James seems to truly enjoy speaking with Doug:)

"I can read it and appreciate this and differ with that." Imagine that. If only the Christian community at large could get their heads (and hearts!) around this one thing, we'd all be in much better shape.

Two absolute gifts to the church, more of these please!

Must admit I cringed a little bit when James White mentioned the Netherlands. Not because he was wrong, mind you, but because I am Dutch Reformed in Australia and we just cut ties less than a decade ago with the Dutch Reformed Church in the Netherlands over their descent into liberalism, and the wounds are still pretty fresh. We definitely need another reform within the Churches first.

@ZephaniahL

Жыл бұрын

What fo you think of this new united church in the NL since 2004, both Calvinist and Lutheran?

@HartyBiker

Жыл бұрын

@@ZephaniahL I haven't heard of this church, but it doesn't surprise me that there is an offshoot church. All I know is that the churches we had sister church relations with became very liberal in their doctrines, allowing gay marriage and so on and we kept relations as long as we could hoping to sway them back to the truth, but recently had to cut ties as they were too far backslidden. Not a happy time for us as it is where our heritage is from, and it has left a lot of people churchless who don't agree with the current Dutch Reformed churches but don't know where to go. As I have said I know much more locally about the Free Reformed Churches in Australia than I do overseas.

@gregb6469

Жыл бұрын

@@HartyBiker -- Perhaps you all can go farther down the Reformation road and become Baptists.

@HartyBiker

Жыл бұрын

@@gregb6469 haha you don't know Dutch Reformed people 🤣

@ezbody

Жыл бұрын

"Liberalism" is what the older generation ALWAYS accuses the younger generation of. And yet, it's liberalism that pushes the society forward, dragging the "faithful" ones, kicking and screaming, with it. 😏 One would think that everyone would figure it out by now, unfortunately, learning from the past isn't for everyone, so it seems.

If we took half the time we fight each other and fought the darkness...

James is slowly transforming into John Calvin.

@thereisnopandemic

Жыл бұрын

One day we will see him accept Covenant Theology and embrace Infant Baptism, just like Abraham accepted infant Circumcision. Abraham did not wait until Isaac could believe

@raifbarrett6739

Жыл бұрын

@@thereisnopandemic That would be so cool, can you imagine White going Presbyterian. 😂

@Shiloh3498

Жыл бұрын

That won't happen gentlemen, because White knows that the New Covenant is a better Covenant where every member is born again. (Circumsized in heart.) 😉

@1001thhill

Жыл бұрын

don't hold your breath, you'll turn blue.

@LM-mq2pj

Жыл бұрын

@@thereisnopandemic They did many things in the old testament that aren't required in the New. It makes no sense to baptize infants. Each person must accept Christ. No one else can do it for them

One of the foremost constitutional theorists of the founding generation, John Adams, observed, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” He wasn't the only Founding Father to hold this view.

@menknurlan

Жыл бұрын

John Adams wasnt a christian though

@TimeToFlush

Жыл бұрын

Is it possible to have a constitutional type government with an immoral people at this stage of the game. How many are imprisoned for Jan 6 and what are they charged with? To look at any piece of paper for what to do when no one is looking at the piece of paper in the midst of a war that is successfully taking land and capital right out from underneath me and my family's feet is in my book a bit foolish. We need to organize and start giving legitimate reasons for being locked up. Where is the "rod" of righteousness? That is what we need to work on.

@Psalm144.1

Жыл бұрын

@@menknurlan True, he was a Unitarian in the end. That doesn’t make his statement untrue.

@ThethomasJefferson

Жыл бұрын

@@menknurlan I guess you better go back in time and tell him that.

@ThethomasJefferson

Жыл бұрын

@@Psalm144.1 how did you come to that conclusion, that John Adams was a Unitarian?

He said at the beginning it's hard not to say something these days. Think about that... Don't let the urgency around us influence us toward foolishness / anxious words. Let us be measured and careful, and most importantly, gracious in our communicating the Truth to this generation of anxiety filled people!

@friedricengravy6646

Жыл бұрын

As they both literally speak into microphones connected to a platform that consistently reaches thousands of people. Dont let fire fighters start fires & then tell u they r fighting the good fight for all of us. If u dont get the point: the woke boogie man has become the click fuel for streamers & electoral fuel for right wing politicians. Otherwise, its not really a thing. Certainly not in government. Cultural issues r sorted out by society not government.

Listened again, loved the discussion. For postmil folks to discuss how things really are going from bad to worse, pushing the exuberance of a Christianized compendium of nations more into the future, is appreciated. It is a comfort to know that regardless of our differences in millennial understandings, the basis is the solid trust in the Word of God as sufficient for truth and practice.

i love these conversations so much.

@LuisBragagnolo

Жыл бұрын

Is this an "only white" religion? It has all the ingredients that you guys hate all none white people, especially all people who weren't born here.

@oracleoftroy

Жыл бұрын

@@LuisBragagnolo Not sure what's up with the anti-whiteism, but it seems about as "only white" as math and classical music and state ID cards, or everything else that the left reflexively calls racist. I think segregation, raced based hiring, and reparations based on skin color are far more racist, but those examples of actual racism are things the left loves, so you might not agree. If you are looking for a more skin-color based group, there is Black Christian Nationalists, White nationalists, Black Nationalists, and various Latino/Black/Dalit/etc liberation theology to consider. You can probably stick any color or ethnicity you want in front of those terms and find some group. Christian Nationalism is about Christian identity and its implications at a national level and isn't restricted by skin color.

We need a part 2… and 3…. Uh and 4 on this subject! Great discussion!

@LuisBragagnolo

Жыл бұрын

So, are you guys going to start expeling Spanish people from your congragation and warning your children do not get married with thier children? Because Stephen Wolfe mention that in his book.

The way things are going in America, and with President Trump's conviction, Christian nationalism is looking pretty good right now. The time for talk is over.

2 of my favorite Pastors! Theological juggernauts!

@lovetraveler1

Жыл бұрын

At least Doug is. 😂

@repentorperish1386

Жыл бұрын

@Mark Love they agree on like 98% so ....

@saberconcepts5059

Жыл бұрын

Absolutely!!!!

@JonathanTheZombie

Жыл бұрын

@@lovetraveler1 sigh

@johfu4705

Жыл бұрын

mine too!

(15:28) _On the same day that the Congress ratified the final language of the First Amendment, they proclaimed a national day of thanksgiving in prayer_ September 25, 1789 _Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me “to recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty Lord, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness”: Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the 26th day of November next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the Beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have since enjoyed; for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enabled to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted; for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and, in general, for all the great and various favors which He has been pleased to confer upon us_ -Pres. George Washington

LOVE these! Thanks, you two!!

Love you two! This conversation was amazing. Like water on dry tonsils in today's world. Two people having a conversation. Wow!

I am Baptist and a CN

Dr. White + NQNQ = ❤full

This is the first time I've ever noticed the dilithium chamber on top of White's bookshelf.

Great discussion. Thanks!

Agree. Great discussion.

Two amazing Godly men!

I remember learning as a child that Christians in Rome were persecuted precisely because they would NOT put a statue of the Emperor in their place of worship which was then the accepted way of affirming Roman patriotism and loyalty to the Empire. How many Christians today put the flag of a country which is a world leader in abortion in their place of worship without even thinking twice about it? A man cannot serve two masters. If you are willing to kill a Christian in Russia, Iraq or any other country on behalf of your NATION, the nation is your true MASTER and your insincere Christianity is just a hobby.

@robertlewis6915

Жыл бұрын

Quick point of order: the American flag, as a symbol, is not a statement of worship towards America. That said, it is obviously unsuitable to put the flag inside the church. Whether or not killing in the name of one's nation is moral depends on whether you're at war, have complied with just war theology, and act from no ill motives.

