Psalm 33 and Tyson James
In the second part of today’s program I dove into a response Tyson James wrote (James works for Reasonable Faith) more than three years ago to comments I made from Psalm 33 relating to Molinism way back in May of 2014. So we dove back into the topic, and will finish off our response on Thursday’s program.
Tags: 10:00 Tyson James and Psalm 33
You Might also like
-
And We Have Lift Off!
Without any unscheduled sudden disassembly, either! Our first Road Trip Dividing Line in our new Mobile Command Studio was a success! Sure, we have some tweaking to do (Rich discovered the microphone presets did not save, for example), but we are just ecstatic that sitting here in our 35 foot Jayco Fifth Wheel RV in Kerrville, Texas, we were able to do an over hour long program with two cameras, touch screen (for use with Accordance), etc. and etc.! Sure, there will be more to come (taking calls, having guests), but we are so thankful to have this studio up and operational. I did a walk through the history of A&O as a fitting way to start off in our new mobile studio. I hope it will be encouraging to you. Thanks to all of you who have made this possible!
[embedded content] -
Thanksgiving Thoughts, the PWC
James White, November 21, 2024November 21, 2024, Christian Worldview, Misc, Pastoral Theology, Personal, Post-Evangelicalism, The Dividing Line, Theology Matters Did my usual Thanksgiving thing and pointed out that it should, in fact, be “usual” for Christians to give thanks and to live in a state of thanksgiving. Then we looked at the new “thing” to be all excited about, “The PWC,” the post-war consensus. What is it, how do you define it, and how did it become the central issue in just a matter of a few months? Not sure when the next DL will be as I will be pulling out over the weekend, have long driving days, and next Thursday is Thanksgiving (official). Keep an eye on the A&O app for announcements!
[embedded content] -
Road Trip DL: About Asking Your Debate Opponent to Actually Interpret a Bible Verse
We took the time today to go back over the controversy that has developed when I asked my debate opponent Saturday afternoon to tell us what one of the key texts on the atonement (and in my opening statement) actually means, and he refused to do so. I played the audio of the exchange, put the text on the screen, and we invested an hour and 15 minutes on the topic (after some introductory topics). Not sure if we will be able to squeeze another show in this week, as I am teaching at GBTS Thursday through Saturday.
[embedded content]