Downgrade at Southern Seminary: Postmodernism (Part II)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 20 май 2020
- Dr. Russell Fuller discusses the subject of Postmodernism, and Dr. Al Mohler's role in knowingly promoting and endorsing a book by Jonathan Pennington who advocated for the view, on the campus of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky.
Response to SBTS Videos on Hernandez and Pennington
enemieswithinthechurch.com/20...
To Help:
Donate to Enemies Within the Church (501c3)
enemieswithinthechurch.com/#d...
Go Fund Me for fired SBTS who won't sign Separation Agreement
www.gofundme.com/f/sbts-profs
Grace Baptist Church benevolence fund to help SBTS professors (501c3)
truegraceofgod.org/giving/
Dr. Russell Fuller Facebook Page: / russell.fuller.982
Documents Mentioned in This Video:
Russell Fuller's Questions for Dr. Pennington submitted to Dean
enemieswithinthechurch.com/wp...
Jonathan Pennington's Book "Reading the Gospels Wisely
books.google.com/books?id=Gir...
Al Mohler's Endorsement as one of the "10 Books Every Preacher Should Read
www.thegospelcoalition.org/bl...
Jonathan Pennington's 2015 ETS Speech (1)
enemieswithinthechurch.com/wp...
Jonathan Pennington's Revision of Speech (2)
(This was handed out to students. It includes a denial of Isaiah 53's Messianic interpretation. "As Crump points out over several pages, one is hard pressed to make convincing arguments that many key.")
enemieswithinthechurch.com/wp...
Jonathan Pennington's Revision of Speech (3)
enemieswithinthechurch.com/wp...
Jonathan Pennington's Revision of Speech (4)
enemieswithinthechurch.com/wp...
Jonathan Pennington's Attempts to Clarify
enemieswithinthechurch.com/wp...
Russell Fuller's Speech at Full Professors Meeting Concerning Jonathan Pennington's Views
enemieswithinthechurch.com/wp...
Dr. Fuller's Separation Agreement
enemieswithinthechurch.com/wp...
Follow Jon's Work:
www.worldviewconversation.com
Patreon:
/ worldviewconversation
Subscribe:
itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/c...
Like Us on Facebook:
/ worldviewconversation
Follow Us on RUclips:
/ conversationsthatmatte...
Follow Us on Gab:
gab.ai/worldiewconversation
Follow Jon on Twitter
/ worldviewconvos
Subscribe on Minds
www.minds.com/worldviewconver...
More Ways to Listen:
anchor.fm/worldviewconversation
To Support the Podcast:
www.worldviewconversation.com...
Become a Patron
/ worldviewconversation
Follow Jon on Twitter: / jonharris1989
Follow Jon on Facebook:
/ worldviewconversation
Follow Jon on Gab:
gab.com/jonharris1989
I'll simply repeat what someone wiser already asked on Twitter: Who do you believe, the people who buy silence to protect themselves, or the people who forfeit their severance benefits for the simple opportunity to tell us what they observed?
given that they both believe fairy tales, I don't think either one will be particularly credible
@@GodlessGubment thanks for dropping by to troll. Please seek out Jesus in his word. Ask him for forgiveness of your sin and repentance from your life of sin before it is too late. I will be praying for you friend.
@@retrograd332 Given your tone, I seriously doubt you will be praying. Since there are no gods to "hear" you anyway, it is of no moment. Please take a physics class.
@@GodlessGubment There is just One God, The Holy God, The author of The Holy Bible.
I feel sorry for you, along with a host of many that do not know The True God. He is your Creator.....
@@sherrystacyrn589 prove it
Wow! Myself a PhD student I hope I can have to boldness to stand up for truth as Dr. Fuller has. I pray God grants the wisdom to see and discern the aberrations like he has so clearly.
Thank you, John and Dr. Fuller!
#SoliDeoGloria🙏
"Creeds are only authoritative as they're consistent with Scripture. We constrain our creeds according to the proper reading of Scripture."
As much as I love creeds, confessions, and catechisms, I have to give a hearty "AMEN!" to this statement.
