This video presents a comprehensive approach to evaluating historical claims and understanding Christian doctrine through evidence-based reasoning. The discussion covers how to critically examine the New Testament's historical reliability by analyzing scholarly consensus on manuscript variants, the gap between Jesus's death and Gospel writing, and the distinction between what happened and what was written. It also explores Old Testament references to the Trinity, explains why the Trinity solves theological problems like divine love, and addresses how Christians should respond to criticism while maintaining intellectual honesty. The video emphasizes that while we may not fully comprehend divine mysteries, we can apprehend them through careful study and evidence evaluation.
Deep Dive
Prerequisite Knowledge
- No data available.
Where to go next
- No data available.
Deep Dive
A skeptic said,There are equal evidence against and for the new testament stories/ Dr Frank Turek
Added:There's a lot of evidence from Christians and people who believe the Bible is true to to believe the Bible. There's a lot of evidence to say, "No, it didn't happen that way." Or here's here's at least reasons to doubt that it necessarily happened that way.
>> Yeah.
>> Right. So So then here I am >> like there's always one person making an argument and then there's a counter argument >> And so that's what I do. I find the counter arguments. Like listen to Case for Christ, then I listen to the case against the Case for Christ.
>> Joe >> That's me.
>> Alisa has not interacted yet. So >> Alisa >> Here we go.
>> does This pertains to what you're saying about um when you're going through your process of learning what the Bible actually says and why it holds to be true, etc. And you mentioned uh truth and objective truth um and I I I agree with that premise. So we don't have to talk about that.
So then things are either true if a claim about an historical event is either true or false. It either happened or it didn't.
>> Can you say that again? I'm sorry.
>> claim about a historical event is either true or false.
>> Correct. Yeah.
>> Okay. So then now I'm going to kind of combine that idea with I forgot your name.
>> Anna. That's okay.
>> with what Anna was saying um earlier.
um Because it it doesn't quite I don't understand how um or what it would mean to believe in Jesus. I think that's what you were saying. Without believing that he made the claims he said to have made and done the things he said to have done in the Gospels.
Christianity's a precise historical claim. And so it's either true or false.
How can what I experience raising my kids, living life, whatever, fill in the blank with the experience. How can what I experience possibly help me to know whether or not those specific claims about historical events are true or false? Since Since none of my experiences unless I have some kind of divine revelation, which I'm perfectly It'd be great. That'd be the easiest way. But aside from that how could those experiences help me know an objective fact about a event.
>> Fantastic question.
>> This is a good question and um I mean I'm the thing that just popped into my mind as we said this is like >> [clears throat] >> from my perspective you do have a divine revelation.
And I know that you're trying to get to the bottom of whether or not you think it's true and I and that's understandable. Um but I would say there's a difference between what is objectively true and our ability to know and articulate what is objectively true.
So something could have happened 8,000 years ago and I could be completely ignorant of it and it's still a fact of history whether I am able to know it or not. So I guess the best way I could answer your question is when it comes to objective claims of historical facts the best we can do is look at the evidence and then come to the best conclusion that we can based on that evidence.
>> So that's but that's surely you see that that is not what Anna just said. Uh when I was up here earlier she >> I to be honest with you I really could not hear a lot of what she was >> unbelievable.
>> No, I wasn't ignoring it's very difficult to hear on the stage because there's not a monitor. So I was just trusting that she was rocking it. I was like I'm sure it's great. I couldn't really hear >> So what I've been doing for a year is spending So I'm a carpenter. During the day I just turn on audiobooks or podcasts or whatever, okay.
So I spend >> I have a model for you.
>> A model carpenter?
>> Yeah.
>> Is it Jesus?
I get it.
So So I this is this is what I spend my 8 hours at work on is listening to these types of things and digging and digging and digging and where it's gotten me is there is a lot of evidence from Christians and people who believe the Bible is true to to believe the Bible. There's a lot of evidence to say no, it didn't happen that way or here's here's at least reasons to doubt that it necessarily happened that way.
>> Yeah.
>> Right. So So then here I am >> So there's like there's always one person making an argument and then there's a counter argument >> Which is and so that's what I do. I find the counter arguments. Like I listen to A Case for Christ and I listen to The Case against the Case for Christ. And I listened to both those books.
>> That's good. Yeah.
>> No, it's not good. It's annoying because >> [laughter] >> I I think the process is good. I I agree that. But it's annoying because then I get to this point I go, "Oh, okay.
So, did did it happen or not?"
>> Right. And I think I I obviously can't answer for you, but for me it was taking all of the different opinions.
>> Yep.
