Some are not aware how much evidence for Jesus there is outside the Bible.

The testimony of the Jewish historian Josephus, dated to 93/94 A.D., corroborates much of the basic story of the New Testament about Christ. Josephus was born in Jerusalem in 37 AD. He was a Pharisee, a military general, and then became a historian. He wrote about Jesus, John the Baptist, Pilate, James, and Herod.

However, the authenticity of his passage about Jesus has often been questioned.

The Nicene Creed isn't a dry and dusty list of doctrines. It's a beautiful articulation of the heart of the gospel, crafted in the fires of controversy.

For modern hearts aching for substance and depth, this ancient creed is like a map to the wandering and food to the hungry. My favorite parts:
-"Light From Light" as describing the Son
-"Life-giver" (single Greek term) for the Spirit
-the full narrative scope of Christ's work, including burial, ascension, second coming
-the anti-Gnostic undercurrent, affirming creation and resurrection of the body

Every now and again, I'm called a "liberal" on this website. Usually it’s for things like accepting an old earth, holding to a local flood, being too ecumenical, or not fitting neatly into political categories.

For newcomers or curious onlookers, a short thread. 🧵 1. I’m a classical evangelical Protestant.

I affirm biblical inerrancy, substitutionary atonement, the reality of hell, traditional views of marriage and gender—basically historic Christianity in sum. My theological heroes are Augustine, Anselm, John Owen, and C.S. Lewis.

From what I'm reading, A.I. is not a remote, future challenge. It's something we all should be thinking about right now. I’m not sure what to make of the more dire predictions, but at the very least, major economic shifts from AI seem just around the corner.

On Monday I will release a video entitled "what is heresy?"

Working on the script has me reflecting back on the charges of "heresy" I got for advocating for a local flood view. You may recall!!

Let's take this as a test case for what is at stake in how we define heresy. 🧵 Defining heresy matters because when we use the term too often, we dilute its meaning. This leaves us more vulnerable to *actual* heresy. Its like the boy who cried wolf.

If theological triage entails liberalism, then John Calvin is a liberal. Turretin argued some doctrines are “primary and immediate; such as the articles concerning the Trinity, Christ the Mediator, justification;” while others are secondary (Institutes 1.14.8). On this basis he argued the Eastern Orthodox were wrong about the filioque, yet it was not a damnable error, because it didn’t deny the Trinity itself, or the divinity of the Spirit (Institutes 1.14.15).

Since being on YouTube I have come to appreciate it more as a space, and other YouTubers using it well. One of my favorites is @DrJordanBCooper. He has theological depth and sane judgment and a kind demeanor, qualities sadly rare online. youtube.com/@DrJordanBCoop… Another newer channel that is doing great is Nate Sala at Wise Disciple (@NateAsks). He is a great dude and just killing it lately. I find his videos devotional and refreshing. youtube.com/@WiseDisciple

Respectfully submitted:

The light (day 1) before luminaries (day 4) is *in* the text. One can disagree with Augustine's interpretation of this. But he is not "starting outside of Scripture."

Let's hear, in his own words, why Augustine rejected 24 hour days in Genesis 1. (1/14)

https://twitter.com/aigkenham/status/1724412366492733670

On the sequence of days:

"who can fail to see how problematic is their implication that times began on the fourth day, as though the preceding three days could have passed without time?"

This problem greatly vexed Augustine. He calls it a "mystery" and a "secret."

To the common retort, "reform should have happened WITHIN the church," I point out that Hus and Luther were priests.

Hus was burned. Luther was excommunicated. So with others.

How do you protest from WITHIN when the church kills you or kicks you out?

Blaming the Reformers for not staying within the church is like locking someone in a closet for 6 hours during the party, and then afterwards calling them anti-social.

It's like locking someone outside their office and then complaining they didn't work enough that day.

I love Kierkegaard. I often feel modern theologians should engage him more:

1) he was himself a theologian, not just a philosopher
2) his existentialist themes are profoundly relevant to modern times (e.g., our epidemic of anxiety)
3) he is a unique and fascinating thinker What prompted this sentiment was reading this interesting new book, which highlights how God's changelessness was a theme of Kierkegaard's sermons, informed by classical theology, and relevant to modern theology:
amazon.com/Kierkegaard-Ch…

Why I love sola Scriptura:

Christianity is a revealed religion: thus, the era of public revelation has priority in defining it. Practices that are unknown in this time and only appear centuries after public revelation ceased (like praying to saints) must be tested by revelation. This simple and reasonable instinct to measure the post-apostolic church by the deposit of public revelation is the heart of sola Scriptura: we simply want to keep Christianity as God revealed it, against later deviations, declensions, accretions, innovations, and aberrations.