Of course, but who gets to decide the proper reading of Scripture? You? Your pentecostal uncle? Your Lutheran aunt? Your baptist son? At least the early creeds are the consensus of the "universal" church, and not the private reading of individuals or denominations. Of course creeds derive their authority from scripture, but the earliest Creeds also function as the "universal" interpretations of the early church, thereby constraining and guiding all future interpreters of the Bible. This is what is meant by a "rule of faith", unfortunately pronounced by the host as the regooooooola fidei!
Maybe another way to think about it is this. Hermeneutics books are written to tell us how to properly read the Bible. In other words, these texts are saying, unless you follow these rules, you can't read the Bible correctly. And yet, nobody then suggests that the hermeneutics book is challenging the sufficiency of scripture just because it says you need something other than scripture, namely hermeneutical principles, to actually read scripture.
@@andrewphilipbarlow So protestants interpret scripture wrong? And how do we know the church interpreted it right? Seems on one side you have the Roman Catholic Church and its authoritarian dictate on scripture, and on the other extreme end is the postmodern view, as in this video, where all interpretations are just as valid as any other.
Hey Greg! The Protestant reformers all held to the earliest creeds of the church as authoritative. Not authoritative over scripture, but authoritative summaries of scriptural teaching. And since these creeds were the consensus of the universal church, they were therefore binding On all Christians in all ages.
Hi Andrew. I have wooden plaque of the Nicene Creed hanging on my wall. It is very beautiful. At the Baptist church I used to attend we would recite the Nicene Creed, the Apostles Creed and sometimes the Doxology at the end of service. I miss that. Anyways, the creeds were debated and refined and argued over based on scripture. They were shaped based on scripture and formulated in the first place because others were twisting scripture, not the other way around. The last part you said about it being the consensus of the church and therefore binding sounds very RC to me. Seems one cannot hold both to sola scriptura and the consensus of the church with the same authority. It has to be one or the other that is absolutely binding. Do you have a source for that info so I can look into it further? Perhaps a book page or time stamp? Thanks.
Excellent interview. As a former student of Dr. Fuller, I have always appreciated both his courage and conviction.
If you want to know why guys like me didn’t pursue a PhD or a ThD, this video explains it quite clearly. I’m not interested in wondering whether or not I’m going to be able to feed my family in 3 months after getting fired for defending the Bible at a “conservative” seminary.
Trust God! He loves your family more than you do. Stand up for His Truth. We desperately need PhD teachers of Truth. The hard part is keeping grounded in the Truth as you go thru the heretical school! (Which is probably every school out there.)
Thank you for your obedience and noting those who are causing divisions and offenses. Praying for you.
Wow! Shocked but not surprised. Dr. Williams and Dr. Hall teaching CRT as we already knew show with this evidence how pervasive postmodern thought is within the SBC
Praise Jesus for this Godly talk, praise Jesus for Dr. Fuller and this channel, greetings from taiwan, we desperately need teachers like U 🙌
For what it's worth, I took Dr. Pennington for NT 1 in an online format, and I never noticed him propagating any obviously errant views like were stated in this video. But I am concerned about our seminary, and I thank Dr. Fuller for his faithfulness.
Take a look at the video SBTS just pushed out...
No offense, but introductory classes are Not meant for the more nuanced ideas. You have to get into the specialized classes for that one. I took Gurtner for my NT classes so I’m not too familiar with Pennington
Did you see this? enemieswithinthechurch.com/2020/05/23/postmodernism-in-dr-jonathan-penningtons-writings/
@@ConversationsThatMatterpodcast links to that site aren't working from all your videos although the main page still loads. Thanks for sharing the truth.
It is the job of the churches to hold the SBC (and its seminaries) accountable for their jobs and their teachings. I am so grateful for Dr. Fuller being willing to forsake his job for the sake of the truth. That speaks volumes. Can't wait for the next smoke & mirrors rebuttal from Southern!
Release part three! :)
Will you respond to the SBTS's "response video" to your last interview with doctor Fuller?
Is there any way that Dr Fuller would teach Hebrew through an online course?
Do you have the link to their response? I'll love to see it.
@@aldocardenas8509 Here it is: ruclips.net/video/yx10NOTO8uw/видео.html
@Curtis Loftis Yes, it was very slick, just as one would expect.