>> And for me, what I did, and I don't know if this would be helpful to you or not, but I would try to figure out what they all agree on. So, you know, I would read Bart Ehrman's blog, and then I would listen to lectures from seminary professor, New Testament scholars, let more conservative. And I would go, "What What is it that they agree upon?" So, like when it came to textual criticism, for example, which has to do with the transmission of the text. What they all agreed upon is that there's hundreds of thousands of variants between all the manuscripts. What they disagree on is what that means. And so then I would try to discover, well, even let's figure out what they agree about on what it even means. And even Bart Ehrman himself, famously skeptical scholar, would say that among all of these variations, there isn't one that would meaningfully change the gospel.
>> Sure.
>> Right? I mean >> changed it He He does have one now, but but I was going to say But may I jump in real quick? Because what they agree on Another thing they also agree on is that we don't know what happened in the decades prior to the Gospels being written.
>> I disagree with that.
>> The The The scholars overwhelmingly say, "Yeah, we can get it back to what was written."
>> No.
No, there there's there there are skeptical scholars, even Bart Ehrman himself, who will agree that there's creedal material that's recorded in the New Testament >> Right. They agree on the fact >> anywhere from 18 months to 7 years after Jesus' death.
>> Right, but that's not the same as saying what what's written in the Gospels is what happened. That's to say >> a different question. You just said >> That's my question.
>> you just said that they that scholars say that we get we don't know >> No, we don't know what happened to the stories, the account What I said was we don't know what happened in the decades before the Gospels were written. We don't know what happened to the accounts between it actually happening 32 AD, let's say let's pick that year.
Between 32 AD and whatever year you want to assign for the Gospels being written, whether you say 60, 70, 80, or 90s, whatever. In that time span, what happened to the accounts? How much did they change?
Somewhere between zero and a lot.
And and we don't know >> textual criticism for >> Yes, but that that that can only get us back to what was written.
>> Right.
>> That I'm talking about before it was written down. And Bart Ehrman So, you want to bring up Bart Ehrman? Bart Ehrman wrote the book this book called Jesus Before the Gospels. And in it, what he shows is people's memories were terrible. That this myth of it being an oral culture and all they memorized thing it's just there is no evidence for that. What the evidence shows is that it was passed along and that in that time period they actually had more of a way of talking and sharing things and presenting presentations in a way that would try to fit their audience regardless of whether or not it actually fit the truth the truth of the story.
>> Have you read Peter Williams on some of this?
>> Williams? Yeah.
>> So, there obviously are scholars that disagree with Ehrman on some of that of those things.
>> Well, but you were bringing up things they agree on and I was saying what one thing scholars >> disagree on that, so >> but one thing scholars agree on is what I was bringing up was that gap in time between the events and it being written down. They agree we don't know what happened there.
>> Well, I don't think that that more conservative scholars would say we don't know what happened because we have early creedal material that crystallizes what the Gospel actually was.
>> No, we have creedal material that shows those specific accounts were passed down to quote Paul or whoever wrote it in 1 Corinthians that I passed along what was passed on to me. So, all we know was that was what was passed along to him.
We don't have any evidence beyond that.
That that that that was the creed. So, now we know that was the Now we can and "Okay, that was probably the creed."
>> Well, I'm going to guess I'm not a Greek scholar and I'm going to guess you're not a Greek scholar, so we have to trust the Greek scholars who all agree that that particular creed that you're bringing up from 1 Corinthians 15 is dated even the more skeptical scholars date it even earlier.
>> Sure, very very early. I'm not disagreeing on the creed. I don't I don't Alyssa, I know I talk fast. I'm talking about the the events in the gospels, did they happen?
And no one can know if what happened is what was written down.
It's not possible because we don't have video tape or digital recording.
>> Well, that but if that's the standard that you're holding for all of history, do you hold all of history to that standard?
>> the board.
>> So, do you believe that like for example >> is I don't know. Whatever you guys say next, I would >> George Washington existed?
>> I don't know, but hold on. I don't care.
It makes no difference to me about anything else. All I care about, literally, all I care about is can I teach my kids what's true and am I going to be able to connect it to my creator or not? That's it. So, did George Washington even exist? Don't care.
>> And and that's a fabulous thing to care about.
>> Sure, great. I appreciate Thank you for the encouragement.
>> Appreciate that you care about that.
>> That's Thank you.
And how do I determine that?
>> I think the Have you read I mean I I keep wanting you to give book recommendations, but I don't think that's going to hit the need here. And I >> still make them.
>> I I don't Well, Cold Case Christianity is one.
>> J. Warner Wallace. You Have you looked into arguments against J. Warner?
Have you Have you Have you listened to any of the any of the critiques of J.
Warner's approach?
>> Yeah, there's lots of critiques of everything.
