Pastor Joel Webbon recently had the privilege of sitting down with @Mike Winger (from “Learn To Think Biblically”) to attempt to convince Mike of Theonomy! Subscribe to our YouTube channel for more content like this.
*Join us for our RIGHT RESPONSE CONFERENCE: “Theonomy & Postmillennialism”
May 5-7, 2023 | Georgetown, TX
SPEAKERS: Dr. James White, Gary DeMar, Dr. Joe Boot, and Pastor Joel Webbon
REGISTER HERE! https://rightresponseconference.com/
To support Right Response Ministries, visit: https://rightresponseministries.com/donate
Subscribe to our Theology Applied podcast below:
Apple podcast: https://bit.ly/theologyapplied
Spotify podcast: https://bit.ly/theologyappliedspotify
Google Play podcast: https://bit.ly/theologyappliedgooglepodcast
*If you live in the Austin area, Pastor Joel just started planting a brand new church called Covenant Bible Church in Hutto, Texas. He would love for you to come visit on a Sunday. Check out the church’s website for details: https://covenantbible.org/
#theonomy #mikewinger #theology
source
Awesome example of how to have convos regarding theological differences! Loved it.
I'm commenting a lot but there was a lot in this episode. When he asked about proof texts and you brought up Matt 28, I thought….
Psalm 2. You have Christ asking for the nations, and for KINGS and RULERS to kiss the Son or be crushed… You have in Acts 4 part of Psalm 2 being interpreted as Herod and Pilate and the people planning to murder, and then you have the phrase "Today I have begotten you" being equated with the resurrection of Christ in Acts 13:33. Not to mention what did Satan tempt Jesus with last in Matthew 4? All the kingdoms of the world… But by shortcutting His eternal plan (His death and resurrection) and by worshiping Satan rather than God.
After Jesus's resurrection, He then says that all authority in Heaven and Earth has been given to Him, so go and disciple the nations.
In other words, you have in Psalm 2 the crucifixion, the resurrection, Christ asking for the nations, and political kings and rulers being told to fear and serve Jesus. In the NT you see the temptation of Christ (the kingdoms), Christ's death and resurrection, all authority being given to Him, and then the disciples being sent out on mission to go and win the nations.
Im not really holding onto any of my views here super strongly at this point, I need to parse all of that out more, but there's just too much actually political/governmental language (kings, rulers, nations) for me to ignore.
I am not sure where I land on post mill, amill, or premill nor am I a Calvinist but I definitely believe that theonomy is a view that makes sense and seems to be consistent with Christs’ reign and objective morality (God’s Law).
We know we love our brother by if we love God and keep his commandments. I have heard a pastor say, well, God’s commandment is love, so that’s all John is saying. But I’m thinking, why would John have bothered to say we know we love our brother by if we love? At some point it would seem to be relevant to ask, and which law is it that is written on our hearts now in Christ? Isn’t it that law?
Otherwise, we do have a hard time defining love of neighbor. Does it mean we should not prosecute crime, because I am to love neighbor as self and I would never personally want to face civil justice for committing a crime? Romans 13 indicates God still wants civil justice in the earth, right now, before the return of Christ. But to what evils exactly does government apply the sword? Does love mean to feel affection for an enemy or a neighbor so distant I will never meet that person? Enter civil justice codes – the means by which I love a neighbor whom I will never meet. I maintain true justice in society for his sake, protecting him from theft and murder. I offer a literal cup of water to a literal thirsty body in Jesus’ name. Why wouldn’t I maintain a just society for him, right here in this earth?
So you have Deuteronomy 19, due process in court, beautifully strategized so that the justice system itself may not be used as a murder weapon. But Deuteronomy 19 applies more broadly and more deeply – say to disciplines of thought in the inner person. How do you evaluate the truth or falsehood of any claim? Isn’t there a court of the mind, in which to hear witnesses and investigate witnesses, without partiality? What would it be like to have a Christian populace who can think in a disciplined fashion because they’ve been practicing this word of righteousness?
The sphere sovereignty theory is problematic. I don’t buy it. I think biblical civil justice codes are self-limiting. So, civil government doesn’t take the role of teaching God’s laws to the children. But it does encroach on the “sphere” of the family because it must enforce rape and murder laws even if they are committed by family members. The church is the people of God, and the people of God vote in a self-governing system. Christians might also hold office and be lawmakers. And when they do, they are accountable as God’s deacon, just as unbelieving governors are, to serve him as he requires.
This dude is one scary B.M.F Joel could sense that , these people would be like a christen NAZI state these people hate democracy so better the 😈 you know.
I'm a partial theonomist despite not being postmil. To the extent that Christians have sway in a society, they should shape it toward God's moral order, not some mythical neutrality.
I’d love to see that verse that talks about the need for a precipice on your roof… haha, I know he meant parapet. Still funny
1:26:24 "I don't think the nations are part of Christ's kingdom"
Ask me,
and I will make the nations your inheritance,
the ends of the earth your possession.
You will break them with a rod of iron;
you will dash them to pieces like pottery.
Psalm 2:8-9
The Lord has established his throne in the heavens, and his kingdom rules over all.
Psalm 103:19
From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, and he will rule3 them with a rod of iron. He will tread the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty.
Revelation 19:15
For “God has put all things in subjection under his feet.” But when it says, “all things are put in subjection,” it is plain that he is excepted who put all things in subjection under him. When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection under him, that God may be all in all.
1 Corinthians 15:27-28
And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me."
