I can't get enough of Natasha's clarity on Biblical perspective. Her interviews keep getting better. Of course, Professor McDowell rocks with his questions and response timing. Phenomenal. Praise God!!!

Thanks for having Natasha on. After watching I purchased the book "Faithfully Different" and am studying it as another apologetic material to help defend the faith with gentleness and respect.

Terrific conversation. I would also recommend the book "When the Secular Becomes Sacred." I wrote this book to address many of the issues discussed in this podcast.

@SeanMcDowell

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks for watching. Your book is excellent!

Re: the dropping off from a Biblical worldview in America in the last 25 years. That takes us back to the turn of the millennium as the beginning of precipice from which our nation dropped. That's a generation from the publications in 1953 of the first issue of Playboy and the Kinsey report on Sexual Behavior In Women. Both Hef and Kinsey started a movement to twist society to affirm their bad behavior, particularly in regard to sex. Their brand of hedonism spread out not only into our nation's current twisted conceptions of sex and sexuality, but also into other areas of life, which has resulted in the "I'm the boss of me by my standard; you can't judge" mentality.

@iw9338

Жыл бұрын

You are correct.

This was excellent..glad I watched all the way to the end. Blessings…

Another great show, another great interview. Love how you ask great questions and then let your guests talk and give the long answers. You are really gifted at the long form interview. Thanks again, and God bless.

Wow. One of the most solid, balanced, and winsome worldview viewpoints I have ever heard. Added to my favorites and well be sharing with the congregation I am blessed with. Thank you Dr. McDowell for having Ms. Crain on!

Awesome channel, awesome conversation. I particularly appreciate the sobering awareness of the movement to get pedophiles recognized as a normal, acceptable group (blah!). Also at the end, what Ms. Crain does with her kids, something I did minus the social media (we had BOOKS!). Plus acknowledgement that sometimes dealing with certain topics will be better received in private through relationship. That's the only way I can imagine leading anyone to Messiah.

interesting listening to this after just watching Sean's conversation with Adam Davidson. Particularly he mentioned two things that are prevalent in this interview. 1) that "secular" people are led by feelings. He denied that, at least for himself. and 2) the problem with a Christian explaining what "secular" people think/believe. Great conversations.

@SeanMcDowell

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks for watching both. Great contrast!

I can’t believe with almost 140 views that this video only has less then 900 likes. This baffles me. Great video! Answered a lot of things on my mind. Thanks for all that you do. PTL

Experience doesn’t supersede the Bible as a source of knowledge. 👍🏽

@robertdouglas8895

2 жыл бұрын

Unless that includes the experience of interpreting the Bible through the Holy Spirit. Words on a page don't give us anything.

Really appreciate this.

Natasha - thank you for this discussion. It was excellent - so thorough and well thought through. Thank you for helping us process it!

Loved this talk! So helpful and explains perfectly what we see happening through the marketing analogy you shared, Natasha. As always you both are such gifts to us all...thank you for all you do!

Such a great interview. She articulated each point so well. Definitely buying her book.

Very helpful. Just purchased the audible version of the book.

Wow… I knew that the biblical worldview becoming less popular, I just didn’t realize the extent. Love this conversation and for bringing this information out into the open. Definitely will be picking up a copy of Faithfully Different.

Great interview

I just want to buy every book from every speaker to learn more. Such great content. Thanks for sharing all of these conversations

@monkeyman193

Жыл бұрын

Any evil can be justified with the Bible.

@KM-zn3lx

Жыл бұрын

​@@monkeyman193 such as what with scriptures cited, please. Also what about The Veda...karma of poor ppl or caste systems? Also the Qoran....lying as a means to an end, child brides, and killing of gays and infidels if they don't accept Mohammad. I could go on but those are the main books I'm thinking of.

Fabulous! We are going to do a book study this summer as a result of listening to this podcast for some interested women at our church. I love the foundational premise of worldview and also the gracious way in which both Shaun and Natasha share the way in which we need to be communicating with believers and unbelievers on various topics with grace and knowledge and truth. Thank you so much for the behind the scenes study and conversation we are looking forward to delving into Natasha‘s book and making identification truly functional as Christians!

@SeanMcDowell

2 жыл бұрын

Awesome!

As always, Thank the Lord for your energy, ideas and the illuminating videos. Your programs on a broad variety of subjects clarifies my view. I found the guest speakers on O.T. and NT. archaeology to be extremely edifying. Of course, I go first and foremost to the Bible. I just enjoy a promoter of the gospel such as yourself. God bless you, the family and Biola.

@SeanMcDowell

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks George!

Reminds me of a quote: "When Christianity is made to be a culture war rather than an opportunity to serve, the result will always be disappointment."

Excellent thanks very much 🙏💜😊

Sean, your reference to MLK in this discussion was very helpful for me. (Cue 14:15) I'm 71. Teaching 5th grade in th 70s, I showed newsreal footage of MLK, the March and his speeches. I wish history was a more respected discipline in schools today...the history of actual people/events...NOT the "interpretation of history" via secular worldviews such as WOKE'ism.

Thanks!

I’m glad I watched this video. Paul Does Say that we are to come into the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, Ephesians 4:13. When a person says you aren’t to judge me as to what I understand is right, not if I am saved or not, that doesn’t sound like it’s Scripture or helpful to either of us.

So good

Love me some Crain!!!