>> That's That's my point. So, you are This is Alyssa, I I really >> to But what you what I'm just going I'm going to throw it to Anna, but what I would suggest and just maybe what I would recommend or you asked about what I did. What I did was I'm not going to just say because this person is a scholar, I'm going to believe everything they say. I'm going to listen to what the other scholars say. And regular people >> Mhm. can have really good insights as well, and they can study deeply, which Jim did. He studied the the primary sources very deeply to follow that chain of custody for the Gospels. And I think he makes a really solid case that I was personally persuaded by, not just alone, but in addition to other things.
>> And so, you know, you're asking about my process. That was my process. Now, part of what I think maybe our brains might be a little different because the way my brain works is I really like to I'm I'm deci- I'm not saying you're indecisive.
I'm saying I'm really like I will do and then land. And maybe I I've noticed with other people they don't land as fast. And And I'm not saying I'm right about everything.
>> My wife is right there and I laughed because I I am I everything is easy for me to decide because I don't care.
Like you just pick you just set yourself apart, you don't feel anything, and you choose things. This is the one thing where you can't just do that.
>> Right.
>> And and the other thing that's different about this is that >> for some reason and I can't explain why, but I was able to to decide for myself on those things.
>> Sure. I think it's because of what you've shared, which I appreciate. I appreciate your honesty. You said you wanted it to be true. It's this beautiful thing and you really >> That's me trying to admit my bias to you because that's very important to admit your bias because I could have gotten up here and said, "Oh, I just wanted it to be totally You know, we all have to admit our bias." And I think that's the best way to overcome bias is to admit >> Uh I don't think we can overcome all our biases, but yes. But But what I'm getting at is you I think that's a fair starting point.
Because you can't you can't help what you want to have to be true. And yet that's not really super helpful when you're trying to analyze the evidence.
>> But also, if I could share, in my process of changing my theology, there was a lot of stuff I changed that I really wanted to be true, that I had to be like, "No, that's not true."
>> Mhm.
>> And so, there's there was both.
>> Yep.
>> Uh but But again, I just wanted to admit my bias that I did find the gospel beautiful. And so I it in my mind it was like I watched my friends just throw it out so easily.
>> Mhm.
>> And my purpose in communicating that was to say it wasn't so easy for me to throw it out. So I I fought for I fought for it because I did care.
>> Right.
>> And and but I do believe, hopefully I I'm being honest with myself, that if I would have discovered that it was false, if the if the evidence was overwhelming against it, then I would have had the courage to abandon it. I hope. I hope that that would be >> an option just to to say I don't know?
Did you ever consider that?
>> lived in that space for a long time.
>> Right. So I I I guess what I mean is that to to say it's not that it's false, it's that yeah, there's a creator and he he just hasn't revealed himself to us.
>> Well, yeah, but I don't believe that's true. So >> you ever consider that? I mean, if you did, that's okay. I I wasn't sure. Yeah.
>> I think my mind was persuaded that was true. I was totally double-minded because my mind was thinking that, my heart believed differently.
>> Can you Can you say that what you mean by your heart believed differently?
>> My my heart loved a a god that I really wasn't sure existed and probably maybe didn't exist.
>> Huh.
I don't understand. I believe you. I just >> understand it either.
>> I mean, that sentence it seems like nonsense to me. I'm not saying you're not saying that.
>> like nonsense. It was a very painful place to be in.
>> Yeah.
Appreciate it.
>> Hi. My name is Duncan.
Um, I appreciate what y'all are doing here. I'm a believer as well. I have a couple of questions about the Trinity.
First of all, you had mentioned that there were some examples of the Trinity in the Old Testament. I'm just a little curious if I could hear more about that and whether or not that audience should have expected a triune God.
And then my second question is a little bit more rambly.
So, I was watching >> Let's Let's go with the first one first.
Do you want to say anything to that?
>> Go ahead.
>> We have an article on our blog, the Cross Examined blog by Jonathan McLatchie, and it has in there the Trinity in the Old Testament. I can't remember the exact passages, but there's some in Isaiah. I know in Judges 6 there are two Yahwehs.
Um some say when in Genesis let us create man in our image, some say that is a reference to the Trinity, although some will dispute that.
But there are references in the Old Testament that suggest a plurality in the personhood of God.
It's not as clear obviously as in the New Testament as the New Testament I should say, but it's in there. And McLatchie has maybe two or three articles on our blog. So, if you go to the Cross Examined blog and and click on Trinity, McLatchie, or just Jonathan, you'll you'll find it.
All right?
>> All right, I'll check those out.
>> Yeah.