@malachi7948

Жыл бұрын

“There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy: who art thou that judgest another? James 4:2 There is one lawgiver and it follows from this that the earthly ruler does not have legislative power. The earthly ruler instead has executive power (Romans 13). And the powers that be are ordained of God. So authority is not with the people nor is the Christian statesman beholden to share his executive office with the people, whether it be through democracy or with representatives through parliament. Rather, democracy is due recompense for the sins of America. “For the transgression of a land many are the princes thereof: but by a man of understanding and knowledge the state thereof shall be prolonged.” Proverbs 28:2 Yet the earthly ruler should seek charity for his earthly subjects, knowing fully that his accountability is only Jesus Christ and not to the people. “For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.” Galatians 1:10-12 The ruler is just as much accountable to Jesus Christ as the subject is. This is the basic principle behind what is called Christian nationalism today. But this idea does not have a clear articulation and it is not explicitly grounded on the one and only rock of our salvation. If the Christian churches in America do not strictly proclaim that Jesus Christ is the one and only God, and they do not teach his words nor obey his words, then they should never expect an earthly ruler from the narrow path which leads to life, instead they will continually be ruled over by unbelievers and they will see heathen customs proliferate in their lands. “I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.” John 8:24 “Then said they unto him, Who art thou? And Jesus saith unto them, Even the same that I said unto you from the beginning.” John 8:25 “Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he.” Isaiah 41:4 “See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand. For I lift up my hand to heaven, and say, I live for ever. If I whet my glittering sword, and mine hand take hold on judgment; I will render vengeance to mine enemies, and will reward them that hate me.” Deuteronomy 32:39-41 “And to the angel of the church in Pergamos write; These things saith he which hath the sharp sword with two edges; I know thy works, and where thou dwellest, even where Satan's seat is: and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth. But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication. So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate. Repent; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth. He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it. And unto the angel of the church in Thyatira write; These things saith the Son of God, who hath his eyes like unto a flame of fire, and his feet are like fine brass; I know thy works, and charity, and service, and faith, and thy patience, and thy works; and the last to be more than the first. Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols. And I gave her space to repent of her fornication; and she repented not. Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds. And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works. But unto you I say, and unto the rest in Thyatira, as many as have not this doctrine, and which have not known the depths of Satan, as they speak; I will put upon you none other burden. But that which ye have already hold fast till I come. And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations: And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father. And I will give him the morning star. He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.” Revelation 2:12-28 Jesus Christ is he who searcheth the reins and the hearts, he is the Everlasting father, the only Saviour, the only wise God; the one and only God: “I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings.” Jeremiah 17:10

@malachi7948

Жыл бұрын

The earthly ruler is to bear the sword, rather his office is a ministry of God: “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. Fior rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.” Romans 13:1-7 A Christian is not permitted to resist mandatory conscription in military service. Christ did not command the centurion to abandon his post, rather he said that he had greater faith than all of Israel: “And when Jesus was entered into Capernaum, there came unto him a centurion, beseeching him, And saying, Lord, my servant lieth at home sick of the palsy, grievously tormented. And Jesus saith unto him, I will come and heal him. The centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof: but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed. For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this man, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it. When Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel. And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven. But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. And Jesus said unto the centurion, Go thy way; and as thou hast believed, so be it done unto thee. And his servant was healed in the selfsame hour.” Matthew 8:5-13

I love the Star Trek lamp!!!

Well that was disappointingly short. Can't you guys extend the discussion out?

"There is a securlist consensus, currently." Yea, and it acts like a religion.

@raevj

2 ай бұрын

Yes, Leftists worship their ideology like a religion..

I think Wolfe's quote regarding baptism is absolutely spot on! He's exactly right in what he said

Dear Uncles 👋😊

I think the bigger disconnect between Baptistic churches and the kind of nation under discussion here, and something like a Presbyterian church and this kind of nation is not the baptism but the *government*. The "every individual gets a vote" congregationalism tends to conflict with the kind of more federal type of government in either a Presbyterian church or a Republic or similar nation.

@cosmictreason2242

Жыл бұрын

Disenfranchised members seem a bigger problem

@TheJesusNerd40

Жыл бұрын

Another problem is that 'the founding fathers were Christian' myth. They were actually religious deists that were loosely affliated with Christianity.

@cosmictreason2242

Жыл бұрын

@@TheJesusNerd40 the postmil theonomist guys are being very clear that they’re not claiming the ffs were born again, but that they had a distinctively comprehensively Christianized worldview. Deist or not, they were far more “Christian” than any “my private personal faith is very important to me” politician these days. And the cause is because the culture was heavily Christian influenced. That’s inescapable

Yes I hear both of you and respect your views..... But that horse has bolted long ago. The preaching of the gospel isn't even properly done in our churches at large and to put this sort of thing in motion into the church while they can't even be faithful to their commission is truly mind boggling and will never work

No Quarter November?

My problem with Christian Nationalism is that depending on who is defining the term I could either be fully on board or in armed opposition. From the sound of things, Doug here takes the part I like the sound of.

@nhtom8

Жыл бұрын

I share your skepticism and your optimism. However, things don't always go the way promised. Care to be "baptized" in that lightless pit they mentioned? Count on jealousy and pride. Our founders did.

@Cjinglaterra

Жыл бұрын

@@nhtom8 yeah, generally I just say I’m not a Christian Nationalist, or a theonomist, for that matter. All it takes is looking at my neighbors. There’s a lot of Baptists, Pentecostals, and Roman Catholics around, and I’m pretty sure I’m the only Anglican in my county.

@oracleoftroy

Жыл бұрын

@@Cjinglaterra It seems obvious to me that humans are sinful and going to do wicked acts, so the question is whether we would rather have our nations based off of whatever seems right in the eyes of man, or to base our laws on what God has proscribed. I think God knows better than man what is good for us. When man messes up, what do we appeal to for correction? Cultural norms? The current status quo? Or God's word? If we think that the "baptism" of the lightness pit was wrong, is it wrong because we judge it to be today, but maybe it wasn't actually wrong a few centuries ago, or was it eternally wrong per God's law? I think basing our laws on the general equity of God's law is how we avoid those sorts of things in the first place while making sure we have a solid foundation to correct where we inevitably get things wrong.

@ArchitectOfTheApocalypse

Жыл бұрын

Don't worry: the term Christian nationalism was coined by antiChristians to make bible-believing Christians the bad guys. This is the truth.

@geraldredlinger9176

Жыл бұрын

well put - and same in regards to opposing some people and their conception. Funny thing is the term is 10 seconds old and people act like, it is some consecrated reformed term that we need to defend. It isn't. It may or may not be useful and may or may not map onto ideas and thought forms of value

Heard this today, Sunday afternoon, after preaching on Premillenial Christian Nationalism part 1 (at least one, maybe two more messages) as a deep dive into II Thessalonians 2:1, 2 on the parousia of our Lord. Yes, we can join in on this one wholeheartedly. I do think the postmil view is not accurate, but for us it is a 'love your neighbor' command. Either way, as a witness to the gospel and a hope of revival should God so move, would love to see it and participate. "Christian" would be an adjective to the noun "Nation" to us, a description of a nation whose God is the Sovereign Creator and whose Word is soundly moral law to the nation will bless any society that has it at its base. What an opportunity when preaching the gospel of salvation for sinners who are convicted of sin by the Spirit of God.

@gayleliman3423

Жыл бұрын

Can you define Premillennial Nationalism for me please.

@craigchambers4183

Жыл бұрын

@@gayleliman3423 In general, the return of our Lord takes place, and He rules on the throne of David in Jerusalem, Israel over all the nations for 1,000 years followed by the judgment of the wicked and the eternal kingdom. Specific to my understanding, believers go through the tribulation; not usual in premil today, but was usual among the early church and is designated historical premil by some. The issue between us is called by many dispensationalism, meaning the physically chosen of God (the Jews with the national rule of God in Israel) will have the promises to them by grace fulfilled. Israel with the Son of David, the Messiah, the Mediator (God and Man, Jesus) will actually rule physically present on the earth. The practical implications, to me, is how we see our role in the present.

@craigchambers4183

Жыл бұрын

@@gayleliman3423 This is my definition of premil nationalism, that believers (Christians) who love their neighbors in this nation (America) take action in accordance with the truth which will be in the best interest of said neighbors. Spiritually, this means we share the gospel so that sinners whom God has chosen believe; they are regenerate in heart, believing in their Lord Jesus in His substitutionary atonement on the cross for His people, His bodily resurrection and attestation by God as to His work in fact was actually propitious, effective and accepted by Him, and His ascension to the right hand of God in heaven from where He rules the mediatorial kingdom (He is the mediator between God and man). Temporally, this means His people love their neighbors as image bearers, doing to them as we would want to have done to us in this life so that all may live in peace and that the gospel might be advanced unhindered. In practice, this means we vote according to holiness with the morals (the law of God) in mind as this would bless the nation. We speak out the truth in love, and resist the evil one's deceptions. So, we love our tribe/town/city, we love our nation being members together with others of like culture and polity, and we care for the world of people as neighbor nations or peoples without the desire for a globalism of all nations. God designed us as nations for a reason, and those nations will end, but not until everything written has come to pass. The premillennial understanding is that Christ will rule for 1,000 years on the throne of David on earth in Jerusalem, ruling all the nations through the nation of Israel, fulfilling prophetic promises because God is a faithful God. This rule, in our view, only comes when Jesus does, and only by His doing, not by ours. Therefore, Christian Nationalism to us does not mean we are implementing the mediatorial kingdom on behalf of Jesus before He comes, and even when He does come with us following Him, He Himself will exercise all of civic and religious power and authority in Person, albeit we will also reign with Him. This does not square with the postmil view, but we are not radically apart: neither sees believers employing the sword to make people believe in our day; both agree that is a work of the Holy Spirit. Both are using words, and those that are from the Lord, the Word of God - the sword of the Spirit.