It is ironic that today's church stands against cultural conformity, while today's church also appeals to cultural conformity when explaining difficult bible passages.

this has been the most mind bugling question i had of my entire Christian life, “are women allowed to ‘teach’ over men?” “are women pastors/teachers biblically entitled to operate?”

@sheldoncscoggins

2 жыл бұрын

Keep an eye on Mike Winger's videos the next few weeks! he's starting to do a series about really digging into what the Bible says about it. Mike Winger is a great biblical resource

@esoptron3983

2 жыл бұрын

In addition to Mike Winger's videos, I recommend watching Nick Quient's upcoming content on the subject to get both sides of the issue. His channel name is 'New Testament Theologist'. Both of them have a deep regard for the truth of scripture, so I think learning from them can be fruitful.

@vienmabaiiit6406

2 жыл бұрын

@@sheldoncscoggins okay thank you

@vienmabaiiit6406

2 жыл бұрын

@@esoptron3983 i will

@shamtactics4712

2 жыл бұрын

This video is sin because a woman is leading women… these biblical Christians don’t even take it literally…

Do that other show specifically for the parents raising children please 😊.

I am about to do a Bible study on this book

I loved your lessons today they felt like 10 minutes and I hope you come back and on behalf of stone ridge thank you -Rohan

@SeanMcDowell

2 жыл бұрын

Nice meeting you Rohan!

@goldysingh4420

2 жыл бұрын

@@SeanMcDowell it was nice meeting you too

@stevenrivard9246

2 жыл бұрын

@@SeanMcDowell Hello Dr. McDowell. Fellow Christian here. If I wanted to ask you questions about the Holy Spirit, what would be the best way to do that (In the comments section, email, or website?)... And would you respond to my questions?

@SeanMcDowell

2 жыл бұрын

@@stevenrivard9246 I have an assistant who helps with Qs that come through my website. Personally I try to tackle Qs during live Q&As too…

@stevenrivard9246

2 жыл бұрын

@@SeanMcDowell This is not the type of question for a live Q&A, it is more of a question that takes a little time and research... So I will just ask it here, and see if you respond. There are writings from early Christians like Theophilus of Antioch and Irenaeus who claim that the Holy Spirit is the "Wisdom of God" in the same way that Jesus is the "Word of God." Also, when I look at the book of Proverbs it seems to scream out that Wisdom is not merely a personification... but rather an eternal person who was involved in creation with the Father... "then I was beside him, like a master workman, and I was daily his delight, rejoicing before him always" (Proverbs 8:30) Many say that Wisdom is Jesus... But how can this be true when considering the following points: 1. Jesus IS the door/gate (John 10:9); Wisdom stands AT the door/gate (Proverbs 8:3). 2. According to Isaiah 42:1-3, Jesus is NOT suppose to "cry out" or "raise his voice in the streets" but that is EXACTLY what the person Wisdom does in Proverbs 8:3-4... "beside the gate leading into the city, at the entrance, she cries aloud: To you, O people, I call out; I raise my voice to all mankind.'" 3. Wisdom seems to be female, Jesus and the Father are male. The only person of the trinity that seems to represent femininity in the Godhead is the Holy Spirit. If you disagree, then please tell me why believers are "born again" spiritually of the Holy Spirit? Does not giving birth (Even if it is spiritual birth) represent femininity? Does not Genesis say that humanity was made in God's image... male AND female? Am I way off on this? Or is this decent evidence for LADY WISDOM of Proverbs actually being the 3rd person of the trinity... the Holy Spirit? PS: I have lots of other pieces of evidence that I can share if you are interested. Example: Luke 7:35 "Yet wisdom is justified by all her children.”

Fantastic talk. Upgraded camera = 👌🏼👀

I am struggling with this too. My 30 year old children, reject our families faith and see Christianity as oppressive. I can understand how they feel, because indeed Christian’s have done great evil in the past. So now when we speak up about against current legislation and immoral values and trends, we are seen as bigots. When I tell my loved ones I think homosexuality is not wise or a good choice for society they call me a homophobe. I do think that Christian’s are often hurtful and unkind in their approach and exclusion of people who are struggling with this. I just don’t know where to draw the line in our churches. Do we need to adjust, or try new ways and listen to the Holy Spirits guidance? Do we need to fear a slippery slope?

@SeanMcDowell

2 жыл бұрын

Wish I had a simple answer for you, but thanks for sharing and sorry about the tension you find yourself in.

Love this! Thank you!

I like this interview as a non Christian, very interesting to see how Christians feel about todays culture and I think Natasha makes great points and articulates them greatly but I think Natasha makes some assumptions about people with secular views. For example the judging is a sin point. As someone who is secular I don’t think judging is a sin or something you shouldn’t do and many people I know who are secular agree. For me and many others judging what another person does is something that should be done and will help improve others to be better. Why do you think secular people disapprove of some Christian behaviour because they JUDGED that it was bad. Another thing is the happiness is the goal, I wouldn’t say happiness is THE goal, it’s only a goal for some or one goal of someone’s life. For example: the search for truth is a goal many people have that sometimes will make you unhappy. I could go on about the other two points but you get my point, I think Natasha didn’t really ask secular people about their views before writing her book, but maybe she did and I’m just a small minority. Even so either way she made it seem as though all seculars believe these same 4 points but that really does not seem to be the case to me. Edit: I have now written a short English essay as a KZread comment.

