It seems that most Evangelicals would deny that matter can be sanctified. They may confess that a person’s soul can become holy, while denying any possibility of physical matter being sanctified by God’s grace. Grace, for the evangelical Protestant, is nothing more than Gods “unmerited favor” so any talk of physical items or places become holy by God’s presence or energies (Grace) is generally rejected.
"All places are holy," ergo *no* places are holy. It's the same logic they use when they say stuff like "the priesthood of believers." "All Christians are priests," meaning there *are* no priests. They don't realize it, but they are arguing that there is no need for any kind of order in the life of a Christian. At the very best, they are claiming that all Christians can invent their own way of worshipping God, make it up as they go along.
Why are some Protestants so bent on stripping holiness out of Christianity? Is it because their "worship" is so barren and their experience is so banal? It's like they don't believe all the biblical stories.
It’s because the notion that holiness is a real, tactile thing manifest in places, things, and especially people completely undermines Sola Fide and forensic justification. If holiness is real and observable then you can’t assert you’re Saved by legal fiat disconnected from how you actually live and behave.
The entire video is if course solid, but I particularly appreciate your articulation in the last couple minutes, thank you sir, Godbless. I'll be praying these videos continue to spread
The fact that God used Paul's handkerchief or Elisha's bones to heal, the elements of the Eucharist to impart salvation and grace go against the Protestant notion that can't God use matter and sacred spaces for a greater good is just unbiblical. Hebrews 9 says the copies of the heavenly and the "heavenly things themselves" are purified by Christ's blood. This is because the earthly copies are just as relevant as the heavenly.
The idea or implication that protestants do not believe in the holy presence of God is not logical. It seems to be a broad brush approach based on a singular podcast video used in the context of this video. As a protestant, I believe in the real holy presence of God. I believe in Psalm 139 that provides a clear explanation of the presence of God. Through faith in Jesus Christ, I am now am indwelt by the Holy Spirit and God's omniscient present surrounds me, envelopes me. Does my attendance at gathering in church buildings enhance my experience with and in God's presence, of course it does.
I grew up in the exact same sort of paradigm which is heavily influenced by baptist theology which has expanded into the non-denominational megachurch movement. Many good people who love Christ and want to share Him with others but their understanding of the Church I believe to be a bit off =)
That’s ad hominem. It’s not right to simply presume that someone who has a different view from you has ‘bad faith’. That is unproductive and clearly not Christ-like. Why not invite him to a dialogue? Debates tends to be less helpful than sit-downs, in my opinion. It would be helpful for everyone involved to avoid attacking each other, but instead to talk. As Christians it’s important to have more dialogues and less fights. Last but not least, Dr. Wadsworth used the Scripture as his point of reference. Notice the author of this video did not use a single verse to support his claim. That’s a big difference, even if you don’t believe in Sola Scriptura.
@@willieneon1 I don't believe that Dr. Wadsworth has 'bad faith.' I said that baptist theology in which I grew up doesn't have room for seeing the holy and sacred in a sacramental way which goes beyond persons but into matter and material itself. Secondly, the reference of 'holy ground' is a Biblical reference which Christ does not disregard in the New Covenant but rather expands in His ministry and through the sacramental actions of the Church (Eucharist, Holy Oil, Altars, etc). Secondly, other channels have had dialogues with Dr. Wadsworth and I am currently reading through his dissertation. I would interview Dr. Gavin Ortlund and Dr. Jordan Cooper in a heartbeat, but I am not sure how productive my conversation would be with Dr. Wadsworth.
@@willieneon1He quoted Exodus 3:5 at 0:42 And I would say that Jesus' words in Matthew 23:19-22 are relevant here: "How blind you are! For which is greater, the gift or the altar that makes the gift sacred? So whoever swears by the altar, swears by it and by everything on it; and whoever swears by the sanctuary, swears by it and by the one who dwells in it; and whoever swears by heaven, swears by the throne of God and by the one who is seated upon it."