I just saw the response video and I'm not impressed when anyone just assents and agrees to a declaration because that doesn't stop anyone of teaching unbiblical concepts covered and coated with biblical truth.
@@aldocardenas8509 I very much agree with you. Beating about the bush. They do not mention Dr Fuller or what he has said, but just ask questions about the same things.
I am saddened by how Southern Seminary could be a great place but is taken down by Church politics. They should keep standing up for the truth. Such institutions are greatly needed in this day and age.
I am saddened by how Dr Mohler, who has previously fought for truth, lets this slide.
Thank you for the interview. Dr. Fuller is correct and we're grateful for his commitment to the Bible's authority and the rejection of postmodern hermeneutics.
Good Word about Adam and Genesis 1-3. Is this still an issue?
Proverbs 18:17 always comes to my mind in moments like this.
Yup
Thank you both so much for this video!! I am looking forward to the 3rd. It is saddening to see the SBCdowngrade.
The fact Southern is quickly responding to this interview is telling.
enemieswithinthechurch.com/2020/05/23/postmodernism-in-dr-jonathan-penningtons-writings/
Yup
How long should they have waited?
@@JoshuaMNielsen well because they have tradition of not speaking out and if Dr. Fuller was wrong about these men or even mis interpreting them, I don't believe they would respond at all. I think Fuller is telling the truth and now they are trying to damage control. Look through RUclips that President of Boyce college Matthew Hall has videos of claiming he is racist simply because he is white.
Also, they have the comment section turned off. I actually saw the “response” videos before I knew these existed. I am thankful to God that these were “recommend” by RUclips.
Not that this makes things any better, but Southern is not the only purportedly orthodox seminary with serious problems. See the attached article on Westminster Theological Seminary (WTS) by Dr. Mark Karlberg: www.trinityfoundation.org/PDF/The%20Trinity%20Review%2000304%20SpecialIssueMasterofDeceptionandIntrigue.pdf
Al Mohler gave the fourth annual "Gaffin Lecture" at WTS in 2011. Gaffin teaches a subtle form of justification by faith and works.
Thank you for posting these videos. Very helpful
The post-modern professor shows his/her modernity when a student answers the questions on the paper in a post-modern way by giving said student an F.
I wonder if SBTS will have another quick response video. Hopefully comments will be turned on this time. And for anyone that wants to tell me they have comments turned off on all videos, it’s not true...
I wasn’t even searching to find vids with comments but 2 ama’s had them enabled
And here it is, like clockwork: ruclips.net/video/8kl9MXozD_k/видео.html
Bro - I happen to notice that Southern Seminary is releasing videos several days after yours post with the professors in question. The last two have been with Pennington and Hernanadez. I think they are looking at your videos and initating interviews with these professors as a response. Check them out if you have time.
And the comments are disabled on those response videos. So, they're not interested in creating dialogues. They're doing damage control.
@@padretienesseis My thoughts exactly
Can you provide links to these?
@@nickalsop3833 ruclips.net/video/yx10NOTO8uw/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/8kl9MXozD_k/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/8PLGpETG69w/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/RyLlibhsk4E/видео.html
@@michaelpatterson832 Thank you! I thought they were definitely answering the issues brought up by these interviews with Dr. Fuller.
I saw Pennington’s departure from a biblical view of Scripture firsthand when I was at SBTS completing my PhD. It was shocking at the time because I assumed all the faculty had a high view of Scripture, but sadly I learned that wasn’t the case.
One of my dreams was to someday graduate from the SBTS with an MDiv. This breaks my heart in so many ways. Just goes to show that Jesus is the true hero, not even the guys I've looked up to for so long at SBTS. So thankful that you were able to do this interview and that Dr. Fuller agreed to do it. Maybe an alarm will be sounded in the SBC and this will all turn around? But it seems to run so deep.
I would advise you to research these claims and not take them as face value. I do not agree at all with the assessment of Dr Pennington given in this interview.
@@brandoncorbin168 thanks for reaching out. My one youtube comment is not an exhaustive explanation of my reasoning. I think Resolution 9 alone is enough to give any Bible believing Christian at least some pause in considering the direction of the SBC and its seminaries. There are others of course. But thanks for caring and responding. I think this is a really important conversation. Take care man!