@jyoudybeth

2 жыл бұрын

Haha! Funny. Thank you for your “essay.” It’s good to be reminded that no one group is completely homogeneous.

@jackatron9772

Жыл бұрын

She was just saying these are the general principals that the majority of secular and progressive Christians typically line up. A a Christian in general the most common criticism I hear from non Christian’s is that” it is not their place to judge” or they will pick out bible verses and use them out of context to say “see the Bible says not to judge” or they will say Christians aren’t allowed to let their faith inform their political or policy backings. As if that is what was meant when the founding fathers formed the union. Bc clearly everyone has their own beliefs value systems and worldivews that then Inform their opinions about what is morally good or bad or just not just Christians. I’m glad you appreciated her discussion, it’s hard to find solid Christian’s to represent the biblical worldview with such clarity! Thankful for Natasha and Seth 🙌🏻

How often that I try to fix my car without looking at the manual, written by the manufacturer of my car? Only when my way doesn’t work, that I either read the manual or take it to the dealership! The ultimate solution is in the manual and the creator :-)

I think her dilemma would be so easily solved if she provided a checklist identify who is a true Christian and who is not. A list of what a functionally biblical worldview actually means

@hhstark8663

2 жыл бұрын

Here is the checklist for being a true Christian: - The trinity. - The deity of Christ. - The bodily resurrection. - The atonement. - The sanctity of life (meaning no abortion and no unjust murder and no bondage). - The sanctity of marriage between ONE adult man and ONE adult woman until death do them apart (meaning no divorce and no polygamy and no bestiality and no pedophilia and no fornication etc). - The New Covenent. - The abolishment of the Old Covenent. - The authority of the New Testament.

@PeterFortuna

2 жыл бұрын

@@hhstark8663 I don't think Most people would agree with your list. .

@andrewbowenssylvanianfamilies

2 жыл бұрын

@@hhstark8663 Sorry, but in your list, you mentioned unjust murder. Are you suggesting that murder is just in some cases?

49:31 I think this is an issue around which we should tread lightly. I am sensitive to a historical point: "religion" as we think about it today is not a feature of the Biblical story. The taxonomy of "religion" includes words like "theology", which if defined as a systematic study or account of particular religious belief, is foreign to both testaments. My point is not to make a boogey man of "low theology Jesus" when Jesus was the personal expression of the Hebrew God in real time. In his teachings, Jesus is not "doing theology", he is expressing (through human relationship) the thoughts, emotional life and purposes of God. He makes pronouncements, performs miracles, gives commands, and expresses truth from God's perspective. From our vantage point, one might summarize this in theological terms, but that is something we are imposing on the text. It is not expressed that way. Jesus asked, "Who do you say I am?", the pivotal question each person has to answer. But the "Cliff's Notes" to that question offered in the Bible is not a bullet-pointed list or Theological textbook, it is a composite description (from scattered passages in the Old Testament) of a person who was going to arrive. I am sympathetic to a concern for a way of thinking that reduces Jesus to a good deed doer, but I'm also concerned that the "fix" is to double-down on a formula that is largely absent in the New Testament. A more powerful way to address a "low theology Jesus" is to live a vibrant life of "good works" because of the truth of who Jesus is. The temptation is to develop more programs of knowledge about Jesus rather than to encounter the Divine Son of God and then follow him.

a secular person also can take a worldview, like humanism, its not necessarily just theirselves. and people how refer to a religion take that religion for themselves in the first place. and if christianity and secularism are the 2 biggest groups its normal that the 2 influence each other. its just more simple to deal with for worldviews that dont claim to be god given

Hi. If a church isn't sponsored by state where are the loopholes happening with MCC churches being given so many 'grants' ? Is there a watchdog organization that is looking into this? For instance the assigned stimulus funds

Liked the talk and got some perspective on some cultural shifts in America. I didn't like that these cultural shift where viewed being part of the secular worldview, it seemed like painting with to broad of a brush. For example to say for example that "Feelings are the ultimate guide in the secular worldview.", is similar to saying that "God is the ultimate guide in the religious worldview.". To talk about "the secular worldview" seems wrong since there isn't one, just like there isn't one religious worldview . A better way to express "Feelings are the ultimate guide in the secular worldview." is to say "A commonality in many secular worldviews is that, feelings are the ultimate guide.".

I know not all Christians, even high profile Christians, have understood the New Testament commandment of God Doesn’t Begin With The Shema, or the Ten Commandments under Love God and Love your neighbor as your self (Mark 12:29-31 ) but is found in 1st John 3:22-23 ‘believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ and love one another as he (Jesus, John 13:34 as he loves us) gave commandment’ . Progressive Christians, or others, should realize the many topics Jesus discussed, spoke in passing to it, covered more than light social interaction with one another, when applying ‘love as he loved us’ in the different areas he taught would be heavenly living, heavenly politics.

It's all very well saying a 'secular' person only appeals to self and not a higher authority. The reality is that many Christians, and I speak as one, disagree strongly on what that higher authority is saying. A good example is that of gay sexual relations. Many Christians argue that God does not approve of such relationships, but a significant number believe He's fine with it. That disagreement largely comes down to one's understanding of the Bible, which is really the higher authority in many people's minds.