It seems that most Evangelicals would deny that matter can be sanctified. They may confess that a person’s soul can become holy, while denying any possibility of physical matter being sanctified by God’s grace. Grace, for the evangelical Protestant, is nothing more than Gods “unmerited favor” so any talk of physical items or places become holy by God’s presence or energies (Grace) is generally rejected.
"All places are holy," ergo *no* places are holy. It's the same logic they use when they say stuff like "the priesthood of believers." "All Christians are priests," meaning there *are* no priests. They don't realize it, but they are arguing that there is no need for any kind of order in the life of a Christian. At the very best, they are claiming that all Christians can invent their own way of worshipping God, make it up as they go along.
Why are some Protestants so bent on stripping holiness out of Christianity? Is it because their "worship" is so barren and their experience is so banal? It's like they don't believe all the biblical stories.
It’s because the notion that holiness is a real, tactile thing manifest in places, things, and especially people completely undermines Sola Fide and forensic justification. If holiness is real and observable then you can’t assert you’re Saved by legal fiat disconnected from how you actually live and behave.
The entire video is if course solid, but I particularly appreciate your articulation in the last couple minutes, thank you sir, Godbless.
I'll be praying these videos continue to spread
The fact that God used Paul's handkerchief or Elisha's bones to heal, the elements of the Eucharist to impart salvation and grace go against the Protestant notion that can't God use matter and sacred spaces for a greater good is just unbiblical. Hebrews 9 says the copies of the heavenly and the "heavenly things themselves" are purified by Christ's blood. This is because the earthly copies are just as relevant as the heavenly.
The idea or implication that protestants do not believe in the holy presence of God is not logical. It seems to be a broad brush approach based on a singular podcast video used in the context of this video. As a protestant, I believe in the real holy presence of God. I believe in Psalm 139 that provides a clear explanation of the presence of God. Through faith in Jesus Christ, I am now am indwelt by the Holy Spirit and God's omniscient present surrounds me, envelopes me. Does my attendance at gathering in church buildings enhance my experience with and in God's presence, of course it does.
This 'doctor' seems to have this unshakable presumption of bad faith, doesn't seem like an actual academic, wonder if he's from a diploma mill
I grew up in the exact same sort of paradigm which is heavily influenced by baptist theology which has expanded into the non-denominational megachurch movement. Many good people who love Christ and want to share Him with others but their understanding of the Church I believe to be a bit off =)
That’s ad hominem. It’s not right to simply presume that someone who has a different view from you has ‘bad faith’. That is unproductive and clearly not Christ-like.
Why not invite him to a dialogue? Debates tends to be less helpful than sit-downs, in my opinion. It would be helpful for everyone involved to avoid attacking each other, but instead to talk. As Christians it’s important to have more dialogues and less fights.
Last but not least, Dr. Wadsworth used the Scripture as his point of reference. Notice the author of this video did not use a single verse to support his claim. That’s a big difference, even if you don’t believe in Sola Scriptura.
@@willieneon1 I don't believe that Dr. Wadsworth has 'bad faith.' I said that baptist theology in which I grew up doesn't have room for seeing the holy and sacred in a sacramental way which goes beyond persons but into matter and material itself. Secondly, the reference of 'holy ground' is a Biblical reference which Christ does not disregard in the New Covenant but rather expands in His ministry and through the sacramental actions of the Church (Eucharist, Holy Oil, Altars, etc). Secondly, other channels have had dialogues with Dr. Wadsworth and I am currently reading through his dissertation. I would interview Dr. Gavin Ortlund and Dr. Jordan Cooper in a heartbeat, but I am not sure how productive my conversation would be with Dr. Wadsworth.
@@willieneon1He quoted Exodus 3:5 at 0:42
And I would say that Jesus' words in Matthew 23:19-22 are relevant here:
"How blind you are! For which is greater, the gift or the altar that makes the gift sacred? So whoever swears by the altar, swears by it and by everything on it; and whoever swears by the sanctuary, swears by it and by the one who dwells in it; and whoever swears by heaven, swears by the throne of God and by the one who is seated upon it."
@@willieneon1He referenced scripture multiple times