@gayleliman3423

Жыл бұрын

@@craigchambers4183 Thank you, I appreciate your taking the time to explain in more detail. I am a pre mill believer and I recently heard Michelle Bachman address Evangelical Christian Nationalism, as something a lot of people to the left say is dangerous, which I found preposterous. I agree with your views, and as Messianic believers, my husband and I disagree with post or amillennial eschatoligical perspective of the Millennial Kingdom.

@craigchambers4183

Жыл бұрын

@@gayleliman3423 I used to try and be 'non-political' from the pulpit as that is what the EFCA (you can search KZread Conversations That Matter Is the EFCA going woke? to see me discuss them) and most other evangelicals through the years practiced, sort of. What I found by the Lord's grace this past year was how these organizations actual promote this among conservatives while doing quite the opposite with the 'liberal' strain of church members. I have since returned my ordination, or literally ask them to remove it and they agreed. My friend, another pastor, was unbelievably 'charged' with Christian Nationalism by promoting morality among EFCA churches and for us all to vote well. Nothing to do with violence, of course, but they defrocked him the same day my ordination was removed. He wrote "Woke-Free Church" which exposed things, and then released "Blood-Red Church" which released right as he was punished. Jeff Kliewer. is his name. Now I know better; no one is 'neutral,' least of all the evangelical organizations of which few are blameless.

This is no way Dr. White's sweater vest would comply with Star Fleet regulations. If the anti-matter containment field fails, and there is a warp core breach, that sweater is going to light up like a Christmas tree.

Please look up Dr. Steve Turley.

Hey Can you do a video on papal infallability

In the end, the only way I see Christian Nationalism could ever work is: 1) God brings a true reformation and revival in the hearts of the vast majority of society. 2) People define what a true Christian is and are not wishy-washy on the definition.

@UnlimitedMercy

Жыл бұрын

Agreed. Pastor Doug in his book Mere Christendom does say that you can’t just plop down Christian laws on an unchristian society. He argues that it will be accomplished through, “The folly of preaching.”

@jeremyzitzow4417

Жыл бұрын

@@UnlimitedMercy My problem is too many believers can't come to an agreement on defining what a true Christian is. For example, Doug's definition of what constitutes a true Christian is surely different than James' definition, whose is also different than mine. How could there ever be consensus? I know Doug doesn't like denominationalism, but in no way will a majority of denominations budge on their definitions.

@UnlimitedMercy

Жыл бұрын

@@jeremyzitzow4417 That is definitely a large hurdle to clear. From what I understand his position would be counting as brothers anyone willing to hold to the basic fundamentals of the Apostles Creed. And I think his point that church discipline would need to be taken seriously is an important thing to note. This discipline would also be something that would come through reformation and revival within the church first, as judgement starts with the household of God. I think we would be in agreement that a mere Christendom is not something that we as the church can manufacture, it must be done by the Holy Spirit.

@jeremyzitzow4417

Жыл бұрын

@@UnlimitedMercy The problem is, James, myself and others do not believe the Apostles Creed goes far enough on defining what a true believer is. Hence, you can see how this is going to be an incredibly huge problem.

@UnlimitedMercy

Жыл бұрын

@@jeremyzitzow4417 I agree, it is pretty foundational, without much further doctrinal explanation, ie: justification by grace alone through faith alone. Completely absent. At the same time I think that is where the local church will need to reform in the effective teaching of doctrine and holding their members accountable through church discipline. Additionally, those doctrines that further clarify our faith and enlighten our hearts to the glories of God, may not be necessary for salvation. One of my favorite illustrations of this comes from Alistair Begg when he talks about the thief on the cross. If he were theoretically pressed on theological or doctrinal matters his answer would boil down to, “The man on the middle cross said I could come.” In short, I think the church needs to come to a point of being able to look at someone who affirms something as simple as the apostles creed as a brother, and yet be willing to differ on the issues that are not essential. For those issues that are essential, such as salvation by grace through faith, correct those who are in error.

As Isaiah says, "destruction is decreed overflowing with righteousness". I believe this is not only about the exiles returning, but also referring to the ending of the old covenant and Jerusalem's destruction in 70AD, which confirmed the new covenant as the only eternal covenant for God's people by grace through faith. Nonetheless, it can be example for us that righteousness often comes on the heals of redemptive judgements. No pain, no gain as they say. For though your people Israel be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them will return. Destruction is decreed, overflowing with righteousness. Isaiah 10:22

Doug your position seems impractical and overly idealistic. You think around 75% of the U.S, population can convert to Christianity, through a move of the Holy Spirit but on the other hand, that would not lead to the establishment of an over-arching united Christian denomination of the United States? Please explain how that adds up.

Hey Doug, your thoughts on Mike Winger?

@nathanielkeane8462

Жыл бұрын

Great guy, great brother, thankful for him, great and necessary apologetic content, and Calvary chapel has 🗑 theology in a lot of areas.

@billyrubin2065

Жыл бұрын

@@nathanielkeane8462 thanks, Doug!

@JB-em9po

Жыл бұрын

Lol

@nathanielkeane8462

Жыл бұрын

@@billyrubin2065 😂 i mean, it’s kind of a random question to ask on a Christian nationalism video. Like Doug is gonna scroll the comments and give his Mike Winger take, assuming he has one.

Doug, thank you for setting out plainly your take on the whole Christian nationalism subject. What you've said makes a lot of sense. I was initially concerned that there were some warning lights that might have tipped Christian nationalism into MAGA territory. I can see now that's definitely not the case and it's absolutely not where you're coming from at all.

@ArchitectOfTheApocalypse

Жыл бұрын

What's wrong with MAGA?

@andrewgd1858

Жыл бұрын

MAGA is not about Christian movement at all . There is no one says center is Christ and transforming by God’s law . Just about Trump fever plus Qanon fever mix up , in the end that is humanism movement.

@TimeToFlush

Жыл бұрын

@@ArchitectOfTheApocalypse I think he is a pawn in the hand of the zionist.

@randomango2789

Жыл бұрын

@@ArchitectOfTheApocalypse It’s the fact that Trump is an instigator and a cult leader. I remember back in 2015 when people were saying that Trump was the next King Cyrus, or that he was the next King David who would bring back American “Christian” values. Based on Trump’s character and lifestyle, it seems that he’s not a Christian at all and he’s openly admitted that he’s never bothered to repent of his sins. I found it alarming that people were seeing him as a “Christian” president when he clearly does not resemble that. The ironic thing is that all the Protestant Conservative Christians who would defend him would abuse Matthew 7:1 to excuse his sinful behavior, which is similar to when Progressive “Christians” abuse Matthew 7:1 to excuse homosexuality and other sins. It’s also ironic because the Protestant Christians who defend him sound EXACTLY like Catholics when they defend their popes

@ezbody

Жыл бұрын

It definitely is the case. If one pays careful attention, one would notice that the "Christian" nationalism playing field is infested with all kinds of con-men, swindlers and manipulators, whose main goal is political power, and nothing else. There isn't even a hint of Christ there, in fact, many of them don't even know how to properly imitate being a Christian, nor do they even care. They know that no one will bother to verify who they really are, anyway.

“Well uh David was novice in battle…” Some Doug spirit said, from some inner room, as if speaking back from both the future and the past. It is written, and accounted before David slew Goliath: “I have seen a son of Jesse of Bethlehem who knows how to play the lyre. He is a brave man and a warrior. He speaks well and is a fine-looking man. And the LORD is with him.” And also it is written: “Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.” Come armies of Doug and James “undead,” those who hide in inner rooms and gnaw on dead men’s bones, those who howl at your own false light, and who beat the air for the sake of your carnal lusts, while creeping about seeking blood, let us reason together. If you are not as brute beasts, let us reason together. Your champions will not condescend to protect your wicked works, unless you pay them money to do so. So why then give them any money at all, since your money is passing away?

@ryonrobynson

Жыл бұрын

@@kylesimmons9457 are you asking for an interpreter as one truly blind, or are you thinking to mock me, because you presume I’m bound and blind folded? Are there no interpreters among the seminarians these days, who can read plain English?

@ryonrobynson

Жыл бұрын

@@kylesimmons9457, are you sure? Because I’m fairly sure, that female eldership is still opposed by these seminarians on the internet.

"I can read it and appreciate this and differ with that." If less Christians treated the Bible this way, we'd be a lot better off.