@PC-vg8vn

2 жыл бұрын

@Prey R Many Christians would disagree with you, and Im not sure that is always based on wanting to feel it's ok. My point is there is an arrogance in the view "I appeal to a higher power so I must be right", when your understanding may in reality be wrong.

@tinacoleman1400

2 жыл бұрын

I’m wondering about anyone that disagrees strongly with what the higher authority is saying (being God & His Word)? Would that mean we as created beings know BETTER than God? Then WE (self) becomes the highest authority just like she was saying.

@MessiahRamsay

2 жыл бұрын

Christianity en masse has always been in opposition towards the fight for civil rights. While contemporary Christians point to a few examples of socially conscious Christians during abolition, women’s suffrage, etc. these are examples of the Christian minority at the time. Just like today we see a minority of Christians accepting LGBT rights while the majority act terrified and confused. Thankful for Christians who embrace 21st century human values as we drag the rest of them with us to a future with better morals and virtues 💙🏳️‍🌈.

@josietanner3960

2 жыл бұрын

@@MessiahRamsay We are not supposed to change depending on the culture. There are several things to note in your post... Scripture is clear that ALL races were made in the image of God, and they ALL have equal value, therefore, the abolitionist Christians were following Biblical values and Christians who supported slavery and segregation were shaped by the culture. Scripture tells us that in the eyes of God men and women have equal value and should be respected and taken care of, therefore, Christians who supported the suffragette movement had Biblical principals and those who did not support the cause were shaped by culture. We are seeing the opposite effect now. Scripture is CLEAR that homosexual marriage or lifestyle is a sin, therefore, Christians who support the lgbtq agenda are being shaped by culture and those who stand against it have a Biblical worldview.

@hhstark8663

2 жыл бұрын

Historically, Christians have always been opposed to slavery (bondage). This why bondage stopped in tribal Europe. In the 19th century, a bunch of slave-owners tried to twist Scripture to further their own (secular) political agenda and slapped the christian-label on it using Aristotlean philosophy. "Black people and indian people are not _really_ human like us. The New Testament is not _really_ clear on it." Prior to that point, ALL christians where unanimous in abolishing bondage.

Sean coul you watch an review the video called “could this be the real tomb of Christ?| Jesus’ Lost tomb | timeline it makes me question quite a bit I thought I knew

Please make a video on jay shetty and his teachings related to Christian faith

Are we to have a biblical worldview or a Christological world view ? Jesus had a culture of non-judgement and was a friend of sinners He did not stand aloof in judgement toward them as modern day Christians , but he engaged them in conversation.

@Prismatic_Truth

2 жыл бұрын

Jesus Christ was God in the flesh, so His personal impact in conversation was clearly somewhat different from ours. That said, I don't see any Christians saying we ought not to engage sinners in conversation. And while engaging sinners in conversation, Christ did also judge their actions and tell them they needed to repent. So the dichotomy you posit here between _judging_ and _engaging in conversation_ isn't really a valid one.

Blackmailing saves lives

How would Jesus speak today into our culture , as God throughout scripture spoke to people in the culture which they are in. we as Christians have become largely irrelevant as our language , as our way of communicating have been stuck in a forgotten time. We seriously need to have a new look at scripture as evangelicals

@angietorok8389

2 жыл бұрын

The message of the Gospel is simple and timeless. People reject it today for exactly the same reasons they rejected it in the days of Jesus and the apostles. Nothing has changed except that those who rebel against it have countless more places to find support of their behavior.

My son is my best friend ( he’s 17 now) and he has a girlfriend ( first love) but for popularity he and her decide to switch genders 😣😖🥺?? I am Not! Supporting this? But I’m trying to wait out this awful Trend! He knows I was reborn into a life following Jesus when my alcoholism was swept away 9 years ago! Amen! He got baptized with me and his older sister as well. Including my husband, me and my kids. It’s rocky because I’m reborn and there believer’s ( but it’s weak)? I would love to start a channel helping kids know Jesus without All the Religion weight?😉God Bless You!!

@KM-zn3lx

Жыл бұрын

Praying for you! Just my viewpoint and not to blame, but I never called my kids my best friend! I told them I was their mother and that meant they might hate me sometimes.

@deeannkan7394

Жыл бұрын

@@KM-zn3lx yes! I agree with that, thank you for your reply 😇🙏🏻

Lots of Christian parents send their kids to college thinking it is the best choice for their future. Then the children lose their faith do to lies spread by college culture and professor pressure and teachings. Any Christian needs to be aware of the risk.

More freedom in Australia.

I hate to say it, but I think we've always lived in secular times. In some it was just better hidden than others🤔

Benedict option?

Look at those books to her right lined up. Isn't that great?

Ot goes something like La la la la I can't hear you.