>> Um so, as for my second question, so I was watching this guy and he said he was a Christian YouTuber and he like he does a lot of like compilation videos on like conspiracy theories and stuff, but he was doing one on Christian concepts. And he talked about the Trinity and then he explained it like um it like making an analogy to humans having a body, soul, and spirit. It was like Jesus is the body, the God the Father is the soul, and the Holy Spirit is the spirit. And alarm bells started kind of going off in my head cuz it sounded like partialism.
>> It is. There's no analogy for the Trinity. Congratulations, you were listening wrong.
>> Yeah. But there was there was also part of me that's like, am I being a little too nitpicky? And where do we find the balance between having grace to people that may not understand all the way versus how do I know when to say, "Okay, this is wrong." And why is it important that you're extremely correct on this? Does that make sense?
>> Beautiful. It does make sense. I don't know.
It seems to me that it'd be something that would You said you were a believer, right?
>> Yeah.
>> That we would be expecting to walk by faith in the moment curated answers to whoever you're speaking with. Right?
Beseeching the Holy Spirit to help you.
Um and remembering to mimic the Lord as you watch the person in front of you receive what you're trying to say.
Um I'm not sure that I would ever be able to answer that with like one set answer for all people.
I tend to answer with both things, right? So, you're pointing out there's a problem with with giving an analogy for the Trinity. You also want to give grace that we do still have to try to We can We can apprehend and we may be not be able to comprehend the Trinity, right?
But, we can apprehend that there are Trinities that are regularly showing up in creation. And we can point at that and say, "Well, look, does does that not look like a fingerprint?" Like the fact that all of existence is a Trinity of Trinities.
Right? Length, width, height, past, present, future.
All those things, yeah. So, there is an analogy, but you would still be teaching partialism. Yeah. Um and so, you just want to say that out loud. Transparency, right? This is an incomplete analogy, but if it helps you grasp a hold of what we're talking about to continue the conversation, then let's use it. And if not, then we'll back up.
So, you're always serving the person who's asking the question.
Does that help? Make it worse?
Be better if there's a formula. Okay, I'm just making sure.
>> I just want to say three quick things and then just illustrate this for a second. Number one, it would be strange if an infinite God wasn't strange to us.
Number two, as C.S. Lewis said, some Muslims will say, "Well, Allah is simpler than Yahweh." And Lewis went on to say, "Well, of course, if we're inventing religions, we can make things simpler because you have no facts to bother with.
But if God truly is something beyond just a monotheistic being, we would expect something like this if he is beyond just a purely monotheistic being, one person.
Third thing is is I think the Trinity actually solves problems rather than creates them. Because how could God be love if he was purely a monotheistic being? There would be no one to love.
But if there's a lover, loved one, and a spirit of love, you have love from all eternity.
And as And it just said, there's no perfect analogy, but this is the one my mentor, Dr. Norman Geisler, used to use just to give a sense of what the Trinity might be like.
If you think of a triangle, you have a divine nature, it's one triangle with three corners, and you have three persons in that trian- triangle, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Jesus has a human nature that is not intermingled with a divine nature, but he has two natures.
And so when you ask a question about Jesus, you always ask You always have to ask two questions. Cuz people would say, "How could Jesus be God if he didn't know when he was coming back?" Did Jesus know when he was coming back as God?
Yes, but as man, no. Did Jesus get hungry? As God, no. As man, yes.
Another way of looking at this is to say that God is one what with three who's.
He is a what, a divine nature, but he has three who's. Who Who one is the Father, who two is the Son, and who three is the Holy Spirit. Jesus, on the other hand, is one who with two what's, a what one, which is divine nature, and a what two, the human nature in who too?
This is Abbott and Costello theology, just so you know.
So, um you can see that this is not a contradiction. It may be beyond reason, but it's not against reason. And as Anna also just said, we can apprehend it even if we can't completely comprehend it.
So, the Trinity, we have a section in I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist on this.
Um I think actually makes sense when you think about it this way.
>> All right, thank you all.
>> All right, thank you.
>> Uh hi, my name is also Lauren. Um and I I really have been going over in my head how I'm supposed to talk about this and like how to word it. It's nothing too crazy, but um I don't know if I'm going to say the right words, so bear with me. And I also don't really know what specific answer I'm looking for. I'm just looking for an answer.
Um so, I've I grew up in the Bible Belt.
I've grown up weird my whole life and I've gotten looks for it my whole life.
I'm about to be 22 years old, well, next month, yeah, starting tomorrow.
Um and it's it's crazy to me sometimes how I get looked at. And I'm maybe just wearing a different top than somebody else would maybe wear.
Um and I struggled with that a lot in the church, especially, because it was like, "Okay, so I know I'm different from everybody else.