@@brandoncorbin168 -- So Dr Pennington is either teaching distortions of the truth, or he is unable to make himself clear about what he does believe. Either way, something is wrong.
Greg B have you read the work that is being misquoted in this video? If the answer is no I have no further comment. If it’s yes, then I’d be interested in seeing how you came to your negative opinions of his work.
@@brandoncorbin168 -- Heretics and false teachers always whine about being 'misquoted'.
If you’re interested in the other side of the discussion it is here. ruclips.net/video/yx10NOTO8uw/видео.html
Dr. Pennington speaks about the rich picture for interpretation...
Dr. P. is very deceiving!
We have it all the time, talking and writing!
What counts more?
At the video about J Pennington there are no comments allowed! Because he could be demasked?
This is an excellent interview. Thank you Jon, for taking the time to seek out the truth and give people like Dr. Fuller an opportunity to speak out. I appreciate your research and tenacity in such a huge task as this. Praying for Dr. Fuller during this time. Many can teach the Bible but very few are willing to stand for truth when faced with such adversity within a Christian institution like a seminary or a church. What a testimony he is for others to stand and glorify God!
How postmodernism undermines the gospel? Answer- They imply that hell is not real and neither is sin & lawlessness.
Dr. Fuller. Thank you for this video. Are you a Calvinist?
Excellent interview. Sad and perilous times. “He who has ears to hear let him hear.”
Very interesting
Around 6:30, you quote Dr Pennington’s book and you interpret him about what he believes regarding interpreting authorial intent. I notice you didn’t call him up and let him tell you what his intent in authoring that statement was.
Yup. It could be done pretty easy huh? Since we'll he worked with him. I'm sure SBTS will do a video with him too
This reply takes the cake. If we are unable to understand someone's words apart from an additional interpretation from them, we are caught in an infinite regress always needing more interpretations of the last interpretation.
Conversations That Matter My biggest issue, which is what was hidden behind my comment is simply this. I graduated Southern Seminary two years ago. I’m now serving a church as their pastor. I was never taught any of this stuff you are accusing Southern of in these videos. I love the word of God and it is the highest and most beautiful authority to know truth. I never had Dr Pennington as a professor, but the reality of what you were doing with these videos is disgusting. Because to the average viewer who watches these videos who has no knowledge of Southern Seminary is going to think that every professor at Southern is teaching heresy and that they don’t value scripture which is completely false. There were so many men at Southern Seminary who invested in me and my love for the word and love for doctrine and love for Christ we’re only strengthened by these men. In the way y’all are telling your narrative on here, it makes those men out to be “enemies of the church” and they’re just not. They love the church, Jesus, and the Bible. The way you are shaping your narrative in these videos is, whether intentionally or not, slandering all of those men at Southern Seminary who love raising a faithful pastors who preach the Bible.
@@JediPastorAaron exactly my point as well.
@@JediPastorAaron It could be that you were not very discerning in picking up these problems. I used to donate to Southern Seminary and received their alumni magazine. I could see Mohler moving away from the Bible and conservative social policy then.
I sure would love to know the greater context of the quote about the authority of Scripture. Dr. Fuller ends up calling creeds authorities as well, but he calls them "sub authorities" and Scripture "the authority of all authorities" (he contradicts himself by mixing language of "sole" authority with the plural "authorities" - but then tries to correct himself with what I think is more accurate in calling Scripture "the authority of all authorities", meaning the ULTIMATE authority). Was it demonstrated, however, that Pennington does NOT believe that the Bible is "the authority of all authorities"? I do not think so, from this video.
This article gets into that a little. enemieswithinthechurch.com/2020/05/23/postmodernism-in-dr-jonathan-penningtons-writings/
@@ConversationsThatMatterpodcast If the articulation had been clearer to begin with I would have no problem with the critique. I'm already inclined to be alarmed because of even the possibility of certain written comments being able to be understood or applied in a relativistic way. But imprecise insinuation helps no one. I'm challenging people to be precise.
SBTS is fallen.