I find it interesting that she said we're finding that we "no longer have certain values" in common with today's culture, but I disagree. There are LGB people and liberal non-Christians who are so disillusioned with, confused by and disagree with, gender/trans ideology, that they now find themselves standing on the same side with Christians against that change in worldview. Dr Kathleen Stock (lesbian professor) was interviewed by Allie Beth Stuckey (conservative christian podcaster) and she used the phrase "we find ourselves strange bedfellows" on this issue ( kzread.info/dash/bejne/rI2iyLx-h8vbdpM.html ) LOL...ok let me continue listening

@ChristianCatboy

2 жыл бұрын

Gosh... I checked out your link, but I don't think I'll be able to watch it. Framing the transgender experience, right from the outset, as being inherently tied up with "radical activism" and the "erasure of women" is... a bit too openly hostile for me to deal with! As a transgender Christian, I wish there were some way for me to talk to other Bible-believing Christians about the actual science behind hormone replacement therapy (it's basically just another medical / psychiatric treatment, to help people with a fairly rare condition; doesn't have to be understood as challenging the concept of manhood and womanhood for everyone), and how at least in my own case it seems to have clearly "born good fruit" and helped me escape deeply entrenched patterns of sin. Galatians 3:28 isn't being taken seriously enough by conservative Evangelical, imho. :-/

@machellovelivelife658

2 жыл бұрын

@@ChristianCatboy to be honest, just the one line "we find ourselves strange bedfellows" is the thing that stuck out in my memory the most about this interview that I watched back in 2020. And it did boggle my mind that a "Left leaning" lesbian would go on a "right leaning" Christian's podcast, that's what drew to watch. I don't remember much about the framing of it now. However, you saying that you are a "transgender Christian" reminded me of another interview I stumbled across and watched. I believe you may find the tone more watchable : kzread.info/dash/bejne/d62stsVmpaqwZrQ.html Take care, and enjoy the rest of your weekend

Do they do it by ignoring science, common sense, and rational thought?

Even science can be divided to low and high confidence disciplines. If we are talking about practical physics, math or chemistry very few deny what these revealed and very few can falsify and overwrite their discoveries (or improve them in any way). Talking about history, psychology or biology - specifically evolution theory, abiogenesis - are low confidence sciences because their hypothesises cannot be proven in the same way and they contain a lot of different contradictious assumptions/conclusions (alongside their schools). A lot of ppl do not see the distinction between these categories and they just generally state that science is the source of truth. However everybody can see that science, especially the low confidence fields, can change quite rapidly so they cannot give us/point to the truth. Let's see the Pythagorean Theorem. It stands for ~2500 years and proven from many different way. No one falsified it and most probably no one will (unless God change the rules of math itself). However, when history tells us what Napoleon thought about his campaign against Russia is quite subjective and full with assumptions. Particularly because we are getting farther from his age and so we are getting farther and farther to understand him. Even if we find more and more written materials. This does not mean that history is not a science, it is just not a science that we can trust as much as in eg. math. The implication of this distinction is that science itself cannot be the source of truth. See the details in www.amazon.com/Scientific-Approach-Evolution-Didnt-Biology/dp/1532988095 Also there is a big issue with eg. the contemporary sciences (particularly biology). It tries to be objective but rule out the possibility that God created the world. If we want to be objective, we should not rule it out but research in that direction too (even if we cannot reveal that indeed He created it... after all if we can prove it, we should not need to believe in Him).

Strikes me that Biblical Believing Christians are in no worse position than declared atheists in the USA :-) .

Sean, when you two get to heaven, will you all be still writing and selling books?

Science won't answer the question, "Did Jesus rise from the dead?" because it's not a valid question generated by an anomaly -- a question of intrinsic interest, no matter who states it. That's why Bart Ehrman keeps pointing-out that the question is theologically-biased, of no interst to Historical Science. Were there, say, a miracle-worker among us, certified to be about two thousand years old, Christian theology might have a valid question it can explain. But, Christian theology, explaining no anomaly at all, is "as a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing," in MacBeth's bleak world.

I think that there may be two main problems with this conversation. Firstly, Natasha keeps talking about "Christian / Biblical values" as if there is a core of agreed such values held by all Christians. As an atheist looking in from the outside it is self evident that Christians vary wildly in their interpretation of the Bible. I feel that Sean should have raised this very obvious point. Secondly, Natasha says that many people, including many Christians, base their views on a self centred view of what makes them happy, and also create or construct their morality based on a non Biblical view. However, I'd ever so gently suggest thast Natasha does precisely the same thing. In other words, she doesn't base her morality soley on the Bible. For example, surely she doesn't support slavery or the stoning to death of adulterers (and there are hundreds of other moral attrocities in the Bible) instead she cherry picks the bits of the Bible that she is comfortable with. Her entire platform of appealing to "Christian / Biblical values" just falls apart so easilly.

@tinacoleman1400

2 жыл бұрын

There are moral laws that are the same throughout time and there are civil and ceremonial laws that were followed all through history. Morality in and of itself is clearly set out in scripture. Natasha seemed crystal clear on her explanation of biblical world views and the fact that feelings were not controlling that but our evaluation of God and His Word being the ultimate foundation for those beliefs. Unless someone has something that out trumps our creator God (which no one does) doesn’t that just become a “self” issue?

@hhstark8663

2 жыл бұрын

When Natasha says "Bible", she is actually referring to *the New Testament* and she is referring to Christian orthodoxy, which is shared by ALL Christian denominations and has been in place for the last 2 millenia. Anyone who diverges from this Christian orthodoxy, is a heretic and deserves to be excommunicated. *Christian orthodoxy:* (historic and contemporary) - The trinity. - The deity of Christ. - The resurrection. - The atonement. - The sanctity of life (meaning no abortion and no murders and no bondage). - The sanctity of marriage between ONE adult man and ONE adult woman until death do them apart (meaning no divorce and no polygamy and no bestiality and no pedophilia and no fornication and no prostituition etc). - The New Covenent. - The abolishment of the Old Covenent. - The authority of the New Testament. All Christians - regardless of denomination - unanimously agree that the mosaic law has been abolished. The issues the original post raised, should be adressed to Ben Shapiro (not Natasha).