But why does that matter? Because I'm a child of God and they're children of God. And I'm trying to find God the way everybody else is. So, why is everybody looking at me weird when I maybe say something in a different way? Or maybe I have interests that they're not interested in.
And I know that a lot of people deal with that on a majorly severe level, on a way different level than me. Like maybe they struggle with uh not knowing if they're comfortable in the gender that they they were assigned at birth or if they're comfortable with the gender they're attracted to, stuff like that, but they want to get close to God and they don't feel like they can because they're not surrounded by uh a culture or um a group of people that are letting them have that space to grow closer to God even if they are living in sin, even if they are struggling with things that the other people don't. Like, what words of encouragement could you give to everybody in this room to like be able to handle like knowing how to deal with people that maybe have different interests than you, don't understand you, maybe don't have the same ideas with you. Just like, how do you encourage people to grow closer to God when they feel so far from it?
Does that make sense?
>> Yeah.
It sounds like you're acting out one of Jesus' roles.
This is me looked at and rejected based on behaviors that people didn't understand and judged based on appearances without further investigation.
The I happened to watch the live chat for a second while these guys were speaking.
And I was laughing in the back. You may have heard me.
Because people were already commenting on these.
>> [laughter] >> And we've gotten lots of compliments and lots of like, what is that? And I mean, we're talking the judgments were, is she woke?
Is she Is she laughing as Wonder Woman?
Um is she like, what what exactly is going on here? And the truth is is that no, I got some really cool Byzantine vambraces for my birthday cuz I'm a nerd.
And I like them and I don't have an excuse to wear them very often, but I want other super nerd theology girls, who I know are out there, to know that it's okay.
And I want them to see that. So, it's a lot it's a lot of premeditated stuff, but it's also just cuz I like them, right?
People are people and they're going to continue to people and it's going to be really poor until Jesus comes back. But, the amount of grace and mercy and forgiveness and your resilience in not returning the favor is also acting out Christ to them.
So, rejoice.
>> Thank you.
>> Good job, Lauren.
>> Also, I like them. I love Byzantine art.
>> I can wear them.
>> [applause] >> Yeah, I would I would add one thing.
It's a great question. I think that we need to take an interest in other people by asking them um where they're coming from, why they're coming from that position.
Because how are we going to reach out to people if we don't do that? If we don't ask, "Hey, what's your story?" And and why do you look at things that way? You know, how were you brought up? What were you taught? What What do you believe?" And we should be asking a lot of questions as Christians.
Instead of just saying, "Oh, you don't believe as I do." Well, forget it.
How is that evangelism? How is that loving people? Let me say one other thing that I think is is very helpful that I've I didn't come up with this, somebody else did, but there's a lot of people in the church that will disappoint you. But when somebody plays Beethoven poorly, who do you blame?
You don't blame Beethoven, right? So, when someone plays Jesus poorly, you don't blame Jesus.
Just because I'm not true and beautiful doesn't mean Jesus isn't true and beautiful. So, let's keep our eyes on Jesus. Yes, go ahead.
>> Um I agree with that completely and this will just be a statement. Um another thing I wanted to say and forgot was that like I went through those things. I went through the austra- aust- I got ostracized for things that I felt like were really dumb. Um and I still stayed true to my faith because I had it. And my opinions on things changed all the time and I cried a lot of tears over a lot of people maybe not wanting to be friends with me, maybe not inviting me to their Bible study. And all of this to say exactly what you're saying, it didn't jip me of how I believed about God and his character because we're not his character. We're called to try to be that, but we're never going to be and we're going to make a lot of mistakes. So, I'm just thankful that I I stayed and I've mentioned that to Anna before.
I'm thankful that nothing nothing brought me away from God even when I really was like, "Man, dude, why'd you make me like this? Like kind of weird."
>> Hello. My name's Christian.
>> Christian, go ahead.
>> My question is I was talking with a Yeah, in the cafeteria at school and he said he was a Muslim.
And kind of talked back and forth and he asked me how can somebody like Paul who before he became a Christian was persecuting the Jews and he had uh people like Stephen that got stoned under his authority.
How can he still get into heaven with all of that that he's done? What about the people that he stoned that didn't get a say, that got done wrong by him?
Where does their I guess you would say their justice come in?
>> Because nobody deserves heaven. Nobody.
It's all grace.
The justice fell on Jesus, not on Paul, not on me, not on you, not on anyone.
>> Mhm.
>> That's the beauty of the gospel. That's one of the reasons that Alyssa just said she found it beautiful. I find it beautiful, too.
Why wouldn't you want it to be true is my question.
Now, is it true? That's another question. But, why wouldn't you want it to be true that the God of the universe, who's infinitely just, if he's infinitely just, he has to punish sin, but since he's infinitely loving, he doesn't want to punish us.