Gentlemen, you two are some of the best that Christianity has to offer in our present age. And yet, having said that I just want to remind both of you that this nation was once a country that had a sort of "Christian Nationalism" at its founding and I would suggest that what each of you desire can be found there by returning to "We hold these truths to be self evident...." And a good place to reintroduce our current culture to that vision, I submit that Ben Franklins speech at the Constitutional Convention on June 28, 1787 be submitted as evidence of what it means to be in favor of a "Christian Nationalism" .

@tdawg6000

Жыл бұрын

@@1Whipperin this is revisionist history fiction

@ManassehJones

Жыл бұрын

@Bill Baehr Spiritually, I'd have to agree with your linguistic connotations on "liberty" and "freedom." What's your position on the Puritans during that time, relative to your observations?

@ManassehJones

Жыл бұрын

@Bill Baehr As far as I know they were apolitical as far as any desired doctrinal Nationalism. I'm not sure of their stance on the Revolutionary War. You know much more than me, it appears. That's why I asked.

@virtualpilgrim8645

Жыл бұрын

The US 1790 Naturalization Act defined citizens as white persons of good character. Not white Christians.

@Psalm144.1

Жыл бұрын

@@1Whipperin Tyrants are not ordained of God because God is not the author of sin. Tyrants as a man can be resisted just like a son can resist a father who is abusive, or just like a criminal who breaks into your house. It’s not sin to resist tyranny. When resisting, people are not resisting the govt office, they’re resisting a man acting outside their office.

Great discussion. Wolfe and Wilson’s understanding of baptism is somewhat back to font. Many historical reformed theologians correctly made a distinction between covenant community and covenant fellowship. Israelite children and slaves were born into or were part of the covenant community but there needed to be a special work of grace and regeneration to become part of the covenant fellowship (not all of Israel are Israel). The children of baptists in virtue of their birth are part of the covenant community and hence we do not need extra “theological steps” to arrive at the idea of a Christian nation. It is critical to emphasise that both circumcision and baptism are a response to God’s grace. Neither circumcision nor baptism makes one a member of the covenant, God’s sovereign grace in election does. Circumcision or baptism is a response to God’s grace.

I wonder if James has listened to Doug’s woke video trashing white southern culture

@WARobertsonMMII

Жыл бұрын

Link please?

@johnlocke6800

Жыл бұрын

@@WARobertsonMMII I think Billy is referencing Doug's post called "white boy bummer".

Maybe "No Quarter November" Gary DeMar next time....

So then, the wicked of the seminarians and the wicked of those who offer their wicked to Molech, stand in tension, unable to gain any ground against one another, at least among them, where good and evil are regarded as equal in power and glory, if only for their money making. The seminarian won’t say it, but is still daily convicted to that effect, by their own haughty impotence. It is that same haughty impotence, why you do not bother to come and contend. It is that same haughty impotence that has you itching the block button every time you find a prophet in your midst.

He talks about the establishment-doctors and the military-but I noticed he left the police out.

Doesn’t infant baptism take the place of eighth day circumcising ?

@andrewgd1858

Жыл бұрын

It is .

@guessable

Жыл бұрын

I’m paedobaptist but no technically the Bible never states that. The only thing we find is belief and almost immediate baptism

@dbruh936

Жыл бұрын

There was actually something of a debate in the church early on whether baptism should be done on the 8th day or right away for an infant.

@cosmictreason2242

Жыл бұрын

@@dbruh936 if it isn’t, then it’s already shown that the command is not one and the same because it’s been changed in its essential elements

@ByGraceThruFaith8453

Жыл бұрын

No.

“People who oppose are on the periphery now because there’s a massive Christian consensus.” The Good Shepherd leaves the 99 to pursue the lost sheep. So how are the lost ever on the periphery of any Christian society lead by the Good Shepherd?

2 wonderful, faithful, serious learned Christians who are disconnected from reality by a false eschatology and slavery to Moses, not for salvation, but for Law. As they and I will live forever, they will learn. They certainly mean well, and God blessed them.

If I recall correctly, at the time of the Constitutional Convention, 90% of Americans were English in culture and Reformed in theology; Baptists, Methodists, Quakers, Catholics, etc., made up less than 10% of the population. Has there ever been a culturally, linguistically and religiously diverse population, won to Christ and able to establish a free and prosperous society?

@user-eg2jr8dt1j

Жыл бұрын

That was why we originally had a "Republic" composed of 50 states and not a "Federalized Democracy". After the Civil war, the entire legal basis for much constitutional thought regarding State vs. Federal "rights" became entirely convoluted, abused and corrupted.

@Psalm144.1

Жыл бұрын

Anglicanism was a large segment.

@Psalm144.1

Жыл бұрын

Yes there has. For several centuries Great Britain and the established Church of England was it. They are now only a mere glimpse of was once a wonderful Christian nation. There is a reason why Anglicanism is the largest Protestant denomination in the world. It is why evangelism is growing (God of course through his Church).

@davidshmavid5

Жыл бұрын

Free for who? These people relied heavily on slave and indentured labor. There never would have even been an industrial revolution without this kind of labor.

@virtualpilgrim8645

Жыл бұрын

The West doesn't stand a chance of any kind of Reformation or revival because mass immigration from diverse countries has paved the way for communism. These guys have no concept of the importance demographics. They live in cloistered ideological bubbles divorced from the reality of history.

G3 guys today listening to this: Nations can't believe!

49:15 "You can't build a Godly civil order without a movement of the Spirit." I agree. But, why not just build a civil order? Why the adjective? Let's stop blaming God and waiting on the Holy Spirit to produce a majority consensus and just get busy fighting the enemy that is disrupting civil order. God created nation to provide civil order. God created Church to provide the truth that man should contemplate. 1 Timothy 2:1-4 First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men, 2 for kings and all who are in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity. 3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. Rulers of nation carry swords to kill the disrupters of that civil order. That's all we need to advocate. Romans 13:3-4 For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same; 4 for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil. But to advocate for such means we still need to find a consensus willing to take sword in hand. We should talk about what a nation is. Is it something organic like in Genesis 10:5. Genesis 10:5 From these the coastlands of the nations were separated into their lands, every one according to his language, according to their families, into their nations. Is it something like God taught Israel or is it an IDEA like we have been taught? Maybe this IDEA is not capable of producing a force that can match the force pressing against us. Maybe that is why we are passing hell on to our kids. It's not God's fault in delaying revival; it's our fault for accepting an idea in place of His definition and design. We are like the transgender kid who believes the lie about sex. We are acting like the married gay couple who complains about their marital difficulties. We need to turn back to live within the boundaries God's established. I imagine He created these for our good. I imagine Satan and his cohorts want to mangle these. ===== Aristotelian concept signifying ‘friendship’ - ethno-cultural consensus between members of the same City. For Aristotle, democracy is possible only within homogeneous ethnic groups, while despots have always reigned over highly fragmented societies. A multi-ethnic society is thus necessarily anti-democratic and chaotic, for it lacks philia, this profound, flesh-and-blood fraternity of citizens. Tyrants and despots divide and rule, they want the City divided by ethnic rivalries. The indispensable condition for ensuring a people’s sovereignty accordingly resides in its unity. Ethnic chaos prevents all philia from developing. A citizenry is formed on the basis of proximity - or it is not formed at all. The abstract, integrationist doctrines of the French Revolution envisage man as simply a ‘man’, a resident, a consumer. Civic spirit, like public safety, social harmony, and solidarity, is based not on education or persuasion alone, but on cultural unanimity - on common values, lifestyles, and innate behaviours. Societies need something to glue them together; it turns out that having the same basic hardware, and thus the same basic inclinations and abilities, is a necessary but not sufficient condition. This means that without it, you have no glue, but you need other stuff as well to make a society work. If we flip that around, it means that without ethnic nationalism, no society will survive. Mixed-race societies substitute ideology or dogma for those innate bonds, but these are not as strong, which is why such societies tend to militarize and become totalitarian in order to preserve some unity. Copied on 2023-03-07 from Philia - The Project for a New American Government newamericangovernment.org/philia/

They exist if by God, they are gifted and enabled to have the purposed effect. They are meant to change our hearts so that His great purposes are realized, and to hold accountable those that refuse. So be not amazed, lest you hold a man too high, but rather as bereans, learn from them so that His will is done. Besides I don't like Doug he drinks whiskey and teaches. He will be accountable for those that drink thinking it's ok cuz Doug is doing it.

Roger Williams and that when they have opened a gap in the HEDGE, or WALL OF SEPARATION, between the garden of the Church and the wilderness of the world, God hath ever broken down the WALL itself, removed the candlestick, &c. and made his garden a wilderness, as at this day.