Are DNA’s ever fitting in the body of Christ?
Who thinks that in a couple days SBTS will have an interview video with Dr. Pennington where he states he does not believe postmodernism and tries to "clarify" his viewpoints?
There was a man who thought he was dead and all of his friends could not convince him that he was truly alive. “No, no, I am dead” he would say. So his family brought him to doctor. The doctor tried everything he could to convince him he was not dead. “No, no I am dead” he said. Finally the doctor said “do dead men bleed?” The man replied “of course not. Dead men don’t bleed!” The doctor pricked him with a needle and he began to bleed. “Wow thank you so much doctor. I never knew.” “Your welcome” replied the doctor. The man looked up and said “I guess dead men do bleed.”
Hope there is. Proverbs 18:17
I'm sure they're will be
@@Richardcontramundum And there it is, right on schedule
Tom you guys need to start a little Fundamentalist college👍
Respectfully, the last 10 minutes are a mischaracterization of Dr. Pennington's teachings on OT Messianic prophecies. I have heard the exact opposite from him in his NT classes. I am not sure what Dr. Fuller has used or experienced to build his conclusions but again, respectfully, he is inaccurate in his characterization about Dr. Pennington.
The documents are literally in the info section. I have an inbox full of emails from former students telling me this is exactly what Pennington taught. If he's contradicting himself, that's really bad. Professors should be consistent.
Agreed. Fuller implies that Pennington denies the very existence of a "messianic paradigm" in the OT. But he of course denies no such thing. What Pennington does deny is that the OT contains a "clear, full-blown messianic understanding that aligns perfectly with the NT's witness" (p. 8), including a conception of the Messiah as a figure who "healed the sick, raised the dead, forgave sins, was crucified, rose on the third day, and then ascended to heaven" (p. 8, quoting Crump). And Pennington denies this because it's obviously untrue. The OT contains no picture of the Messiah that satisfies all of these criteria. It might also be worth pointing out that, despite Fuller's suggestion, Pennington does not in fact agree with Crump all the way down. For example, having set out the latter's view, Pennington concludes that "Crump and others seem to err on the side of discontinuity [between old and new covenants]" (p. 12). Pennington is an extraordinarily subtle and nuanced scholar. Surely a touch of subtlety and nuance isn't too much to ask in return.
@@aglover12345 I want to be charitable here but it seems that perhaps a personal relational bias is clouding this argument. That is just what it seems like. I can be sympathetic not knowing the extent of the relational issues but also not wanting to dive in towards gossip. But as far as the mischaracterizations of Dr. Pennington: I have very recently read Dr. Pennington's work ("How to Read the Gospels Wisely") and have observed his lectures, and I have not found any basis for Dr. Fuller's claims, only perhaps a misunderstanding of Pennington's nuance (often taken out of context) and a quickness towards accusation. Disappointing. I hesitate to post this or to continue to engage with this type of content because I do think this video series and its premise is absolutely inappropriate and often appears as unfounded, disgruntled gossip. I hope whoever views this video can be critical and examining, and can see from these comments that Dr. Fuller's view is not widely shared by Pennington's (conservative) students.
Here's what he teaches.
enemieswithinthechurch.com/2020/05/23/postmodernism-in-dr-jonathan-penningtons-writings/
Scholarship is meaningless from the vantage point of the layperson. Many “scholars” attack the gospel. The historical Jesus people have been doing it for centuries now, and yet christians follow these unbelievers because they worship rationalism instead of the enlightenment that comes from the Spirit of God. We need to quit worshipping and following the latest avant guarde scholars and laud the Spirit of God who reveals the things of God.
Unmasked is the right word. In German it says "demaskieren"...
Yes, the written word counts on which you get your PhD!
When I "check out" a scholar, I look at his writings, his alma mater, his teachers and institutions...
Let me tell you, it does NOT look good for Dr. J Pennington and Dr. Hernandez!
Both are fine beings, kind, have a lot of patience, look "teachable", BUT
you have to go with their public writings and where they were willing for a longer time to be trained and educated as scholars!
Both (Dr. P and Dr. H) do NOT pass the test!
I would not send my child to Southern with these kind of teachers!