So, he punishes an innocent substitute in his place.
That's Jesus. But, I would ask the Muslim, would he want Christianity to be true? And if it was true, would he become a Christian?
Let's see what he says.
Does that make sense?
>> Yeah.
And what to my mind was it was the reason that that can happen is it's because of God's unconditional love.
>> Yes.
It's infinite love.
It's not unconditional.
There is a condition on it. He's not going to force anyone into heaven against their will.
He wants you to accept the free gift.
Because being in heaven, if you don't want to be with Jesus, it's not going to be heaven.
>> Mhm.
But I guess I I would mean unconditional in the sense that it doesn't matter what we do. He would still love us either way.
>> Yes.
He loves us.
But just like here on this earth, a pardon doesn't go into effect until the prisoner accepts it.
>> Mhm.
>> We have to accept it.
>> Thank you.
>> All right. Thank you.
>> Uh I'm Will and I'm going to I I'm in high school and I have a lot of friends who like to ask Christian uh questions about Christianity. And I know that there is answers to some of these questions. I just don't quite have them. And one of these questions I I would need an answer to is my like my friend asks, "How is it that people very, very evil, like Hitler for example, can go to heaven on their deathbed theoretically, but like very, very kind people can uh just go to hell if they don't believe in Jesus?" And I I know there is an answer for that. I just want like a clear explanation that I can give him.
>> You don't go to heaven for being good.
There are no good people in heaven.
We're all fallen.
We all need a savior.
In fact, just think about this for a second, that if you just sin once a day, which is an absurdly low number for fallen creatures like us, but just once a day you're short with somebody, you're selfish one time a day, you have evil thoughts, you do something bad.
If you live for 70 years, that's over 25,000 crimes on your rap sheet.
Is anyone going to be able to stand before God after 70 years and say, "I was a pretty good person?"
You were?
Look at this rap sheet here.
No.
You weren't a really good person.
So, none of us are good.
But as we mentioned earlier, Jesus takes our punishment upon himself and nobody goes to heaven because of what they've done. We go to heaven based on what he's done.
And God is not going to force anybody into heaven against their will. The assumption is everyone who wants to be in heaven, that's not true. Who's in heaven? Jesus is in heaven.
There have been people running from Jesus their entire lives. Why is he going to force them into his presence in the afterlife?
There's really logically only two places you can go.
You can go be with Jesus, that's heaven, or you can be separated from Jesus, that's hell.
And if evil people, and we're all evil, but if people that have done much more evil things accept Christ, they'll be in heaven, but they're going to lose rewards. This is what Paul teaches in 1 Corinthians chapter 3. They'll be getting into heaven as if a man gets through a fire just with his clothes being singed is what Paul puts it in some language like that.
So, nobody deserves to be in heaven.
But God is not going to force anybody there.
And um you don't go to hell because you haven't accepted Jesus. You go to hell because you've sinned.
To say you go to hell because you haven't accepted Jesus is it would be like saying um I died because I didn't go to the doctor. No, you died because you had a disease. Now, maybe you could prevent dying, at least temporarily, by going to a doctor.
But if you choose not to go to the doctor, it's not because you didn't go to the doctor, it's because you had a disease that caused you to die.
So, um hell is justice and heaven is grace.
And you're we're we're going to get one or two things. We're either going to get justice or we're going to get grace.
And this is called the second law of thermodynamics.
When you run out of justice or you run out of juice. So, it's good this is the last question. You guys have got anything to add?
>> I think that was an excellent close. Do you feel satisfied with that answer?
>> Yeah, thank you.
>> very much.
>> All right.
>> Ladies and gentlemen, thank you. My name is Shay.
>> Shay, Shay.
>> for you. I love you. You come up in my algorithm and I think God's telling me to listen to your podcast. So, I'm going to start doing that.
My question, I'm not even sure exactly how to formulate it, but our church is going through something after some changes, trying to um I would say restructure in a bit, build leadership.
I feel on fire that this is like for such a time as this. I'm like, I'm ready for this.
But being a woman, and we've talked about that, like I feel tempered at times, um I want to help my church. I was just listening to you today talk about the four eyes.
Uh but our church is talking about its identity.
In essence, what do we put out online so that people know what they're getting into when they come here. And it's got to be more than we love Jesus.
Cuz that's misconstrued.
So, I'm looking for words of wisdom for how should our church It doesn't matter what denomination, but it's non-denominational Christian church, and I'm thinking of these apostles and how they died and what they died for, and they set the standard for the church.
What do we put out there to say this is what we stand for without getting too political, this and that?
And what is your best advice to me to help my church through this time?
>> Well, I'll start. I I would advise you to be clear.