@labsquadmedia176

2 жыл бұрын

@Heynow I appreciate your points. I also appreciate your tone which seemed to be calm and kind (I appreciated the "ever so gently"). UPDATE- I've written way too much! I broke my answer into two posts. Sorry, I warmed to my subject and got carried away. Read if you want, if not maybe someone else will find it interesting. Cheers! --------- To your first point, although I would argue there is a difference between total consensus and general agreement, but you touch on an important point, the problem of how to identify what actually defines a Christian. I say "problem" but for many people, it's not really a problem. However, someone wanted to establish a definitive way to recognize a "true Christian" there are basically two possible approaches. The first is a RELIGIOUS approach: a Christian is someone who agrees to a particular set of statements. As you note, that path quickly becomes entangled as we take stock of the landscape and realize that a "wild variety" exists in what might constitute that "set of statements". Name-calling, arguments and assumptions ensue. We are left with the American legal position which is "your religion is whatever you say it is". The state provides no litmus test because it can't. This is not difficulty unique to Christianity (see "Being Hindu" by Hindol Sengupta) The second is a RELATIONAL approach: a Christian is someone who knows (i.e. has entered into an interpersonal, trust relationship) with God through Jesus. Before I'm charged with cheating and inserting a mini-list of my own, I'll just point out that this is how all normal friendships work. One person discloses himself to another person, then that second individual can trust that self revelation and act upon it or reject it and go on her way. A relationship is a dance of sharing (thoughts, desires, and emotions) and trusting response. If my wife suddenly says she doesn't like chocolate anymore, I act "in faith" by not buying her chocolate. She notes my respect for her desires and that strengthens our friendship. This dance of self-disclosure and trusting response is woven throughout the entire bible and culminates in the life of Jesus. (e.g. Jeremiah 31:31-34, Hebrews 1:1-2, and 1 John 5:12). Like many things in life it's not WHAT you know but WHO you know. That changes everything because the criteria for a relational connection is a relational connection, not a list of statements. How then do we address the variety of people who claim the title “Christian”? First, the list doesn’t mean anything. All that matters is the actual friendship. But then, just as our everyday friendships differ, so there will be variance in each Christian in their unique relationship to Jesus. However, since Jesus is the common denominator among Christians, everyone will have a consistent experience of him. It will be impossible to continue a real relationship with Jesus if one doesn't trust what he says about himself and what he expects in the relationship. That is just like any human relationship. However, Jesus said he personally engages with anyone who comes to him. This is not guesswork, it's a guided friendship as you respond to what he is saying (John 14:23). Additionally, it's obvious to someone who knows Jesus when another person is not in close relationship to Him. Just like if someone says they know a famous musician, but describe them all wrong (height, nationality, music style) a true fan will say, "I think you're thinking of someone else". It’s a distinction not based on a list of facts, but on a clearly recognizable quality of life. As in marriage, one's life patterns, choices, desires, etc. begin to be shaped by my love and friendship for your partner. Again these are all normal human reactions and underscore the point: while the RELIGIOUS approach is desirable to politicians, pundits, and social media arguments, the RELATIONAL approach is actually how Jesus, his Apostles (and the Hebrew Narrative) present the issue.