If I had to choose between "Reading the Gospels Wisely" or "Four Portraits One Jesus" I would choose the latter every single time.
Both books were assigned by Pennington in his Intro to NT class. I think Fuller misunderstands Pennington.
I have to disagree with this one; the regula fide isn't Catholic
I have to disagree with you, and go, again, full Berean. And as they believed what 1 John 2.26-27 explains is the hope of revelation concerning the true meaning of God’s Word.
Gentlemen, your testimony is devistating and makes the path forward clear: leave the old paradigm behind in the dust heap of failed man's wisdom. Leave the SBC, defund ALL SBC institutions, and then create a new affiliation, that employs a curricula to self educate and then locally evaluate and ordain your pastors. Learned and trustworthy individuals, such as Dr. Fuller, could provide curricula, distance learning as well as certifications for their curricula. It could all be accomplished relatively quickly.
And the NEW affiliation will never go "bad." Just keep forming new ones - that will surely solve the problems.
People always go liberal. It takes hard actions to move back. Leaving this in the dust heap for a new denomination is not the smartest answer
@@GodlessGubment You are very right on all points this is why keeping authority as local as possible and the association as loose as possible is key. The concept is called low coupling/high cohesion designed to protect the autonomy of the local church and provide a network of support with common resources but no hierarchy to suck up church funds. Nevertheless, anything man makes can be subverted by the Evil One. Everything depends upon vigilancvigilance, discernment, and lots of heartfelt prayer.
God bless you, man.
So you’re good with Augustine’s OT interpretation?😳
I have problems some with Augustine as well, as one should, but Im not the standard... However the comment is a non sequitur.
Way to take that quote out of context. If one truly seeks to understand the quote he referred to, you will be applying the principles he taught in the book.
Just watched Pennington’s response. Rich, nuanced, subtle, thoughtful, honest, even inspiring in places. With all due respect to Fuller, and unless Pennington is lying through his teeth, the video posted here is thoroughly misguided and no longer worthy of our attention.
I think that’s a reasonable question. I’m generally familiar with Pennington’s work, though admittedly not as familiar as I would like to be. I suppose I weight the interview heavily because it gives us the clearest and most direct access to the author himself-and, consequently, the best chance to judge not only “authorial intention” but also the hermeutical assumptions that lie behind that intention.
enemieswithinthechurch.com/2020/05/23/postmodernism-in-dr-jonathan-penningtons-writings/
Have you read this?
That's how subtle it is, Adam!
No worries, God knows! And hopefully, not too many more children of God will be deceived anymore! Thanks to Dr. Fuller and others who are willing to reveal the higher criticism and postmodern thought applied by these 2 Prof's and others!
@@ConversationsThatMatterpodcast hey, this link isn’t working, do you have another one?
Is the claim that Dr. Mohler disagreed with Dr. Pennington's books verifiable? As a major concern brought up in the video - that there are contradictions being made behind closed doors - this should be verifiable beyond the testimony of a single witness.
Al Mohler, in effect, fired Fuller for confronting him with these charges about what is being promoted at Southern Seminary that is at odds with Biblical orthodoxy. Mohler knows about these issues. It is clear that not only Mohler is fine with these moves to modernist interpretations of the Bible but also the move to Neo-Marxism. Mohler has for some time been soft on homosexuality in his public comments. He also defends the infusion of Critical Race Theory into Christian theology. He protects Jarvis Williams who quite clearly reads racial reconciliation in radical terms into the Gospel. He has a video on Southern Seminary's website saying that accepting racial egalitarianism is necessary for salvation. That requirement is not only not in the Bible but is at odds with Sola Fide. There is no egalitarianism in the Bible except for the equality of all persons' spiritual worth in the eyes of God. The Gospel is for anyone and for everyone, but that does not entail doing away with all distinctions among people. These Baptist seminaries are chocked full of Post Modernist Neo-Marxists.
Mohler himself has published interviews acknowledging his acceptance of CRT orthodoxy.
Im a student at sbts and I agree 100% with Dr Fuller. I have taken class with dr. Pennington and he disseminates his views to his students. I read the "agreement" that Dr. Fuller did not sign and its scaryyy to see that kind of agreement in a "solid reformed" seminary.
