually determinedmorality can't be socially constructed○ actually, our culture got its ideas from a Judea-Christian background○ thus, this proves what the non-theist is trying to disprovemorality comes from nature (i.e. Darwinian evolution)○ how is self-sacrificial care of the weak/unproductive helpful to the herd?○ morals are simply evolutionary hold overs○ not clear how this is obligatory —— Links —— Check out the other talks in this Apologetics ConferenceFor more, here’s an entire Apologetics ClassIntro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

In the second presentation of this Apologetics Conference, we delve into a comparison of three major time periods: (1) the age of authority, (2) the age of reason, and (3) the age of authenticity.  We look at how people practiced their faith in each as well as what criticisms apologists answered.  For our post-modern time, I recommend the strategy of discussing a social issue, showing how our society is failing to address it, and how Christianity can offer a solution.  Last of all we try out this strategy on a number of controversial issues, including gun violence, sexual harassment, and  technology use. Here is the handout I used: —— Links —— Check out the other talks in this Apologetics ConferenceFor more, here's an entire Apologetics ClassIntro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.

Today we are starting something new. I’m very excited to present to you in its entirety, the apologetics conference held in Paducah, KY last June. We’ve got a great line up of speakers for you including Jerry Wierwille, myself, Kenny Willenburg, Dale Tuggy, Kegan Chandler, and John Truitt. It was a wonderful time of meeting people and working together to figure out ways of reaching the millennial generation with the gospel. As it turned out, a great majority of the presentations focused on understanding the post-modern worldview. This was so helpful, because it’s nearly impossible to discuss important issues if both people are unaware of the fact that they are each coming from incompatible worldviews. Although, for many of us, our natural inclination is to show someone why their underlying assumptions are invalid, a better starting point for evangelism is to work within their post-modern outlook to show how attractive and awesome the gospel is. In this first presentation, Jerry Wierwille covers a brief history of how major philosophers initiated a movement that led to sequestering away of faith as something personal and private.  Then he shares how to broach spiritual topics with secular people around us. His talk is relatively short, only 34 minutes long, but I also included the questions and comments, which went for another half hour. —— Notes —— Rene Descartes (1596-1650) early 1600s cogito ergo sum put himself at the center of reality rather than God previously, scientists located God at the center of the universe and from there derived his laws divided mind from matter   John Locke (1632-1704) empiricism sense perception is the basis for true knowledge/reality   David Hume (1711-1776) skepticism anything not proven using scientific method is not verifiable   Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) appearances of forms absolute idealism law of non-contradiction freedom above nature   Georg Hegel (1770-1831) dialectic idealism thesis, antithesis, synthesis   value/fact divide religion relegated to the mind, but not objective   humanism manifestos in 1933, 1973, 2003 progressive philosophy of life that w/o supernaturalism affirms our responsibility to lead ethical lives live well, fully values and ideals however carefully wrought are subject to change knowledge derived by empirically  humans are part of nature, the result of unguided evolution ethics derived from trial and error, treat others as having inherent worth and dignity life’s fulfillment found in wonders and joy of human existence humans find meaning in relationships; want a world free of cruelty; differences resolved cooperatively w/o violence working to better society maximizes happiness; support a just distribution of nature’s resources so as many as possible can enjoy a good life; human rights; civil liberties; civic duties to vote the responsibility for our lives is ours and ours alone   private life (values) ————————- public life (facts)   you can have beliefs, but they are private privatization is one of the main problems in our society for evangelism culture/public life must be devoid of religion you can believe what you want, but don’t tell me what to believe we all make our own truth called judgmental, traditionalist, intolerant

How much does truth matter to you?  In particular, how should we think about Christians who hold very different views on key subjects?  For example, I’m a biblical unitarian, someone who believes that we should take Jesus literally when he called his Father “the only true God.”  Of course I believe Jesus is God’s only begotten son, the anointed Messiah who died for our sins, but I don’t affirm the fourth century doctrine of the Trinity.  Some Christians would call me a heretic beyond the pale of fellowship or even salvation (even if I do believe the gospel message with all my heart).  Others would say I’m deceived but would have no problem working together in various areas.  Chuck Whitlock, a bible student, husband, and father of five has been wrestling with precisely these questions over the last 5 or so years.  Having grown up in strong evangelical denominations his whole life, he had to rethink his relationship with mainstream Christianity when he began changing several of his key beliefs.  In this interview, we discuss various ways to think about this issue, based on Whitlock’s paper (see below).  He steaks out a balanced position between writing everyone off who disagrees with him and accepting everyone as brothers and sisters without regard for their beliefs. —— Links —— Read Chuck Whitlock’s entire paper below Email him at chuckw@whitlox.net Check out his blacksmith forges For Dale Tuggy’s presentation on John Locke’s minimalist definition of Christians based on the simple confession that Jesus is Messiah, see Heretic! Four Approaches to Dropping H-Bombs For more on biblical unitarianism, check out these podcasts, especially Podcast 44: The Immutable Shema as well as christianmonotheism.com More info about KingdomFest (Sep 7-9, 2018) Intro music: Jazzy Frenchy by bensound.com. Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.   Does Truth Matter? Truth matters! … but how much?   Introduction: There is a significant distance between the Biblical Unitarian faith and ‘orthodoxy’ in its various forms. If you haven’t come to this conclusion, just try to advance the idea that Jesus is not God and see what kind of reception this gets:)  Even less divisive topics, such as resurrection or the gospel of the kingdom, meet with great opposition. The apparent incompatibility between Biblical Unitarianism and ‘orthodoxy’ causes one to wonder what it means that other Christians don’t seem to be interested in the truths we’ve discovered. Both parties reference the same book and so there is something very familiar in ‘orthodoxy’. A little scholarship shows us how ‘orthodoxy’ represents the Hellenization of the original Jewish Christian faith.  Most of the terms and characters are retained but the meanings are either co-opted or obscured such that, today, in very real terms, they have a different Jesus, a different God, and a different Gospel.    How much does that matter? What does it mean?   Who is saved?: I recognize that this bumps into the impossible question of who is truly saved.  That s