What exactly does Christopher Columbus have to do with the founding principles of the United States? @10:10 What does the phrase “Christian Nation” mean?

It is written: “The man of God was angry with him and said, ‘You should have struck the ground five or six times; then you would have defeated Aram and completely destroyed it. But now you will defeat it only three times.’” Welcome to the school of the prophets. Always free of charge.

James White's comment around 07:38 - "not seeing the fulfillment of the post-millennial hope quite yet"... Exactly. It looks much more like a pre-millennial 2 Timothy 3:1-5.

By the time God extracted a nation out of a nation and led those people to the Promise Land the people understood they as a nation had to FIGHT to take the land God had given to them. What happened to that spirit among God's people and those truths that produced that mindset? Judges 1:1 Now it came about after the death of Joshua that the sons of Israel inquired of the Lord, saying, "Who shall go up first for us against the Canaanites, to FIGHT against them?" We've forgotten what a nation is like others have forgotten what a woman is. If we can come out of the cult we are in to get this right then the wicked will flee or they will die under a rod of righteousness. Here is a way to promote Christian Nationalism positively > hate evil so much that your government (whatever form it takes) actually repels the evil that is raping our women and children. Prov 11:10 When it goes well with the righteous, the city rejoices, And when the wicked perish, there is joyful shouting. We need leaders; voting doesn't work (see Votescam interview with Collier in the 90s proving it had not been working since the 60s and why.) See that interview at kzread.info/dash/bejne/Y6N1ltB9pdiof8o.html (the audio improves as it goes along). We need followers who understand our current constitution doesn't work against this kind of evil we face. Either we build a parallel society quickly or we pass on to our kids slavery and endless experimentation upon them. There is no way to reform what is and casting the problem back on God just doesn't sit will with my kids.

@TimeToFlush

Жыл бұрын

2 Corinthians 11:20 For you TOLERATE it if anyone enslaves you, anyone devours you, anyone takes advantage of you, anyone exalts himself, anyone hits you in the face.

In 1796 in the Treaty of Tripoli the US proclaimed “the government of the United States is not, in any sense founded on the Christian religion “

@catfish1972100

Жыл бұрын

@Charles Tingler I guess I was assuming that these guys agreed with radicals like Jeff Durbin and thatLuke Pierson guy. They always claim the US was founded as a Christian nation, which is false

@theeternalsbeliever1779

Жыл бұрын

@Charles Tingler It still can't be said that the nation is Christian when the Constitution itself guarantees the individual citizen the right to practice whatever religion they want, even if it's false. Such a right will inherently spawn a non-Christian nation in practice.

@cosmictreason2242

Жыл бұрын

That version of the treaty was NOT signed and ratified. It’s fake history. Check the facts

@oracleoftroy

Жыл бұрын

@@cosmictreason2242 From what I am seeing, it's a bit more complicated than that and pretty interesting. The original treaty was written in Arabic and fully negotiated and agreed to by all parties with David Humphreys acting as plenipotentiary (that's a new word for me, basically, he had the full authorization to act on the behalf of the US) under Washington's authority before the English version made it to the senate. It was translated into English by Joel Barlow, one of the men who worked on writing the Arabic version. Apparently, the original Arabic version does not have article 11 and it was inserted by Barlow and as such has been the matter of a lot of dispute as to its legal status because of that. But this translation was the version presented to the Senate and signed by the president and is thus the official English version of the treaty as a matter of record. It's the only treaty with such language and even the later 1805 version that superseded it didn't have it. It comes off to me like Barlow was acting unilaterally and inserting clauses the other side didn't agree to. Maybe it was something they had previously discussed that didn't end up making into the Arabic version, but he was working off older notes. Since neither President Adams or the Senate had a role in drafting the treaty, they probably thought they were just giving official approval to the actual treaty Humphreys legally negotiated under the assumption that the translation was accurate. If for some reason it ever came under legal dispute, I could see a strong case on both sides. That English version is the official version in our legal system, that's plain and indisputable and is a high hurdle to jump. But it is not the version that the international parties agreed to, so it is unclear to me what would happen if the US violated article 11 and declared itself a Christian Nation. The signers to the Arabic version didn't sign against that. It seems to me that a powerful argument could be made that since the clause is absent from the actually internationally agreed to version (assuming testimony from Arabic language and legal experts to that effect) and that the official English version was ratified under the assumption that it accurately reflected what all parties agreed to, that the clause should have no standing. But I'm not a lawyer and I'm not sure what legal precedent says when the two parties have differing official versions of a contract, let alone a treaty. It would be like presenting an Arabic version of a work contract for a foreigner but adding extra clauses in the English version that the other party had no idea about, it just seems fishy and I can't see how they could possibly be enforceable.

@malachi7948

Жыл бұрын

@@oracleoftroy Regardless, we have no loyalty to any writing besides that which is inspired of God; holy scripture. The earthy ruler, and not the constitution, is who we are under on this earth, and the ruler has executive and not legislative power, neither does the constitution have legislative power. Nor any declaration of man or treaty of man. There is one lawgiver.

As Christian curious I cant stop watching Doug talk

@colton7373

Жыл бұрын

Hello friend. I don’t know how much of the gospel you’ve heard but I feel inclined to share this, see what you think: God sent His own son, Jesus into the world to the place of us guilty sinners. Jesus never sinned. He felt no guilt. His conscience was clear before God. Since Adam, there has never been another man like Jesus who did all things pleasing to God. In every way, at all times, without exception, He pleased His Father, whereas we have displeased Him. Yet Jesus did not come just to give us an example. He came to be our substitute-to take the place of us sinners-and bear the punishment for all sin. At the end of His righteous life, He voluntarily died, as if He were the sinner. He took your sin upon himself and died in your place-in the place of all sinners. Forgiveness does not come through the church or through its leaders. Only God can forgive, and he is ready to forgive all who will believe and receive his forgiveness. “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” 1 John 1:9

I have a serious question. Are there sources that show the sale of parts of aborted children? People talk about it and I don't doubt it but I haven't seen anything.

@thewisceeeggg1624

Жыл бұрын

James O'Keefe, veritas press, has video of a planned parenthood representative talking about pricing and the like.

@rebekahguilder602

Жыл бұрын

@@thewisceeeggg1624 Thank you. Much appreciated.

Doug is the kind of guy who will continue to accuse disenfranchised veterans of communism, while lauding the “finer,” things, because the military isn’t a capitalist institution, run by capitalists (or people getting paid varying wage sums on account of an apparently winnowing store of resources, due to a conglomeration of products rather than services) if only to see if he can get a few to pop off to apparently prove his theory that all the wars we’ve waged are unjust and wasted money. That is to say: if he doesn’t repent of his own communism. You see, Doug gets paid money, by those who labor for him, while calling their labor his own, and while deceiving said masses into thinking he’s granting them judiciously equitous education that enables everyone to do as he does (except not for money/fine print)… Communism and seminarianism are essentially the same thing. They both laud the names of men before God, and they’re bent on greed with as little actual labor as possible, just as much as any godless “capitalist,” might be. Doug was once so communist in fact, he even made it a point to jail or exile his opposition, arbitrarily, without due process, or measure of penalty, because it thought it was his own kingdom and no one else’s and because he was afraid the truth might eat into his stores of mammon.

@ryonrobynson

Жыл бұрын

Now Doug is practicing haughty silence while not blocking at least one said opponent, to try to get ahead of the other seminarians in line to their delusional harmo-topia of lip servicing sycophants, all wearing blind folds of their own presumption. All while his boots are still untied, and his affinity for revered blocks of wood still clearly showing.

@ryonrobynson

Жыл бұрын

@@andreadilorenzo_ not really in the church though, though they presume to be!

Christian nationalism? Book? Chapter? Verse? Acts 17:26 “And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;” King James Version (KJV)

@silent-cc1sm

Жыл бұрын

Their konw nationalism in christianity the sad part is christian are falling for it nationalism leads to pagan look at Germany itlay even in Ukraine now

@malachi7948

Жыл бұрын

I don’t believe the issue they’re discussing is ethnic nationalism, it is about whether or not the state should be governed by Christian principles. There is only one lawgiver. So the earthly ruler does not have legislative power. The earthly ruler does have executive power (Romans 13). And the powers that be are ordained of God. So authority is not with the people nor is the Christian statement obliged to share his responsibility with the people through democracy or with representatives through parliament. Rather, democracy is due recompense for the sins of America. “For the transgression of a land many are the princes thereof: but by a man of understanding and knowledge the state thereof shall be prolonged.” Proverbs 28:2 Yet the earthly ruler should seek charity for his early subjects, knowing fully that his accountability is only to Jesus Christ and not to the people. “For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.” Galatians 1:10-12 The ruler is just as much accountable to Jesus Christ as the subject is. This is the basic principle behind what is now being called Christian nationalism today. But it lacks a simple definition. If the Christian churches in America do not strictly proclaim that Jesus Christ is the one and only God, and they do not teach his words or obey his words, then they should never expect a ruler from the narrow path which leads to life, instead they will continually be ruled over by unbelievers and they will see heathen customs proliferate in their lands.