If there is a fixed and stable meaning, but wildly varying interpretations about what that meaning is, how can we be confident there is such a fixed and stable meaning? I know you WANT that to be the case. Any actual evidence that it is that way?
Varying interpretations don't change the meaning of God's word. God spoke with absolute authority and meaning. Studying God's word in context using proper hermaneutics will reveal the correct interpretation and application.
@@TheJpep2424 It seems very much that you are mistaken. Not even among those in a given denomination or seminary using identical hermeneutics is the "correct interpretation" reliably attained. Even if the book is supernatural, which it's not, regular humans read it and disagree.
James Lindon Why are you such a bigot? Oh wait, you want me to take your words in the way you intended them? Why such a fixed stable meaning?
Just because there are false interpretations does not mean there is not a right one. That’s a logical fallacy. We can be confident because God is the author and is, by nature, infallible. If He is infallible then there must be an infallible meaning to what He is saying to us through His written word. Simple.
Aidan Farhi nor do “false interpretations” assure there’s a true one. There may be no true one - or no way to identify and isolate it.
I’m sure Russell Fuller is a fine scholar of the Hebrew Bible, and probably a decent historian of the Ancient Near East. But, based on this interview alone, his grasp of the basic philosophical and hermeneutical concepts relevant to the topic under discussion is remarkably leaden and simplistic. Among other things, he seems to have confused “respect for the authority of scripture” with “acceptance of my preferred hermeneutical strategy.”
Did you read this? enemieswithinthechurch.com/2020/05/23/postmodernism-in-dr-jonathan-penningtons-writings/
Adam Glover I don’t think this video is meant for liberals. There are few enough “fundamentalists” as it is, I wonder why liberals feel the need to come to a “fundamentalist” channel and call them simplistic and leaden.
Ask yourself: Cuo benes? Who benefits? What does it profit Dr. Fuller to, presumably, refuse to sign the NDA, leave tens of thousands on the table, and risk all the possible flak headed his way to come out so quickly and so definitively?
I'm in amazement so see so many dislikes. This is good and edifying.
Messiah is EVERYWHERE in the OT. The OT is FULL of types and shadows of the Messiah. And Yeshua believed it and testified to it. Those who deny it are denying Yeshua. They are deceiving wolves.
You seem like a really nice guy - good job. Keep it up.
Frank Romanek Jr Thanks! Means a lot.
@@lkae4 I hear ya, K. Just remember ultimately you want to be on the right, right side. This is what I mean - Ephesians 6:12 "For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places."
I have taken the New Testament I course and am currently in The Sermon on the Mount course with Dr. Pennington. I have read the various links and watched the videos I do not see the postmodern humanist boogieman in Dr. Pennington.
You guys are talking past each other. I was in a Pennington class just recently and had to read "Reading the Gospels Well". Pennington is not always the most clear in his book, and I don't agree with on every point, but it's in part because he goes into details that Fuller conflates. For example, Pennington doesn't deny authorial intent, but he points out that the intent of the author (e.g. Mark, Paul) is not the only intent around. For example, you also have divine authorial intent. Those aren't the same thing, even if both are true.
I'll admit that Pennington is a tad squishy at times, but he's not a liberal or post-modernist by any stretch, and what's going on here is a lot of people talking past each other (at least as far as "Reading the Gospels Well" goes).
So are you saying Pennington does not believe the 'community' should decide the intent of writings of the Gospels? in other words, does Pennington use the terms "textual intent" for his work, or have you heard him say or seen in his writings "authorial intent" is the correct or incorrect reading of the Gospels? Because Dr. Fuller seems to believe and has stated so, that Pennington has more of a Catholic belief of the intent of the Gospel reading and understanding. Thanks. Check here: enemieswithinthechurch.com/2020/05/23/postmodernism-in-dr-jonathan-penningtons-writings/
@@RonKris I'm not playing some sort of Pennington apologist, and I don't agree with Pennington's writing on every point. Having said that, when I hear people like Fuller (and it seems like you) refer to "authorial intent", it's a sloppy term. Human authorial intent is not the only thing around. So is divine intent, and from what I understood of Pennington, he's concerned with both human and divine authorial intent. Those two are not the same, though the "authorial intent" crowd implicitly assumes they're the same or simply forgets that both exist. That's not all that different from Augustine. As far as Pennington and regula fidei, this was one of the areas I did get a little queasy. However, his understanding is more along the lines of Reformed confessional thinking in regards to regula fidei, not Roman Catholic thinking. Unlike Rome, he rarely appealed to it in interpretation, but used it more as a good guardrail. That's the Reformed confessional attitude, not the attitude of Rome.
