Відео

Thank you for uploading these discussions. I recently obtained and read Torrance’s book on Grace in the Apostolic Fathers (I remember flicking through it in a bible college library quite a number of years ago). Ever since being exposed to the early fathers I have thought that they contain a heavy flavour of works righteousness. I think Torrance’s verdict on them is highly controversial today and he would be highly criticized by many many theologians today. I have come across many folks (an notable example would be the work of David Bercot who has a significant output) who think the early fathers are the key to understanding New Testament Soteriology and that the reformers at best got things wrong, or at worst were damnable heretics who promoted antinomianism (or even Gnosticism, which is a bizarre accusation). I think these folks try to play down how harsh and graceless some of these fathers were though, the Shepherd of Hermas being possibly the worst example. If one were to take all that Hermas said as true, I fail to see how the Christian life would contain any joy, peace and freedom. It is indeed, as was alluded to in the discussion, a work of proto Pelagianism.

Nice to see Ted on again

Theological science 😂 Is that like creation science 😂😂 Science has proven all religious claims wrong, theology should be in the myths section of education 😂😂😂

From 27:07 on about the sacraments is very good Marty! Something like: "You don't have to make waves in the surf (breakers/breaking) to surf - you have to study and get to know the surf, experience it and feel it - to participate, take part in it.

Young-Il is asking amazing questions. Ones i was struggling with, without being able to put them to words. Thanks Young-Il! Btw. I dont think i can do the Kohlbrugge thing. Hope someone will. Greetings from the Netherlands.

Thanks for sharing it 😊

Who is jb?

"Saved" begins with saving..as in " receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls" Or, " receive with meekness the engrafted word which is able to save your souls " Then even as ones soul is gaining spiritual renewal..so the possibility of the quickening of the mortal flesh (physical body) comes into play as far as being saved...ultimately saved from what? Saved from the adamic nature seemingly still alive within us..saved from ourselves essentially

As Jesus was/is the express image of the Father..essentially One.. Jesus said some stuff..some tough stuff..woe unto him who through offenses come, for it would be better for him that a millstone were hung about his neck and cast into the sea.. Being one example.. Punishment is definitely shown.. Universalism doesn't mean a easy pardon by the blood of Christ-welcome home.. I believe there will be a kind of purgatory for many..before Love wins So it does matter what we do to each other in this life... Only God knows how justice will be brought about..to bring about Universalism..looking forward to the day I can hug Hilter and see the love of God in his eyes and say well done buddy (in that he went through penitence and came out purified on the other side fully restored)

Thank you for posting. This was a wonderful, clear and very edifying discussion . I note the deliberately simple use of language as the mark of one who has truly has understood his subject and able to teach others. Thankyou for putting the cookies on the lower shelf !

Paul is the best!

Regarding synergism, the Orthodox stress union with Christ and working out salvation by considering the Greek word for “together with” (syn). There’s so many examples, like Romans 8 - … if we suffer with (syn) him, we shall reign (syn) with him. It speaks of participation. Christ is with us in our sufferings.

1:03:43 Did I hear it right that the New Covenant is between God and Jesus Christ and we as adopted or included in Jesus.How about the so called Old Covenant?Was it not between God and Israel, the one mediated by Moses?

Great conversation!

2:00 jesus is our guide through the promised holy spirit.

35:19 - 35:40 . I always had/have a feeling about the 'repent, or else God is going to get you' kind of gospel that you are "winning souls" - for God - to keep them from His "well deserved wrath in hell" - against God -. He is both the initiator/reason/helper/starter/finisher - and opponent - of the 'gospel target(s)'...to use some simple shortcuts so i can fit this into one comment section.

It's like Robert capon says. I am and I am not a universalist. Iam one if we're talking about accepting the already given acceptance of what christ has accomplished in the finished work of the cross and being the savior of the whole world

I think that many Christians think it's not fair that the so called bad people can get away with all the evil crap they do. When the Christian is following Jesus and living right. And then they think how and why would God save them. It's not fair. And their hearts swing the pendulum to the other side. The point at 50 mins is spot on. It's like they get mad because they chose to be saved as if it was their choice. Which in have personally wondered about myself.

Being someone who appears to be somewhat culturally illiterate, at timing, 1hr 29mins, I failed to get the connection of whatever, to the notion of the Superhero. !!!!

I am very happy to have found this channel today. Great conversation.

When Bryden chimes in at 50:30 and proceeds for several minutes, this was a highlight moment for me! Thanks for this conversation!

I once asked TFT what he thought about "theosis.' He replied that it was akin to what the Reformed tradition calls "glorification." Not identical, but akin. I can't find this idea anywhere in his published writings. But I find it to be illuminating.