I think the lie in all that Doug Wilson says is seen in the contradiction in Wilson’s focus and emphasis on the practical material “top down” manifestations of a Christian nation while extolling the bottom up ideals of preaching the gospel that saves souls. In other words, if what’s needed is converted souls by the gospel (bottom up) why are Christian Nationals publicly preaching a gospel of cultural/social renewel (top down) and not the gospel of Jesus Christ that is the power of God unto salvation? The whole approach of preaching from the ills of society-appealing to the material/carnal fears of people may reactively produce a “revival” and return to systematic religion but it will ultimately yield MERE vain, external and carnal expressions of morality that is just as much a stench in the nostrils of God as any other religious legalistic endeavor.

@oracleoftroy

Жыл бұрын

_"In other words, if what’s needed is converted souls by the gospel (bottom up) why are Christian Nationals publicly preaching a gospel of cultural/social renewel (top down) and not the gospel of Jesus Christ that is the power of God unto salvation?"_ They are doing both, but one is much more visible. It's not like people can only do one thing. Moreover, this confuses means and ends. Talking about the end result of the faithful preaching of the gospel, that all of society seeks to live as God commands and organizes themselves nationally as Christians, is not to deny that the only way to get there is through the faithful preaching of the gospel to every creature. Besides, they are talking about it, and it is apparently a bad thing for them to do so, yet you are commenting on it... Is it not bad and a hinderance to the gospel that you should also talk about it? But then, is it fine when you do it and only bad when people disagree with you? Or is there some standard you can point to that doesn't look arbitrary?

This is a excerpt from The Case for Christian Nationalism by Mr. Wolfe “This not to say that capital punishment is the necessary, sole, or desired punishment. Banishment and long term imprisonment may suffice [for heretics] as well… those who do not profess Christianity and yet actively proselytize their non Christian religion or belief system or actively seek to refute the Christian religion are subject to the same principles outlined above” Pages 391-392 I don’t see this attitude in Paul when he opens Romans 9 with wishing to be dammed rather than his people according to the flesh. That kind of love is not in this book and I don’t see it in the character of the author. I hope Pastor White and Pastor Wilson don’t agree with this. This video tells me they don’t lean that way but there’s a difference with minor disagreements and major doctrinal error. I’m worried that they take statements like this too lightly and truncated our hope into something that is forced rather than proclaimed unto the nations

@dirkwalstead7891

Жыл бұрын

Question; You have "for heretics" in parentheses. Was that in the original text, or in the preceding context, or did you just add it? I'm just trying to get a handle on what level of blasphemy law he is arguing for. As a Baptist who's read lots of church history the question of "suppression of the the heretics", looms large in my thinking.

There's no such thing as a "formally Christian nation" unless that nation has "a form of godliness but denying its power". You guys are witnessing the theological backbone of the great apostasy coming to fruition. Read Jesus's letter to the Church of Sardis. He told you to watch for him, not build his kingdom. Beware unless you be found standing against him in that day.

@oracleoftroy

Жыл бұрын

_"Read Jesus's letter to the Church of Sardis. He told you to watch for him, not build his kingdom. Beware unless you be found standing against him in that day."_ Err, He seems to have said the opposite? "Wake up, and strengthen what remains and is about to die, for I have not found your works complete in the sight of my God. Remember, then, what you received and heard. Keep it, and repent." In fact, there is no need to watch for him if they repented, because his coming would be a bad thing. "If you will not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what hour I will come against you." If anything, this seems to directly refute the modernist Christian instinct to just sit back and watch what is going on rather than getting involved. Yet here is a clear call that they should repent, remember God's word, double down on what is life giving and return to doing the work God has called us to do.

“They went back to Christopher Columbus…” For a historian you do sure know how to mix your contraposed seminarian institutions. What of Colombus’ murderously abusive greed should be lauded in Christ’s Kingdom in your opinion? And how do you think that should apply to you, if you’re complicit with his evil works?

How about a Judaeo-Christian nationalism with laws are based upon Moses' received Ten Commandments as interpreted by Jesus Christ's Sermon on the Mount?

@joshh1693

Жыл бұрын

The problem with that is modern Judaism asserts our Lord and savior is boiling in hell. The two religions are incompatible. We need to try to convert Jews into Christianity, not ignore the fact they are going to hell and lock arms with them as if they are the same as us.

@annakimborahpa

Жыл бұрын

@@joshh1693 That depends upon which branch of Judaism you are referring to. Christianity was grafted onto Judaism. I'll gladly lock arms with Jews in civil society if there was a public recognition and observance of the 10 Commandments as interpreted by Jesus Christ's Sermon on the Mount.

@michaelward1341

Жыл бұрын

@@annakimborahpa Almost all branches of Modern Judaism is based on the Talmud: conservative, reformed, Orthodox, ultra Orthodox. The only exception is a an extremely tiny sect and remnant of the Sadducees whose name I can't even remember.

@michaelward1341

Жыл бұрын

There's no such thing as Judeo-Christian.

@annakimborahpa

Жыл бұрын

@@michaelward1341 Really? There are no Jewish Christians who observe the traditions of their Hebrew heritage in addition to following Jesus?

This guy has no concept of what was happening 10 years ago. 29:19 “You couldn’t get an audience for this 10 years ago.” Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and many other anti-theists were doing precisely this, and it completely transformed the social landscape. I don’t get the Boomer impulse to simply deny reality. It’s one thing to avoid it, but lying to people in the age of the internet rarely ends well.

I have a high respect for each of these men, but I must humbly say they do not understand the New Covenant.

“That was only possible because there was a massive Christian consensus…” Speaking of the formal declarations of seminarian government. Do you seminarians worship a block of wood? Yes, they revere the pulpit. Do they trade eternal riches in Christ for earthly payments for works Jesus commands be freely done? Yes, they practice mammon as surely as any pagan of Rome, or Greek sorcerer. So then, is it true, historically, that this nation was ever truly Christian? No, if the measure is an “overwhelming numerical advantage in way of consensus, or pew seats filled.“ Even some of those who worshipped their ancestors as God, understood number of bodies in war, or the numerical advantage of one’s troops, in and of itself, confers no real advantage. Doug’s half wisdom is as wishy washy as a Unitarians. While his dogma appears as if it is a different seminarian breed, it’s bite is the same: impotent.

“…it’s through a massive work of the Spirit…” followed by hard swallow dead eyes. I thought Doug wasn’t “stuck like a pig,” as he described of himself, and that his bravado would continue like a “train,” (?) But only for a short time. Having believed all things I couldn’t deny the cowardice he continues to display, before my very eyes. God made all things good, and His Imago Dei shouldn’t be used to laud cowardly mumblings from apparently inner rooms. Does James take delight or not take delight in these writings, and does everyone presume his mirth will result in my murder here if only by the mute or the block?

I don't know what Baptist church you belonged to, Doug, but it's not the Baptist belief to baptize at 10 yrs old. You get baptized when you get saved. Whether you're 10, 20 or 70 years old. My mother just got baptized, she's almost 70. And, of course, she had to be FULLY submerged.