I think people really want clarity. When when I'm looking at different churches, I want to know specifically what they believe and what they stand for. And the churches that have these kind of wishy-washy statements that you can't really tell what they believe about things, I don't think that's helpful.
So, I I think my advice would be be very, very clear on what you believe about God, about Jesus, about the Bible, about the gospel.
And um be very clear on what the essentials are versus non-essentials, what your positions are on non-essentials. I think that's important when people are looking at churches. I think it's also helpful for churches to make a statement on the sanctity of life and marriage because those are two extremely polarizing issues, but and and there's a reason for that, too, because you don't want to trick people into coming You know, there are churches that say, "All are welcome."
>> Right.
>> But and they don't put on their website that they they actually affirm the biblical definition of marriage, and then people come thinking, "Oh, this is a affirming church." And then they feel tricked. So, I would just with graciousness, I would advise you to be very clear on what your positions are and word it in a way that's gracious and loving but truthful.
>> Put it out there.
>> Does that answer your question? Do you want a little bit more?
>> I'd love to hear from you.
>> You do?
>> Yeah.
>> Oh, thank you. Okay, that's nice.
Um my study of church history has shown, as far as I can tell, that there's no way around all of the debates and the complexity that you're getting at, that you're already anticipating.
Um so, I would recommend just transparency.
So, we want to be main and plain and clear about orthodoxy, which shouldn't be hard to do from with a bunch of Christians. But, as you move into the more controversial secondary and tertiary issues, if you haven't come down on the position as a group, just say that out loud. We are still investigating this, and we are still studying this to figure out where we land. And that way, everybody who enters your community and your parish knows what they're entering and can have a say.
And then, as far as you all are concerned, be excellent of what is good and innocent of evil, and don't bear false witness.
And the Lord will work with you.
>> All right. Thanks, guys.
>> Thank you.
>> Um first, I want to thank you all for doing this. I really admire all of you.
Um my question is how do you all feel about the Passion Translation?
>> Yuck. Gross. Next question. [laughter] Is it okay that I super don't like the Passion Translation?
>> don't like it, either.
>> What's what's kind of your arguments behind that?
>> Say that again.
>> What's kind of like the arguments behind that about why it's bad?
>> Well, okay. So, the Passion Translation, for anybody who's unfamiliar, is a single author. It's not It's not a translation. It's a single author Bible that the the guy who wrote it does not have training in the original languages, and he claims that God downloaded this information to him. And if And Mike Winger has done a great series on this if you go on YouTube, where he actually interviewed scholars that are on translation teams for different translations, and they evaluated the differences. And ultimately, there's a Australian New Testament scholar that I read I'm sorry maybe Old Testament scholar where he compared the original with the passion translation and he said I this is exactly the translation I would expect uh to lead people into a cult.
Cuz it changes the text enough to give you a like a different paradigm, a different worldview. And so I would just say avoid it. It's not a real translation. I agree with Anna super duper don't like it.
>> It's really good kindling for your fireplace.
>> [laughter] >> Um you should know I'm a cult and new religion specialist so I'm a little bit eccentric on this stuff but we've been tracking how many times the Passion Translation app has been updating as apologists make criticisms and they're quietly making addendums and then not like erasing the previous version so you can't see what they changed. It's a cult.
Don't do it. Don't do it.
>> Cuz I know some people would say it's just a paraphrase like any other paraphrase so y'all would disagree with that?
>> I don't even think it's a paraphrase because I mean yeah maybe you could loosely call it a bad paraphrase but it's it's a it's a bad one at that.
>> He's adding his own revelation.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay thank you.
>> You're welcome.
>> Amari um I'm 16 and I started I started going back to church in sixth grade um and I attended a Pentecostal church for a little bit up until eighth grade and uh it was very like emotionally high and low as you would imagine it would be but um and I I started to realize that sometimes like my faith would I I'd be on fire but then you know I'd hit that emotional high but then when something happened I'd hit that low.
Um and my uncle he he's a atheist uh he would be considered one um and I started asking him questions and then my only evidence for a God was just personal encounters with the Holy Ghost.
And um and I started asking him questions about like why he doesn't believe in a God or anything. And uh he he said this. He said that God is defined as a conscious and if God existed before the universe existed, then God would have nothing to be conscious of. And if nothing exists and there's nothing for consciousness to be aware of, therefore God couldn't be conscious. If you're not conscious, then he doesn't exist. Existing without consciousness is impossible. And if God existed before everything, there would be nothing to be aware of. So, how could God be conscious? And that question uh it's been like I I I don't know how to like look into it like really. I'm kind of confused by it.
>> I don't think his counter argument to deism is true because God was conscious of himself.
