Видео

Loving this conversation. Many thanks.

Yes, although Queen Elizabeth did not fully reform the Church of England getting rid of those candlesticks. You had reformation happening in the schools.

Dr. R. Scott Clark recommended by audible word in class, DeGreef’s work that was translated by Bierma titled the Writings of John Calvin.

Whoa, what a lecture! Thanks for this.

Great conversation, professor Chad Van D. Greetings from Tapachula Chiapas, Mexico.

Amen! Beware Vanity Fair!

I'd really like to hear a part 2. Maybe Chad could even be a semi-regular.

I heard Chad Van Dixhoorn for the first time at the Banner of Truth-Eastcoast minister conference 22 or 23. I greatly appreciate this episode. It was such a helpful discussion. Thank you, gentlemen.

Great conversation so far (23 min. in).

For books on Knox there's also Donald Macleod's "Therefore the Truth I Speak: Scottish Theology 1500 - 1700". In addition there is an older lecture on Knox by Macleod on my channel. The video has captions/subtitles to make the English easier to follow. Other lectures from this series were on Robert Bruce, Samuel Rutherford, Thomas Boston and Thomas Chalmers.

Pastor Kevin, here is my question: a Christian home with godly Father/husband (male headship) sets apart whole household including infant baptism. Does this apply when it is the Godly wife/ mother (with an unbelieving husband) does she set apart the whole household unto God?

I would make two counter arguments to Dabney. First, a soft Christian establishment is a good thing, namely blue laws, the Lord's prayer, and Bible readings in public schools, etc. I am sure Dabney supported this. Second, Dabney could advocate for the superiority of free associations only after 1500 years of de facto establishment of Christianity and cultural hegemony. Sadly, we are closer culturally now to Augustine than to Dabney. The Theodosian Code was a form of lawfare against paganism and we will probably need that again.

How very, very disappointing, Kirk. Would Jesus shun LGBT+ people? No. Would Jesus forget the golden rule? Would He refuse to treat others with respect? You are a pseudo Christian at best. “Love thy neighbor” does not specify which neighbors are “acceptable”. I am so disappointed that one of my once favorite Spartans is such 3:15 narrow minded individual. I sincerely hope you can find your way to supporting VP Harris for president. The other choice is a convicted felon, sexual abuser, lying, cheating, three times divorced , traitor to our country. He has broken almost every Commandment. Nothing in the Commandments says anything about gay people. Signed, Sad and disappointed.

Thank you, Kevin, for explaining carefully about whole households and infant baptism. I understand now that is the marking out of the God we serve in our home and in Church attendance. Not necessarily signifying, but hoping the children will come to saving grace at the appointed time.

If God cannot change whatsoever, God cannot become man. God cannot change whatsoever, therefore God cannot become man.

Absolutely gold

Wonderful!

Love this. Thank you.

I'm listening from Uganda, Africa Reformation Theological Seminary. How can I get in touch with Dr. Joel Beeke?

One of the best clearly reformed episodes! Thank you to Dr. DeYoung and Reverend Helopoulos for the great wisdom!

This is series is so critically important right now. Thanks for all the effort in producing it, it's not unappreciated!

I believe Eric Liddell won the men’s 400 in Paris 100 years ago in 1924? Made me think of that as I listen to you guys talk about the Olympic Games. I’m not a runner but makes me want to watch Chariots of Fire again.

LBE is usually good, but when the three wise men gather to pontificate, it's something special. This episode, although not as entertaining as some of their other collaborations, was so helpful. The exhortation to become better writers was like a free mini-writers conference. Thank you. Of course, knowing that one of them may read this and judge my punctuation, syntax, and adherence to the Chicago Manual of Style makes leaving this comment a little anxiety producing. On another note, I may start a Go Fund Me to relocate Justin and his family to a home that isn't on a major fault line. What other than earthquakes in Iowa can explain the disaster of books always behind him?