@labsquadmedia176

2 жыл бұрын

To your second point, your suggestion Natasha cherry picks her biblical adherence won’t be very convincing argument for Christians for a literary reason. I’ll explain by comparing the Bible with the Qur'an. The Qur'an is a collection of sayings, aphorisms, pronouncements and teachings. That is it's essential nature. According to Islam, the Quran was delivered to Muhammad over the course of many encounters. So although there is one human agent, different parts of the Qur'an appeared at different times. Later Qur'anic statements contradict earlier statements. This is not a problem for Muslims because later sayings "abrogate" earlier ones since they view the pronouncements by Muhammad as addressing changing conditions. What does this mean for Muslims when they read the Bible? Muslims reading the Bible come with no expectation of narrative or continuity. It means they have a reading preference for clear statements, rules, and sayings. It means that any story element in the Bible that does not include commentary and teaching is seen to be a tacit promotion of whatever is happening in the story. That's a disaster. Literarily, the Bible is not like the Qur'an. The Bible is essential a Narrative, a long-form story consisting of many smaller, interconnected stories. The main characters are God and humanity. The main plot is a rescue operation fueled by God's steadfast, loyal, affectionate love. Whether you believe the story or not, that's what it is. The story starts very broadly in Act 1 (Genesis 1-11), narrows down to a particular family who become a nation (Genesis 12 - Malachi), before widening out again to include all of humanity (Matthew 28:18-19). You have to read the Bible like you would any story. All the characters, plots, subplots, design patterns, and themes weave together. Sometimes the Bible reports an event without comment. The reader is supposed to know what's already happened in the story and fill in the details or commentary. For example, when God calls Abraham to follow him to a new land in Genesis 12, he is told to leave his father's household behind. Then the narrator tells us Abraham took his nephew, Lot, along on the journey. There is no scolding commentary from the narrator to highlight Abrahams lack of obedience and trust. However, during the next several chapters the reader notices that Lot is the center of all kinds of problems Abraham deals with. If Abraham had just listened to God, things would have turned out better. But the reader also sees how patient and willing God is to work with such a weak partner. With this in mind, let's examine your examples. (Remember, you don't have to believe the story, just allow it to say what it's saying. Whether Adam & Eve are meant to be figurative or literal doesn't make a lick of difference at this point.) You wrote "...surely she doesn't support slavery or the stoning to death of adulterers (and there are hundreds of other moral atrocities in the Bible)" Questions to ask when reading from a story-focused perspective: * How do these negative elements fit into the larger narrative? * Are the simply being reported or are they approved as a positive good? * Are they being allowed temporarily as a concession to human weakness or as a permanent institution? * Are they a command of God and if so what is the reason given? * Does the negative action fit into the broader narrative in a positive way? * In the story, who is God supposed to be? In other words, if he says someone is wicked and deserving of death, does the story present him as the ultimate judge of reality? * Are there any other similar sub-stories in the narrative that clarify or add to the plot? * If God commands something, is it a command to his covenant people, or a general command to all of humanity forever? * Is there a theological point being made? (e.g. The Giant clans are the descendants of rebellious spirits and must be eradicated in the Promised Land. The * Amalekites are the direct tool of the Serpent to defeat God's rescue plan.) * Does the bad thing really happen or is it hyperbolic to make a plot point? * Is God's judgment immediate or the culmination of patiently waiting and offering ample time to change? * Is God consistent in his standards and judgements with his own people? * What are the alternative nations and their gods doing? How do they compare in their treatment? * Does God treat his human partners according to modern standards and cultural ideas? On what basis can we criticize a particular action * How does all of this relate to the end of the story? * Does the audience know something (a sub-text) that I am missing which would inform my understanding? * Did this actually happen in practice? How did the human judges utilize particular laws? Is this case law or statutory law? (Spoiler alert: ancient near-Eastern law codes are case law meaning a law may have a role as a reference without ever being directly applied. This is the case of Hammurabi's Code which is commonly revered throughout the ancient world but not referenced in actual reports of cases) Examples: Solomon is described (without comment) as having acquired heaps of Gold, horses and chariots from Egypt, and hundreds of foreign wives. Ancient Hebrew readers who know the story would read that and think, "Uh oh!" Hebrew readers of Abrahams almost-sacrifice of Isaac already know that they exist, so Isaac must have lived. They would be thinking, “What's going to happen next? What does this say about Abraham's relationship to God? Did this come out of the blue? What story clues show that Abraham is finally trusting God? If Abraham kills Isaac, how will God keep his promise to make Abraham the Father of many nations through Isaac like he said earlier in the story? Early Christians would think: ”How does Isaac's near sacrifice prefigure Jesus ?” Slavery--In the ancient world, everyone had slaves. Even slaves could have slaves in some cultures. God doesn't command slavery, he set out how ISRAEL was to treat slaves. A huge step up (if followed). Why didn't God just ban slavery? There's nothing inherently wrong with working for someone else. Even today, unless you own your own business, you work for someone else if you want to live. It’s a choice who you work for, but it’s not a choice to work. What's reprehensible is violence, working people into the ground, treating them as inferior. Remember, at the beginning of the story "He mad mankind in His image". All humans are declared image-bearers of God. "Remember that you were slaves" God reminds Israel. Also, in many instances (in the ancient world!), it would not be doing a favor for a slave to no longer be a slave. They would have no guarantee of food. They would have no place of protection from wild animals (significant danger in the wilderness) or bandits. They would have no honor, no resources, no connections. The ancient world (and much of the world today) was based upon deep relationships of honor and obligation. In Genesis, Abraham was preparing to make on of his slaves his heir since no child had come. That seems quite a different situation than our experience in 19th century America. In the New Testament, people are freed from the slavery of sin, the threat of judgment, and are adopted into a new family. Free or slave, it didn't matter, all were part of the one family of God. Jesus and the apostles weren't starting a political movement, though Paul promoted manumission if a slave could do it. Our new master was Jesus, the suffering servant who gave his life so we could become "sons of God". Earthly masters were not the ultimate authority. As a result of Christianity, slavery practices in Rome began diminishing. One book in the New Testament specifically deals with a Master/Slave relationship between two Christians (Philemon). Stoning Adulterers--This was a law given only to God's covenant people. Adultery is so destructive to people, families, and communities, and is so contrary to God’s character that a clear distinction is made against the practices of the surrounding nations. Remember, Israel had voluntarily entered into a generational covenant with God to be his people which meant their way of living was intended to demonstrate what God valued and the blessing the came from living accordingly. Look at what comes of adulterous relations in the overall story. Also understand that Israel is said to be “married” to God and their repeated “infidelities” feature largely in the story. Yet God refuses to permanently destroy or even permanently separate them from himself. Read Hosea, a lived-out parable of God’s faithfulness toward his adulterous people through the life of a prophet. Point of interest: no one is ever stoned in the Bible for adultery. Only one time (in the New Testament) is it ever portrayed as a possibility. Joseph, thinking Mary was pregnant by another man was about to divorce her quietly so as not to "expose her to public disgrace", not "so as to keep her from being stoned to death." Not a hard and fast rule, then. Stoning is unknown in the New Testament communities. One reason for this results from Jesus challenge against the hypocrisy of those about to stone a woman ("caught in adultery" -- but where is the man?). Additionally Jesus enacted a new contract (Jeremiah 31:31-34, Luke 22:0). In the New Christian communities, expulsion rather than stoning, is the method of discipline for sexual sin. And that expulsion is only designed to bring someone to their senses. (1 Corinthians 5:1-5). Since the story continues past these negative events, we expect problems to be addressed, mysteries to be explained, and wrongs set right.