@scotttmillar

4 ай бұрын

Doug is Presbyterian sweetie

“As soon as Josiah is dead people veer off into idolatry again…” It’s evident that Doug is looking to establish his own legacy in human history, rather than concerning himself with the actual Kingdom labor. He seems to presume if he quotes Scripture enough people will eventually equate his own work with God’s. How is that assessment being made? Doug implied that Josiah, being leader, meant the people were righteous or practicing righteousness. This implies he thinks if we can just get “godly,” leaders (like himself presumedly, even though I do not think it is wise to assess Doug as godly) that somehow the people then will just become righteous. Josiah, just lessened an evident aggrandizement of evil. He didn’t actually or substantially turn the people to the Way. Why? Because it wasn’t God’s intent. God had a greater promise in mind than the preservation of the Kingdom of Judah. James White seemingly can’t resist itching his ear when quoting Joe Boot, while festooned with his personal library background, and seems to think because the Kingdom is not yet, that’s there’s not much of a point in doing the work. Yes, I’m aware they peddle their wares for money, but I haven’t been deceived again into thinking that such deeds are equivalent with any sign that they’re somehow true believers in God. On the issue of abortion: It’s as if James White and Doug Wilson, continue to presume that unbelievers putting their own children to the sword makes at least their children innocent, as if to say, arbitrarily declaring such children innocent, makes James and Doug look innocent. Hasn’t God said that the children of the wicked are wicked, and destined to a fate much worse than any death we may experience here on earth? Hasn’t God called for their destruction before, and said that they are all guilty of the worst affront of sin, rather than meaning to say they are all innocent because they’re either ignorant, or just so apparently cute? If we are exercising any foresight on behalf of our own tribes, tribes that don’t think human sacrifice should be allowed among us, we should recognize that the infants of the wicked, are the children of the wicked, and tend to grow up to do wicked things. Relegating this past wisdom, this idea that the righteous should rejoice when the wicked decrease, to some sort of ceremonial law, is both bad study, and bad God-reason. In fact, it’s the failure to recognize the utility of the wicked passing away by their own hands: that has prolonged abortion for so long. It is written: “Agree with your enemy quickly.” Had so called churches been identifying abortion of the wicked as a blessing from God, but in accordance with God reason rather than conceit, abortion would have ebbed from the ground up by now. In this seminarianism is the greater impetus: the greater enemy (as unthreatening as it is these days) standing against the Kingdom. People like James White and his “Apologia,” cohort take great delight in pronouncing to everyone they can, how many babies they are saving, but by that really meaning: just lumps of flesh, since they’re not claiming to have saved their souls. Since they claim some evident ignorance is reason to disbar from covenant fellowship in measure, and that children are suspect until they’re old enough to parrot a consigned faith studiously, there is no sense in which keeping a wicked one from slaughtering their spawn, is anything other than, delivering a lump of flesh. If babies are innocent though, just because they’re babies, there’s no sense in which they should not be included, fully, and covenantly. If babies are righteous on account of the ignorance, then surely, their thoughtless parents who would slaughter them as mere flesh, should be exonerated also for being ignorant of God and His Way, arbitrarily. Here’s the big kicker though: James is trying to ask: “What’s the point of imposing government on a non-complicit people?” As if to say: “It doesn’t work.” That’s right. It doesn’t work. So why bother trying to make abortion illegal among those intent on fading away as a tribe? Is it because your afraid you’ll have no more book fodder to pen? Are you intentionally trying to keep abortionits around so you’ll keep getting paid for presumedly standing against them? Yes, that is the case. The work you do is the work of the Warlock, not God. You try and maintain a war because it’s lucrative monetarily to you, rather than attaining unto victory quickly, and in good time.

Im a "Saved by God's Grace" Christian, not affiliated to one specific Religion. ✝️

Dr White keeps referencing Isaiah 2. But that text is strictly premillennialism. The Messiah will sit in David’s throne in Jerusalem.

@oracleoftroy

Жыл бұрын

Which Jerusalem? Rev 21: 2 - "And I saw a the holy city, new _Jerusalem,_ *coming down out of heaven from God,* prepared as a bride adorned for her husband." If Jesus is in heaven now and is king now, he can be ruling from this heavenly Jerusalem now with no issues for a postmil view or Isaiah 2.

@micahmartin4762

Жыл бұрын

@@oracleoftroy The Jerusalem as understood by the author Isaiah, since the reference is to Isaiah's prophecy. - that would be the city geographically located in Palestine. It describes a period where the Messiah will reign in that city to resolve the issues among the nations. That's not described in Revelation 21, which is the eternal state, not the millennial reign. So yes, Isaiah 2 is quite problematic for post-millennial view unless you use the New Testament to reinterpret the Old. But that's not White's stated hermeneutic.

@oracleoftroy

Жыл бұрын

@@micahmartin4762 You are basically saying that when we throw away our understanding of the Bible and apply your understanding of the Bible, our view is wrong. So what? Your view is wrong for the same reason, because you forget that the Jerusalem Jesus reigns from is the one that comes down from heaven. Woah, you must be so convinced now! I'd find it more convincing if you tried to harmonize all of scripture instead of assuming what Isaiah might have thought the prophesy means now shackles God in how he chooses to fulfill it. It is fully possible that Isaiah can have his own private ideas of what God said and still record God's word faithfully. Many in Jesus's era believed Isaiah and other prophets predicted a warrior messiah that would overthrow the Romans. Does that mean anyone who disagreed with what people thought Isaiah was saying were wrong? Of course not. It's not an argument. Show me why the postmil understanding of Isaiah 2 cannot work, don't just assert that Isaiah wasn't postmil.

@micahmartin4762

Жыл бұрын

@@oracleoftroy I wasn't "assuming" what Isaiah might have thought. I was keeping Isaiah in the context of his own writing, as any proper hermeneutic would do. And it doesn't put "shackles" on God to say he fulfills his promises as he gave them. The Jerusalem in Isaiah 2 cannot be referring to the "New Jerusalem" simply because Isiah is speaking "concerning Judah and Jerusalem" (verse 1). This is not a word of prophecy to the "Heavenly Jerusalem." Contextually, it specifically refers to the people in the geographic region of Judah. To read the "New Jerusalem" of Revelation 21 into this text is to practice eisegesis. It also cannot be referring tot he "New Jerusalem" because the nations are streaming to this Jerusalem (in Judah - verse 1 - not heaven) to bring their disputes to the Messiah for resolution. The nations are not currently streaming to Jerusalem today (either heavenly or earthly Jerusalem) so these are things taking place in the still future. And since the Messiah in Isaiah 2, who is in Jerusalem, will "judge between the nations" and "render decisions for many peoples," indicating there is some disagreement and controversy among the nations during this Messianic reign, it therefore cannot be referring to the eternal state in Revelation 22, which describes the nations as whole - no hostility remains (Rev. 22:1-5). While the nations in Isaiah 2 are at peace from warfare, the Lord is still solving their disputes and rendering judgements (and punishing according to Zechariah 14:19). Therefore, Isiah 2 is describing an intermediate state where the Messiah reigns on earth from Jerusalem, resolving sin and dispute among the nations to maintain peace, prior to the eternal state described in Revelation 21-22 where the New Jerusalem comes from heaven to make all things new. These details fit premil eschatology, not postmil. There is more to deal with, particularly regarding the details of the Davidic Covenant, but I'll leave it there for now. Until you can resolve the details I list above, the Postmil view remains in contradiction to Isaiah 2.

@oracleoftroy

Жыл бұрын

@@micahmartin4762 Sigh. The problem is you are wedded to your Premil view that you can't see how someone can read this passage other than with your premil presuppositions. It's hard to even know where to begin to tease out the premil assumptions that of course contradict post mil, yet wouldn't be the same on a full postmil understanding, and it is certainly not something I could tackle in a youtube comment. When I point out one assumption that doesn't align with postmil, you bring out 5 more premil assumptions to show why postmil doesn't fit, yet none of them are shared on postmil. I don't see an internal critique here, just affirmation that postmil is not premil.

NQNQ!

Totally lost the opportunity to say that too much baptism will water down Christianity Christian nationalism.

@silent-cc1sm

Жыл бұрын

How

@dirkwalstead7891

Жыл бұрын

As a Baptist I find that really funny

Baby Baptism is found nowhere in the Bible. Baby Baptism has successfully stolen the genuine Spiritual Conversion of millions who are stuck in works-based "Religious" systems. Personal Salvation can only happen in hearts who acknowledge they are lost. Club affiliation will not save you! Romans 10: 9,10 if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

@oracleoftroy

Жыл бұрын

Restricting Baptism from members of the household of a believer is unbiblical. The practice of the apostles was to baptize the whole household when the believing head believed, in continuation with what God established in Gen 17 and Peter reiterates in Acts 2.

@j.t.patton7820

Жыл бұрын

@@oracleoftroy Was the Thief on the Cross Baptized?

@t-rayhuckabay6700

Жыл бұрын

@@j.t.patton7820 Probably, if he was on the side of Christ which was pierced by the Roman's spear, he was probably splashed with the blood and water that gushed out.

@j.t.patton7820

Жыл бұрын

@@t-rayhuckabay6700 That's extra-Biblical nonsense. Similar to the WORKS BASED "Religions" of the world...adding to the FINISHED WORK that Jesus did in shedding His Blood.

@oracleoftroy

Жыл бұрын

@@j.t.patton7820 Yeah, but baptists don't mind extra-biblical "nonsense" when it suits them. Only when their opposition does it. Where does the Bible teach that the sign of the covenant should no longer be applied to the whole household when the prior practice for millennium was that it should? It's just a new rule they invented that is nowhere in the Bible, yet they want to hang it over the church like it is straight from scripture without doing the heavy lifting for their position. Not even sure how the thief on the cross even addresses anything I said. If you become a Christian and die before you have the opportunity to be baptized, are you saying they are unsaved? I don't think that. I am more concerned with someone who willfully defies every chance to baptize for years while claiming to follow Christ than I am in edge cases like a conversion in the middle of their execution.