One of my Olympic grievances, and I know that this has become commonplace for a number of decades now in both the summer and winter games, but I am just not a fan of American athletes draping under the American flag as if it were a beach towel. A flag which often inevitably gets dragged on the ground and crunched up as athletes take their customary post-match walk garnering celebratory hugs, interviews, and photo ops. Not to mention, it just seems to convey an underlying gloating optic to it all, particularly when it's coming from a traditional Olympic powerhouse nation. For once I'd like to see an American deny the proverbial 'flag robe'. And if questioned by reporters about it, simply say "I'm not a flagpole, which is where that flag belongs." Somehow, the code of respect to be shown to the American flag has fallen by the wayside. On a another note, I find that the older I get, the more I'm inclined to root for team humility or team sportsmanship or team cinderella-story, rather than purely team USA or specific hometown allegiances. Unfortunately, those rooting interest traits are a rarer find in much of mainstream modern day sport, which instead is more commonly littered with chest-thumping, trash-talking, showboating, ego inflated, 'look-at-me' celebratory posturing.

Joy to see you guys back! Really enjoyed whenever you three come together chat and to share thoughts... insightful too..

I have read through Dr Fesko’s books on the Covenant of Redemption and Covenant of Works. I am not going to say the books are an exhaustive source for each topic but they are very close! They are a must have for anyone’s library! Blessings

Divine infinity is problematic

Greetings from Brazil! We´re reading here too!

Thank you for this comparison with the 1689 LBCF and your review of Dispy Theology and PC. You are gifted teacher and preacher. Blessings

What ever happened to Lyrical Theology? Shai Linne from Rap battles on the streets of Philly to moving his ministry to Portland, OR. He is still reformed, just not restless and none of us are young anymore. Flash in the pan.

Aquinas discusses the five ways much more in his Summa Contra Gentiles.

The church needs a 200 pg. summary of Horton's new book with theological conclusions applied to those insights.

How many purposes of the conjugal act are essential to it?

And the open theists shudder

Thank you for that thoughtful discussion. Two things were especially memorable: 1) the "image of Caesar on the coin vs. image of God in us" point and 2) imagining the angels in the break room of heaven watching the big screen TVs showing the big news of what's happening in the churches while the ticker tape of political news scrolls across the bottom.

Love this series, and looking forward to future installments!!!!

Translating 1800 Latin words/hr 👀

July 7, 2024: Very nice talk about an important issue (i.e., slavery) with Witherspoon.

You guys were nothing but political. Political, political, political. An anti-gay juggernaut that produced an army of smug, arrogant, tribal, men that pushed all voices within the local church aside or completely out of the church if they differed in any way from your black and white edicts.

I learned a lot more about Mr. Cousins from the QB documentary on Netflix and have been following him since. Seems like such a good dude

Editor is there any way we can get some sort of video of Kevin teaching this class?

Always a good day when clearly reformed posts these videos

Wow, very good! This needs to reach more people.

Pastor Kevin! Thankful for you! Thankful for your ministry! Thankful for you starting Clearly Reformed! Excited for your systematic theology devotion! Brother Justin, excited about your writing on John Piper! Brother Collin, thankful for your faithfulness! Love you guys! Christ is all!

excellent conversation.