Anyways, I would encourage you to actually read Pennington's book. You'll find components you disagree with (as I did), but you'll also find a lot that is good. Moreover, IMO you'll see that much of the disagreement is based on people talking past each other. Pennington's precision in language often conflicts with the slightly sloppier terminology often used in conservative circles, but upon examination there's less of a problem than we're being told to think is there.
@@paulhess1689 Human and divine intent are the same when Scripture is inspired.
@@SeanusAurelius you sure about that? When Luke wrote to Theophilus what is now Luke and Acts, was his intent for it to be read by other Christians? Very likely. But was it his intent for it to be ready by Isaiah Hess and Seanus Aurelius? Of course not. Or how about Moses - when he gave his sermon in Deuteronomy, did he intend to point his listeners to God? Most certainly. Did he intend to point his listeners to a Jewish carpenter 2000 years later by the name of Jesus Christ? Of course not, for he only saw dimly. But did God have the intent for each of these things? Of course!
So be careful conflating the two, otherwise you'll have to ascribe knowledge to the human authors that they simply didn't have. Inspiration doesn't mean that human intent entirely encompassed divine intent, but that what men moved by the Spirit wrote was indeed the very word of God.
@@paulhess1689 Well, while Divine intent is much more involved and encompassing, the intent of the human author of each book in what became the Bible is not at odds with Divine intent. The human perspective was just much more limited. We see that in Daniel where he conveyed what he heard and was inspired to write as he openly admitted he did not understand what he wrote in the latter parts of the book. So, where can this distinction go astray is when one tries to claim that what was written by a human author was just his limited understanding and we can ignore certain passages that we don't approve of.
"Nice" comes from the Latin for stubbornly ignorant. It retains the original meaning in Spanish. Part of why this is happening is because Churches insist men play nice. Does Matthew 22 sound nice? The conservative resurgence was not nice. It is time for people in the pew to stop donating to the SBC and any pastor that is playing nice. Send your money to whichever ministry remains true, such as what is mentioned here. Stop funding your enemies because they seem nice.
So, this brings up questions for Dr.Fuller in regards to his critique of Dr Pennington:
In Dr Hernandez’s case Dr Fuller read his works and discussed them direct with Dr Hernandez and sought personal clarification. This gives credibility to his concerns. Has Dr Fuller read the scope of Dr Pennington’s works or is he only consulting commentary produced by others?
Has Dr. Fuller sat down with Dr Pennington face to face to discuss his concerns and ask for clarity?
If what he says about Dr Pennington is true, why didn’t he speak out publicly long ago?
Downgrade has been going on since before the days of Spurgeon.
So apparently Southern Baptists are supposed to believe that "the Bible is the ONLY authority or the ONLY source of truth and understanding" ?? (around 7 min 40 seconds) That's absurd. Sola Scriptura means that the Bible is the only *infallible* source of truth and understanding, or the only *divinely inspired* source, not the "only source." Am I totally missing it or are Fuller and the interviewer totally misunderstanding biblical authority in their criticism of Pennington?
That was my impression as well. Perhaps they misspoke, but i know that the bible is silent on motorcycle repair.
So, in your view - all believers have the mind of Christ - why are there 30,000 denominations?
The body has many organs. Each has a function to perform.
Why are unbelievers even commenting on a church matter. Let those without the mind of Christ leave the discussion within Christ’s body, please.
@@lesterchua2677 Secular evangelism takes the form of attacks on the church. If they stay out of these discussions, Secular would only die out faster. "Black Pigeon Speaks" has a video showing how fast Secular populations are dying out.
Most of those 30 000 denominations are in communion with one another and recognise each other as legitimate.