"We don't have the answers.... This is a collaborative effort. If apologetics is going to be useful in this generation, it’s going to have to be led through humility and through prayer."

-@collinhansen

christianitytoday.com/ct/2023/februa… "Our goal is through cultural apologetics to get underneath the surface-level conversations that so many people are having right now about faith to get down to the deeper social structures, or what Tim and others would call a “thick” view of sin rather than a thin one."

Can you be an ecumenical Baptist?🧵

I often get flack from fellow Baptists for the view Derek mentions here. Advocates of closed membership/communion say that my position is "not a Baptist view." I have heard this claim many times. Here is why I find it untenable.

https://twitter.com/derekradney/status/1617926967231410179

When John Bunyan published Differences about Water Baptism No Bar to Communion in 1673, he was not innovating; his predecessor in Bedford, John Gifford, had held to open membership. The appendix included a work of Henry Jessey, a Baptist pastor in London who argued similarly.

Many people are surprised to discover that as a Baptist, I hold to the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist. But did you know that this is actually the prevailing historic Baptist view? (1/7) Most 17th and 18th century Baptists roughly followed John Calvin's "spiritual presence" view, in which we feast upon Christ and his benefits by faith through the Lord's Supper. It was not a mere memorial. It was a rich means of grace and unique occasion for communion with Christ.

When we say, "the problem of evil is a problem for everyone," we don't necessarily mean it's the same *kind* of problem for everyone. E.g., the theist has to explain why God would allow it; the naturalist has to explain what makes it "evil." On this latter point, many have argued that apart from God it is hard/impossible to ground objective moral values and duties (WLC, Plantinga, etc.). This is what CSL was getting at when he said, "A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line."

Re. the great resignation among clergy. What can churches do?

Some short-term ideas:
1. give your pastor(s) a raise
2. offer a paid sabbatical
3. offer paid counseling or coaching
4. support their family (e.g., set up regular free babysitting for those with young kids) There are lots of short-term steps like this that may not fix the larger cultural challenges but are still deeply helpful. They not only bless, they show care and affection, which is perhaps just as important. A pastor who feels loved is less likely to throw in the towel.

One of the responses to my last tweet is the "stop focusing on the extremes" complaint. There are "a few odd nuts," it is said, but they are not representative of evangelicalism as a whole. One tiny house is burning, not the neighborhood. Etc.

Let's talk about that. 1/8 A majority of evangelicals still believe the 2020 election was stolen. Roughly 60%. Just think about that. It's an astonishingly high number. It has not gone down much in the last year. What does this bode for future elections? This is not a small problem. 2/8

This only works if you insist on equating "credo" with "mainstream English-language Baptist, ignoring exceptions." The view that paedobaptism is improper but valid is common in Europe (Barth, Thorwald Lorenzen, Torsten Bergesten), Australia, India, and elsewhere.

https://twitter.com/paleomexicano/status/1469795451868094464

Additionally, plenty of credo groups and scholars affirm baptismal regeneration (Church of Christ, Everett Ferguson, George Beasley-Murray; David Wright is dual practice), and historically, many Baptists have had a broadly high sacramentalism:
amazon.com/More-than-Symb…

Enjoying this. Excellent biography. Among other personal takeaways, its been a reminder of how expansive the neo-Calvinist social vision was. For instance, in his later years Bavinck was an ardent advocate for female suffrage and women's role in society in general. He spoke often at women's societies around the Netherlands. Earlier he had advocated for female theological students to be admitted to the Free University of Amsterdam. During his visit to America he became deeply concerned about racism, warning about its future consequences.

Regarding Christians and the pursuit of justice:

I've been helped by reading Gregory of Nyssa's 4th Homily on Ecclesiastes, which he preached during Lent in 379.

Jennifer Glancy calls the sermon "the most scathing critique of slave-holding in all of antiquity."

Thread ---> The sermon starts by quoting Ecc. 2:7: "I obtained servants, maidens, servants born to me."

Gregory asks:

"Do we find a person who regards himself as lord over his fellow man? Do you see here a pride which makes false pretensions? Such words as these rise up against God."

On the Lord's Supper during quarantine. Been thinking. A question:

If "when you come together" throughout I Cor 11 requires physical proximity for the Lord's Supper, why doesn't "when you come together" in I Cor 14:26 require physical proximity for singing and/or teaching? (Here's the verse:

"What then, brothers? WHEN YOU COME TOGETHER, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for building up."

I Cor. 14:26)