Dr. Swain is making very, very important distinctions with respect to what secularism takes for granted of natural theology, especially in how he applies his explanation of the doctrine in relation to other doctrines. Because Evangelicalism is mentioned I think there is another comment also very necessary. First that the bible speaks about changes of status in relations eternally with respect to a limit in our understanding, being so subjected to time, that we are intended to believe with respect to eternity past and eternity future. As he acknowledges no one has ever said this equates to changes in God. I do not need to quote these Scriptural passages, but it is obvious in the text they are not speaking to relations of origins but of destiny by fulfillment eschatologically (not that the economic relations and result of their operations are unrelated to the relations of origins/ministry, or require any less of God's oneness, but that the economic Trinity is not an expectation of his oneness is against the three persons, or a thereness as implied in some logic of our own abstraction as against the one). The Latin tradition has much it can teach about the integrated relations of origins/missions, and manifestation of one God in the three persons, neither should we neglect how integrated the Evangelical tradition is in a robust application of knowledge of the Trinity to theology in submission to the bible's language. Not to imply a division from the relations of origins in the results from the divine missions or in their fulfillment, as to imply a broken Trinity, and what Packer calls a commercialism in our doctrine of God with respect to God's attainment of salvation. And yet, I'm also concerned about when subjecting our theology to criticism as if in response first to the Latin tradition than the bible, something of our doctrine of Scripture is lost as Evangelicals to this sense of antithesis our doctrine has not earned. This is where a distinction between gross biblicism the reading things carnal into the text/use of the text to affirm our notions, and biblical biblicism the acknowledgment the bible and not our analysis as if it is of common authority becomes important. The first type of theological method (Latin analytical) uses negation greater than the first (Evangelical) because God is lost as the conversation stopper to religious discourse. It might appear more antithesis is left to the evangelical doctrinal method, but there is less to negate when our analysis is not held in common esteem with the text. Especially in understanding theology analytically applied with a primacy of what the Trinity is actually doing, namely inviting us into a real relationship defined in biblical terms yes, and only in biblical terms, but not first the subject of our inquiry before those terms, but divinely stated. We cannot understand status changes in eternity past to eternity future, but the biblical text expects that we won't try to. Unless looking through the mystery only the bible could have shown as being revealed, looking then exclusively through the person of Jesus Christ to find anything of eternity our carnal minds can never achieve, and ordinary Christians throughout church history until now have appreciated this. In talking about Christ's humanity, the bible also speaks about him more divisibly from the Father than many of these discussions allow for (though never less than one in being and will with respect to his divinity). Sometimes the biblical text talks about God as the God of Jesus in a way that I think these convos make very difficult to consider, along the way to of course bringing more depth theologically sure. The way the Latin tradition has expressed the missions and relations of origins being integrated is important because it is the integration from beyond that we often miss by gross biblicism. However, the use of the integration that makes God one by some extension of our analysis is a real abuse of the biblical text to church history also, it is exactly what is assumed by the assumption social trinitarians are around every corner with respect to needed to get the Trinity exact as it pertains to an authority within our own analysis. Again, the distinction I am making is not with a requirement of an ontological difference in God's being upon accomplishment of their missions, rather that each one of us as Christians rely upon authoritative changes in status economically within the Trinity that we shouldn't feel like we have to explain completely by relating backwards to enjoy. As if by necessity of our own application of knowledge we must do what Christ really is for us as the display of entry into knowledge of the Trinity and fellowship with God's Triune person. As if this relies upon making his being proper explicable in a way it never will be to enjoy completely fellowship with the divine Triune life. I know that no one is saying merit is necessary but am concerned that if we place the accent upon our analytical ability as of such an authority with respect to the Trinity that something is lost dogmatically in how we are supposed to listen and be amazed, not gained, especially with our application of the Trinity by way of our doctrine of Scripture. That the emphasis is taken away from the ease of access only Jesus Christ could have accomplished into the Triune relations of God. This is not to belittle doctrine, but the use of tradition to pretend some naming of God's being proper by acumen and scholarly resources most Christians will never have with the understanding and relationship with knowing God as Trinity that they do. When the bible's explanation is more than enough, more than sufficient for entrance into this wonderfully mystery. Something would be lost of simple faith in the doctrine of the Trinity by faith in the bible and could then take the humanity of Christ for granted, which the bible otherwise makes real more easily through the simple Gospel's introduction to the Trinity in the economy of salvation. It would be our insistence to make God's being proper so explicable that would create a sense of antithesis whereby Christians feel like their explanation is in competition with simple trust in what the bible says in its definition of our place in knowing God as Trinity. That everyday Christians, every Christian is meant by God to enjoy the Trinity in the beauty of the simplicity it is presented in the biblical text, not because they fully understand, but all the more enjoyed because they trust what the bible says. That it is no surprise to most Christians all eternity will be required to be brought into any more of a full consideration of the doctrine. And yet, now they know no less of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit for saying so as to pray, but expect him to be doing in his revelation of those persons in the very priority of the biblical text a statement of himself our minds can never fully attain, and yet have been no less made certain as reveled and made known to be believed/instructed in Evangelical doctrine. There is something really good in the commitment to hold out for the best understanding of the Trinity we can have, there is something better to not belittling grace by missing the freedom every Christian has in enjoying it in doing so. No one is saying a distinction between the result of the relations of the economic Trinity by their missions means an ontological difference in God from the being of origins. It is taking the origins of being in some tension with the economic Trinity, that is putting in tension what the biblical text in whole is inspired to resolve. The disclosure of God as Trinity explicitly as the relational basis for our knowing god in the New covenant. Many believers know this by faith more than in principle as a hermeneutic, it is the Evangelical faith that in the name of tradition we cannot lose.

🤍🙏🏻.

🤍🙏🏻.

Collin Hansen is a Leftist clown. Can't believe he laments the creation of Mt. Rushmore. Everyone take note of where he's coming from, a true disciple of Keller.