The word slaughter in this video is not to be taken apart from the idea behind manslaughter. It is unintended, but is serious regarding what is lost in the slaughter or loss of a living part. Godslaughter is only attempted, never achieved!

None of you preached the gospel of conciliation or first gravin's 15. You're so obsessed with building some kind of validity. Opening the Bible would be the last thing you would. Do you worship at the altar a manly wisdom? You may hate me for saying this you're completely unintedifying. Go start a Bible believing church. Go preach said grinthein's five

Maximus the confessor taught that you don’t have a free will here, but when we stand in the presence of a Loving Father He will heal our wills to set us free

I don't think that Calvin's view on the election isn't that much different than Karl Barth. I think Calvin would agree with Barth that Jesus is the only elected son. But the real issues of election are that God elects us to participate with the elected son. We have no election apart from being placed into Christ.i think the real question is, why does God not bring all into his son? One can only truly come into the divine son through a real event of regeneration. And that only happens by the mercy of his self revelation to us. Why does God not reveal himself to all now? I am convinced that that event will take place at the end. Once all, Israel is saved, which in turn releases the full election of the rest of humanity to participate with Israel's restoration?

You guys are great. The simpler it is the more profound it is. Jesus is the Way. Everyone needs to know this. Once you know it by revelation you can never be the same. 😊

Wow! Someone who’s read AEMcG’s 3vol A Scientific Theology👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 Alister tells me he wrote that Int Bio of TF as groundwork for his 3vol material.

A great blessing as always!

Great discussion.

2032! Time warp? 🙂

Really enjoyed this chaps!

🎉 Promo-SM

This is s great discussion and has so many interesting tributaries. Thank you for it. I think the word 'intuition' has indeed been misunderstood and is an unfortunate choice or term given it is so semantically laden. In seeking to be careful interpreters we tend to look for a rule to guide our hermeneutic but we have been given the Spirit who reveals Christ as that hermeneutic. This does not fit well with our textbooks as a method and alarm bells of subjectivity begin to ring. However the Jesus of the text and the risen Lord must be one and he is the only one the Spirit reveals. Just because Torrance may not be able to describe the wonder of how this works does not mean it is not a reality. In fact it is a necessary precondition and Jesus himself is the ground and grammar of all epistemology. The Spirit will lead us as promised. Second the use of Hebrews 1 to support God's communication of himself outside of Christ ("many and various ways") is problematic. If (and indeed since) there is only one mediator between God and humanity, the preincarnate Logos must be God's means of communicating to humanity prior to it. Without the lamb slain before the foundation of the world there can be no Word of God to humanity. I don't think this Scripture necessitates a revision of Christ as sole mediator in the way suggested or that Hebrews 1 necessitates a view that God the Father speaks apart from his Son.

With great respect I think Jeff conflates the objective accomplishment of and the subjective participation in Christ's once and for all sacrifice in his understanding of the atonernent. This leads to a framing (I would say distortion) of the gospel itself which is off centre. This affects the proclamation. While the reframing of the gospel, guided by the extensive and universal nature of the atonement is needed, the way in which the objective and subjective meet is problematic if we conflate them or try to extrapolate their connection by logical means This is the soteriological precipice which runs along the abyss of universalism. This gospel may be attractive (or even necessary if not) but it's not how the Acts of the apostles set it out in Scripture. The response within the response of Christ may not even be understood completely (and not articulated in direct terms) by the writers of the New testament as we read that revelation backwards from millenia of grappling with it in the Church proper. Notwithstanding this the theological reading in this way presses, I think, beyond what the text offers while seeking to penetrate into the reality to which it points. I think we can test and show that there is a shaping of the gospel here which is inconsistent with the revealed text and so has to be a problem. I think even TFT gets quite tangled up here too if I may say (even as towering a figure and brilliant as he was.) It's a complicated gospel. Like the apostles and early church we are clearly called to preach 'repentance' as indicative and imperative which also calls for a response (but to know that the response has only been rightly and fully given in and by Jesus). This is not to throw people back upon themselves but it is to offer them the already offered Christ.

“Smail studied with T F Torrance” (6:50)--When? Did he [After studying under Barth] intersect with TFT’s first months at the U. of Edinburgh? (Smail was ordained for [and I had assumed began full-time] church min. in 1953.)

As a Pentecostal/Charismatic who has been deeply impacted by the Torrances (and Barth), I have a heart to bridge "my people" with this tradition. It has been difficult to find other voices similar to Smail. I look forward to reading more of his works!