I enjoyed this conversation even though both of these people are blind about the importance of racial national homogeneity.

@aallen5256

Жыл бұрын

Did you get round to reading that article about the misunderstood 'connection' between race and IQ yet?

@virtualpilgrim8645

Жыл бұрын

@@aallen5256 Summarize your point and how it relates to me.

@aallen5256

Жыл бұрын

@@virtualpilgrim8645 We've interacted here multiple times recently, do you not remember? You made me look up a 2007 article about a Cherokee nation membership decision which the Cherokee Supreme Court has since reversed. I recommended you read an article from The Atlantic to augment your outdated understanding of race and IQ! But it seems like you've chosen to refuse to know better!!

@aallen5256

Жыл бұрын

@@virtualpilgrim8645 I only recommended the article to you yesterday, don’t know how you’ve forgotten already! Unless you really have no interest in knowing better?

@virtualpilgrim8645

Жыл бұрын

@@aallen5256 What I usually do is summarize the article's main points, then provide the name or link to the article in case anyone wants to verify it.

So to sum up society won’t be culturally Christian until there is a widespread revival. Every reformed Christian believes that., the a millennial included .

@oracleoftroy

Жыл бұрын

Yup, that's why it is always surprising that postmil and theonomy gets so much pushback. It's like a lot of "christians" do not want to see the gospel spread and the people come to Christ, and so they fight the core belief of the postmil tooth and nail. But it really shouldn't be a controversial message for any Christian regardless of their end times view, even if they happen to disagree with postmil, etc.

Protestantism itself is a “denominational issue”.

To anyone reading the comments. Christian Nationalism IS the book "To My Legionaries" by Corneliu Codreanu. Read it! It is not the Westminster Confession of Faith. It's a simple as that.

These are two protestants I respect greatly on many issues quoting the common “reformation” phrase: “post tenebrae, lux” or “after darkness, light.” I heard that phrase often growing up, as a protestant. As I got older, and longer before reading a single Catholic, it struck me as increasingly absurd. Here is they gist of why: Protestantism did not bring “light” after “darkness.” It brought rampant confusion and disunity among Christians. The fruit is utterly obvious. Pre-Luther Christendom has lots of problems. But it upheld the moral law of God as an absolute, even if it wasn’t followed on too many occasions. No one disagreed about this. That changed with the rise of protestant regimes, and the ultimate separation of Church and state. What such regime today, after just a century or two, professes even in theory the moral law of God? Not a single one. The idea that protestantism brought “light” is laughable. I say this as someone who lived the vast majority of my life a protestant, reading Scripture all the time, Luther, Calvin, RC Sproul, Josh MacDowell, etc., and I could not get straight and final answers to almost any of my most pressing questions about the Faith and what God expected of me. Seemingly good, honest, and educated men came down on different sides on all of them. Who was I, the younger man, to contradict any of them, let alone rely purely on my own sense of things, to come to a conclusion that God was bound to accept (since God is Truth, and does not accommodate Himself to error)? This is a uniquely protestant phenomenon. It has not brought light. It has shrouded the world in profound darkness, where even the most basic tenets of God’s moral law are obscured and interpreted away under every specious pretext imaginable, to say nothing of articles of Faith. That is not the Church Christ founded. The Church Christ founded He promised to guide into all truth until He came back-no lapse of 500, 1,000, or 1,500 years. The promise of the kingdom Daniel 2 prophesied as beginning during the days of the Roman Empire was of a kingdom whose sovereignty would never be destroyed, and would expand throughout the whole earth. Protestant sects cannot claim this for themselves, especially when they deny the constantly believed faith established in the first century. There is only one contender for this Church, and it is the very same one that is everywhere and always identified by the ancient Christians as Christ’s one, unique, holy, and apostolic Church: the Catholic Church.

Dr. James White says the following at 37:48-57: "Fritz Erbe was convinced by reading Luther's translation of the New Testament in German of credo-baptism." Three Questions: Was this the same New Testament translation in German that: 1. On his own authority, Martin Luther added the word ALONE (Allein) to Romans 3:28 to read, "For we hold that a man is justified by faith ALONE (Allein)" to justify his doctrine of Sola Fide, i.e., Justification by Faith Alone? [Michael Davies, Cranmer's Godly Order (Ft. Collins, Colorado, 1995), p.25.] 2. He wrote the following regarding his addition of the word ALONE (Allein) to Romans 3:28: "If your papist worries you about the word 'alone', just tell him plainly that Dr. Martin Luther will have it so, and says: 'Papist and donkey are one and the same thing; sic volo, sic jubeo, stat pro ratione voluntas' (thus I wish, thus I command, let my will stand for a reason). For we must not be the pupils or disciples of the papists, but on the contrary their masters and judges. We ought to swagger and hammer on their donkey-heads, and, as Paul challenged the sanctimonious fools of his day, so I will also challenge these donkeys of mine"? [G.W. Bromiley, Thomas Cranmer Theologian (London, 1956), p.36.] 3. In addition to the above concerning Romans 3:28, Luther also wrote: "I am sorry now that I did not add the word 'all' so that it would read 'without all works of all laws', and thus ring out loudly and completely. However, it shall stand as it is in my New Testament, and though all the Papist-donkeys go mad about it, they shall not move me from this"? [A. Hilliard Atteridge, Martin Luther (London, 1940), pp.19-20.]

Christian Nationalism , isn't this what the Popes try to do for centuries ?? Jesus told one sitting on a throne "My kingdom is not of this world" Jesus the King of Kings will separate the wheat from the tares & cleanse His Church , as for me, I will serve and proclaim His name until He comes or I go to Him.

great video. The state will use someones values why not God's? The sate will use someones standard of morality, why not God's standard of morality. The state will impose and enforce someones laws, why not God's?

Since Wolfe believes that observance of the Lord's Day should be civilly enforced, Seventh Day Baptists would be on the double bad list.

@michaelward1341

Жыл бұрын

Who wouldn't be on multiple bad lists under Wolfe's plan?

There will be no true Christian world or true Christian nation, until the Lord Jesus returns to set up His millennial Kingdom. The world has yet to see a true, authentic and living Christian nation, let alone a Christian world.

If a Baptist can continue to be Reformed (Like Charles Spurgeon) and not continue with in cultural captivity or go the pacifist or pessimist Anabaptist route

An accelerationist, a conservative, a White Nationalist and an America First fan walk into a hockey game. The opposing team scores a goal. "Bummer!" the White Nationalist exclaims, but his friends are cheering. "Why are you cheering? He asks. "Now our team will be properly motivated and start playing some real hockey! ' the accelerationist says. "I don't want their fans to think I don't support scoring." the conservative says. Soon after their team scores a goal and the White Nationalist cheers, but his friends are silent. "This is awful," says the conservative. "Now the other team will be mad and take it out on us. Also we're not winning over any of their fans." "This is clearly a fake goal meant to get us to let our guard down." says the accelerationist. "And what about you? What do you think of all this?" The White Nationalist, exasperated, exclaims to the America First fan. "Que? No hablos engliss." He replies.

Not gonna lie, a Lutheran state would be incredibly based.

@gbear34

Жыл бұрын

A Christian state would be based, but there are as many lefty Lutherans as there are anyone else.

@arthurbrugge2457

Жыл бұрын

It's called Canada.

Oh the irony of listening to two men discuss this "plan" who believe and teach that only certain ones are even able to respond to the gospel. The fact that they are even discussing this is unbelievable. Of course there will be "dissenters", "reprobates" or whatever other label placed on non-conforming individuals who suffer the same persecution that true Christians were subjected to by the very "fathers" of their doctrine.

“When that happens, I would like to see the apostles creed in the constitution…” What a trite and vain goal, when instead you could be yearning to see the wicked repent from their ways every day, in accordance with the work that God has given. No wonder most people watch you in order to delight in their own shame and chubby faced whimsy, before shifting gears into grand pontifications of government which you don’t really understand.

"bring Stephen Wolfe in to be the chef" - Doug no - the unsuitability of that even as a joke :)

Wikipedia: "Christian nationalism supports the presence of Christian symbols in the public square, and state patronage for the practice and display of religion, such as Christmas as a national holiday, school prayer, the exhibition of nativity scenes during Christmastide, and the Christian Cross on Good Friday." "Christian Nationalism primarily focuses on the internal politics of society, such as legislating civil and criminal laws that reflect their view of Christianity and the role of religion/s in political and social life." Christian Nationalism opposes democracy and the First Amendment separation of Church and State.

I don't understand why Wilson is defending Wolfe's Kinism. He is a Kinist, plain and simple. Brian Mattson's review of this awful book hits the nail on the head.