And you can be conscious of yourself even if you don't know anything is around you. You can wake up in the middle Do you ever wake up in the middle of the night? We do this a lot all of us cuz we travel. We wake up in the middle of the night we go like, "Where am I?"
You know, you're in a hotel somewhere like, "What town am I in?" You forget for a minute, but you're conscious of yourself. You just don't know anything else.
You can be conscious even if nothing else exists.
There has to be an uncaused first cause and that uncaused first cause has to be personal.
Because in order to go from nothing to a state of creation, someone had to make a choice and only persons make choices.
Impersonal forces don't make choices.
You know, gravity doesn't decide if it's going to pull something to the ground.
It just does it.
So, to go from a state of nothingness to state of creation, the cause of the universe had to be personal.
Had to be and I'm conscious of the feedback. So, I'm moving over here. It had to be personal.
But nothing else had to exist for that being to exist. That it doesn't follow that yeah, there had to be other things I had the being had to be conscious of in order for it to exist. It doesn't follow.
>> Okay. And another question. Um so, I have your book I don't have enough faith to be an atheist and I've been reading it.
>> You're saved.
Look at this. Perfect.
>> Um I'm only on chapter three though. But um >> He's not saved.
>> [laughter] >> He's He's confessing. That's a good sign.
>> All right. But um so far I like it actually. It's really caught my attention. If it didn't catch my attention, I probably wouldn't read it cuz uh yeah, I'm 16 so I don't like >> Just so you know, I only got to chapter four myself.
>> But uh I haven't got to I think you talk about in chapter seven when I was like reading uh like about morality and stuff. And another question I asked my uncle was like can people that aren't religious or that don't follow a like religious textbook, can they can they like have morals?
>> Absolutely.
>> Okay.
>> The argument is not that atheists don't know morality.
The argument is not that atheists can't be moral. The argument is is that atheists can't justify morality.
Because there's no objective standard beyond themselves. It's just your opinion, right?
It's like you can drive down the highway and say I see the speed limit is 70 miles an hour.
And you can actually obey the speed limit at 70 miles an hour.
But there would be no speed limit to obey unless there was a traffic authority.
Right? There wouldn't be a sign that said 70 miles an hour unless there was a traffic authority.
So, what we are saying is that atheists can see the sign, atheists can obey the sign, but there wouldn't be a sign unless an authority existed. And in this case it's God whose nature is the standard of morality. And out of his nature he issues us commands congruent with his nature.
>> Okay. So, that makes sense? Like Yeah, it makes sense. Um but like so like an animal, since like we're different from animals, we don't survive off of instinct, right?
We survive off So, like we don't Do we use human reasoning?
Or >> Yeah, when a when a a lion kills a a gazelle, he's not murdering the gazelle because he's not a moral being. It's not a moral action. But we have the capacity, mind, emotion, and will to make choices.
And so we are moral beings and God gave us that capacity in the Garden of Eden.
People say, "Why did God allow that to happen?" If he didn't, we would have no ability to disobey him, which means we really wouldn't have an ability to be a moral creature.
And since we he did give us that ability, we are moral creatures and as Alyssa said earlier, that's why he had to come.
Because when we committed evil, God had to come into this universe to add humanity to his deity and take the punishment we're due upon himself so he could remain just and justify unjust people like me and you.
So, Christianity is the answer to the problem of evil.
Uh that's why God had to come into this world cuz we had done evil. We are moral creatures, animals are not.
>> Okay. And one more question. Can you sign my book?
Or No.
>> Well, Alyssa does he can sign your book.
>> Yeah, I can but Alyssa has better penmanship. Can she sign it?
>> Okay. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
>> No, no, no, we'll be up here later.
>> Okay.
Related Videos
Communist manifesto was written by Marks and ?
ApnaHistoryOfficial
1K views•2026-06-16
Churches Were Preaching To Make Money | Michael Jones Inspiring Philosophy Speakers corner
LilLaaHilHamd
140 views•2026-06-14
Mandukya Upanishad | Day 52 | Swami Nikhilananda Saraswati
swami.nikhilananda.saraswati
119 views•2026-06-17
The Moral Ethics of Hamsterdam - The Wire
TheShowiest
1K views•2026-06-19
Discovering Better Logics in a Binary World | Dr. Tamice Spencer-Helms | TNE Podcasts
thenewevangelicalspodcast
148 views•2026-06-15
The Person You Protect Does Not Exist
TheChopraWell
1K views•2026-06-16
The Most Honest Lucid Dreaming Video I've Ever Made
luciddreamingteacher
153 views•2026-06-20
June 16, 2026
nickcbarr
1K views•2026-06-16