Wish you would talk about the Savior himself more you guys are missing so much how does Christ stand ready to save sinners Jesus is a mediator love you talk about our Lord himself what is like

Thank you Marty for relating my question to Jeff at around the 30 minute mark. You explained the typical "evangelical anxiety" that drives the question very well and I found Jeff's answer to be breathtakingly profound as he took the question (and answer) to a level that was both properly basic yet provocatively illuminating in regard to all theological questioning: the redemptive interrelation of the "new creational discontinuity/continuity" of humanity in Christ. I was very happy that Jeff was able to move seamlessly from what can seem a simple question to such a rich Christ-centered answer that relates to all human existence as revealed in Christ from Genesis to Revelation. Of course, the way Jeff steered the question of the motivation for evangelism to love as the ultimate reason for it was not only the best possible answer but also beautiful.

Have a nice day! 🌹❤✋👍

Re TFT being sometimes questionable on historical minutiae (due, perhaps, to projection of his own wisdom on his ancient heroes.) Any evidence on TFT’s claim Irenaeus & Athanasius Knew HEBREW?

Itsfunneh this theology never seems to meet the street where I live I don't know one Church Presbyterian Methodist or minion whatever who has a Jesus who has a gospel message they look at me like I'm crazy where you at all this theology where are you where are you at in the in the church is in the trenches in the suffering I don't see any of you in the street

As said and reiterated many times by Jesus, He is in a very close union WITH THE FATHER ONLY. Contrary to the doctrine of the trinity, Jesus is NEVER together with 1. the Father and 2. the Holy Spirit, so that you are sure that NO TRINITY can exist. Further, there is no doubt that the Father - who is with Jesus - IS A SPIRIT (see Jn. 4:23,24). That one is the ONLY ONE SPIRIT who is with Jesus, either called "Holy Spirit" or "Holy Father" by Him. He is the SAME Spirit that before led Jesus in the desert and later also helped Him when speaking - in order to say the right words. In a sermon Jesus talks about the blasphemies against Himself and against the Father, no third blasphemy exists because no third person exists. The trinity is just a CONVENTIONAL doctrine.

Correction: "infernalist:

I see that you have seen that you are not a scriptural "Fundamentalist". Nothing is "fun" to a "Mentalist", who is suffering temporal torment as an Inferalist. But Everything, All Things to Whom be Glory forever, are Great Fun, Love, Joy and Peace to Those Who Know The Way, The Truth, and The Life of Universal Salvation!

John 4:39-42 This is pre-crucifixion conviction of Salvation . These saved Samaritans believe without the woman's (the Church's) evangelizing: "Now We believe, not because of thy saying: for We have heard Him ourselves, and KNOW THAT THIS is Indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world." AKJV , caps added by Permission. This is the Gospel of GOD in a one-verse Great Pearl of Scriptural Light! Glory, Glory, Glory! Dear Baxter you are being called to enroll in A Course In Miracles, a Christian scholar's ultimate Mind of Christ experience.

😮

I'm sure Marty has excellent understandings of Barth and Torrance however he is a poor communicator.

Very powerful advice for sure! This will change many lives!

The chrchfathers made the wrong choice: rather than simply ACCEPTING what is directly stated by Jesus, that is, that He is with the FATHER ONLY, and it's over, they ARROGANTLY decided to create a FANTASY GOD that has no match whatsoever in the gospels. The "Lord who gives life" was thus INVENTED from scratch. According to the fantasies of those inventors, the alleged "Lord who gives life" is supposed to be in a CLOSE UNION (i.e. the alleged trinity) and should therefore ALWAYS BE WITH the Father and the Son. Reality: NO TRACE OF HIM, not a SINGLE word from or to that phantom "Lord"! Not only a very bad choice was not accepting Jesus' words, but also a LACK of committment on the part of those "inventors", it is indeed possible to IDENTIFY who is the Holy Spirit: He is THE FATHER WHO IS A SPIRIT. You get a clue by Jesus when He talks about the TWO blasphemies, where the Father is called "Holy Spirit" by Jesus. That clue is finally CONFIRMED by Jesus when He states that the Father is "a spirit" (Jn. 4:23,24). That ONE is the ONLY SPIRIT!!! Forget the invented spirit of the Lord who gives life! In the same way as what happens by other people (Zacharias for ex.) Jesus has the Holy Spirit inside Him TOO. You can easily learn from the gospels that the Holy Spirit - inside Jesus - is THE FATHER who helps Him! He is the SAME HOLY SPIRIT that some time before led Him in the wilderness. There has been NO "CHANGE OF ASSISTANCE!" Of course you are not supposed to blasphemy the Holy Spirit, who is the Spirit of the Father inside Jesus. Painful: you DEMONSTRATE without any doubt that the trinity is falsehood and even indicate where the error occurred. But they still refuse to accept it and cling to that fully nonsensical doctrine.