@heynow1388

2 жыл бұрын

@@hhstark8663 Hi Many thanks for your reply. I'm always genuinely puzzled when a Christian says (as you do) that the Mosaic law has been abolished, so perhaps you can help me. For example, the Ten Commandments are in the Old Testament, yet most Christians still seem to think they apply. Are you saying they no longer apply? There are countless other laws and commandments in the Old Testament which most Christians seem to believe and think they should obey. However, my biggest problem with the New Covenant argument is that Jesus seems to say the opposite. I'm refering, of course, to Mathew 5:17-20 (ESV) which has Jesus saying . . . . "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fullful them. For trully I say to you until heaven and earth pass away not an iota, not a jot will pass from the Law until all is acomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called the least in the kingdom of heaven . . . " Jesus could only be referring to the Old Testament as (self evidently) the New Testament hadn't been written yet and to me and many people it seems very clear that Jesus is endorsing and reinforcing all the Laws and commendments of the Old Testament, so I really struggle to see the sense of the New Covenant arguement as it seems to go against a very clear statement from Jesus. Can you explain this key quote to me?

I'm not going to use a book that permits you to pass down owned humans to my children as inheritance as my guide book for life. Sorry Sean.

Christian world view: accept Jesus as your lord and savior and trust he will guide you through the Holy Spirit. KISS

Why is faith so weak?

What exactly Is a bibical moral view in her eyes....oh wait she just addressed it. Eh need a bit more what a bibical worldview is.

When she says 'God' she means a book (other) humans have written.

@robertdonofrio7342

2 жыл бұрын

If God wrote the Bible and dropped it from heaven I doubt you’d accept that. So for God to directly lead men to reveal His plan for the world in a form we will understand makes sense to me. To observe the specific prophesies, common story through out scripture and universal lives changed by faith in the one who the Bible points to; Jesus. To read the whole Bible and then say “I don’t believe God is behind it” is possible. To see and spend time with real Jesus followers who have believed the Bible and accepted Jesus as their savior, would show you Gods heart to a hurting world.

@frankwhelan1715

2 жыл бұрын

@@robertdonofrio7342 It's funny when theists, (of all shapes,) say if you don't take fairly mundane things as evidence,(like stuff people write in ancient books) you won't believe ANYTHING no matter how good the evidence (God coming trough the clouds and appearing the whole world, somthing like you suggested) or anything better than claims that other fallible humans make, (esp ancient humans who believed a lot of incredible stuff) as somebody said,people can write anything,paper never refused ink

Her conclusion about higher authority is just silly. Naturally "Self" is the highest authority. It's YOUR PERSONAL interpretation of the Bible that dictates how you live your life. Why do you think there are so many different Christian sects and variations? Jewish people also follow the Bible and have reached a completely different conclusion. So, you see God exists, his teachings exist and thus higher authority exists SOLELY in the form YOUR own mine has chosen.

I wonder if Natasha's husband ever has to tune her out.

If someone is going to talk this much without taking a breath, it would be great if they had something worth saying.

29:55 if you read the Bible literally and follow it literally you know then the world is flat and science is wrong

natasha- the bible is so contradictory and full of errors how can you make it your base of truth??? Sean won't answer the hard questions or take on pinecreek or bart erhman will you?

@hhstark8663

2 жыл бұрын

If the original post had read the appendix of *"Evidence demands a verdict"* (2nd edition), he would have known that Sean already has interacted with Ehrmann. If anyone wants a refutation of these alleged "contradictions" in video-form, go to the youtube-channel *"inspiring philosophy"* and watch his playlist _"Bible Contradictions Refuted"_ .

@NI-pi2ne

2 жыл бұрын

@@hhstark8663 just because sean said he interacted with erhman does not mean he did. Sean does not answer the real tough questions that totally undermine the faith. Why would I make a video when there are many out there by erhman, pinecreek and mythvision! Sean is blind leading the blind.

@josephharding2668

2 жыл бұрын

Could you please give me an example of one of these contradictions? that's quite a serious claim.

@hhstark8663

2 жыл бұрын

​@@josephharding2668 I will give one for him. Before I do that, I want to highlight that contradictions do NOT influence historical reliability. There are contradictions in the testimonies of the sinking Titanic. Does that mean Titanic did not sink? No, of course not. Titanic still sunk. Something can be historically reliable, *without* being inerrant. Here is one example they use: In one instance, it is described that Jesus was grew up in Nazareth. In another instance, it is described that Jesus was born in Betlehem. How would one resolve this discrepancy? The answer, is that small families move around, which is a common thing. I personally was born in a small city, before I moved to a larger city.

@NI-pi2ne

2 жыл бұрын

@@josephharding2668 there are many- here is one to begin- Do you believe jesus is god? So how is it jesus says love your neighbor in the new testament but yet commanded the slaughter of innocent children and babies in the old testament - on nation was even at peace with israel. let me know when you want the next one Do you know when the gospels were written? do you know when the gospels were given their names/titles?

God is not real.

It is ironic that today's church stands against cultural conformity, while today's church also appeals to cultural conformity when explaining difficult bible passages.