Matthew 28:18
Mike's heading left he calls sprinkle his brother and sprinkle teaches another gospel. Please be very aware of Mike
Mike says I don't think the ten commandments are binding for Christians 1:47:50 This is heretical nonsense. Dispensationalism is heresy.
This video helped me think out some issues concerning the doctrines discussed. Thank you, brothers.
Excellent video. Please do a follow up conversation after you've each had time to consider the other's perspective. I absolutely love this type of friendly back and forth discussion.
I am not a calvinist because I do not believe that God has chosen others for heaven and others for hell I believe he knows who's in heaven and who is in hell because he is omnipotent and if he wanted to he would choose who's going to heaven who's going to hell but I don't believe he has done that but at the same time I do believe that without God we are monsters.
That really was excellent to hear!! Helped me so much to understand why people look at me cross-eyed when I mention general equity theonomy.
My big take away is this… you guys were talking about it near the end…
When people are converted or when believers become government officials (of some kind… legislator, sheriff, even government school teacher) there should be NO WAY for their beliefs NOT to inform what they do. If you are a slave of Christ, you are about your Master’s business. So, we absolutely need to know HOW to do these things. I think it’s called having a Biblical worldview. A great place to start with that is “Total Truth” by Nancy Pearcey. Or, you can just go back further to Francis Schaeffer. 🙏🏻
I was listening to the two of you talk about the law of Christ and I kept asking, "How do you define love? How do you define love?" Then you asked the question. Thank you!!
*Join us for our RIGHT RESPONSE CONFERENCE: “Theonomy & Postmillennialism” May 5-7, 2023 | Georgetown, TX
SPEAKERS: Dr. James White, Gary DeMar, Dr. Joe Boot, and Pastor Joel Webbon
REGISTER HERE! https://rightresponseconference.com/
I don’t care what Mike thinks since he’s been so wrong on so many other issues.
Sometimes iron sharpens iron, sometimes they end up shattering each other and making them both useless.
As far as "my kingdom is not of this world or my servants would fight", perhaps it would have been better to explain the context? Do you think a Roman magistrate would have been interested in a "king" rising up among the people, causing an insurrection, and ultimately the overthrow of Ceasar's rule? Of course. Jesus said he was a king, but that His Kingdom was not of this world… system. Where's the idea of "system", at the very least, implied? "Or my servants would fight." His Kingdom is not established by the physical sword (such as some religions, or even irreligious governments), but by "the sword of the Spirit".
What this does not mean is that His rule would not encompass the entirety of the earth. Winger mentioned Dan 2 and said that Christ's reign, His Kingdom would come and smash these other kingdoms and rulers (and it has, btw), but what he forgot was that the prophesy said it would "grow to fill" the earth. Christ's Kingdom grows "like a mustard seed" or spreads like yeast "through the whole lump" of dough. To take from Isaiah, there is an "increase" to Christ's reign which will see "no end".
I think the hang up for guys like Winger is twofold : Western evangelical distinctions and the failure to understand the point from the Postmillennial perspective (even if he rejects the eschatology).
Just my thoughts.
How would Mike Biblically ground the double standard of justice at 1:47:00? God uses one standard, the law, to judge Israel and another standard, unspecified, to judge the pagan nations? The law of Moses has an evangelistic spirit about it
‘Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.’ For what great nation is there that has a god so near to it as the Lord our God is to us, whenever we call upon him? And what great nation is there, that has statutes and rules so righteous as all this law that I set before you today?
Duet 4:7-8
“Give attention to me, my people,
and give ear to me, my nation;
for a law will go out from me,
and I will set my justice for a light to the peoples.
My righteousness draws near,
my salvation has gone out,
and my arms will judge the peoples;
the coastlands hope for me,
and for my arm they wait.
Isaiah 51:4-5
Indeed God seems to hold one standard for all people as described in Leviticus:
Do not make yourselves unclean by any of these things, for by all these the nations I am driving out before you have become unclean, and the land became unclean, so that I punished its iniquity, and the land vomited out its inhabitants. But you shall keep my statutes and my rules and do none of these abominations, either the native or the stranger who sojourns among you (for the people of the land, who were before you, did all of these abominations, so that the land became unclean), lest the land vomit you out when you make it unclean, as it vomited out the nation that was before you.
Leviticus 18:24-27
That sounds like one universal standard of justice to me and even the same penalty (vomited out of the land). God judged the pagan nations according to his law. Same thing with Sodom and Gomorrah.
This is one of your best I think. I have throughly enjoyed listening to two brothers have a cordial discussion on such a contentious subject. As for me, I simply can't understand how we can love our own children, much less our neighbor, and have the hands-off approach to politics that the American Church has grown accustomed to having. One of the lines of reasoning that makes it so contentious, from my perspective, is at 54:06.There, Mr. Winger seems somewhat incredulous as he restates Mr. Webbon's views. (Incredulous may not the best word, at a loss for another ) As we look around our culture with Sodomy being praised, institutionalized through matrimony, and bordering on the state religion in the public schools, along with out-of-control taxation, theft through money-printing, murder of the unborn and our children being transed, that anyone would reject what Mr. Webbon is saying just seems odd to me. Granted, the theonomist position would have probably seemed odd in the 50's, but the truth is that government laws then actually were much closer to Biblical law. Now we are literally, as we speak, going over a cliff and there is still this automatic, and I think thoughtless, repulsion to the correct rolls, past, present and future, of the Church in culture. And all of this while we can actually see the cultural rot from our living room window.
Absolutely phenomenal video, as usual. Pastor Joel is one of the most brilliant and faithful thinkers of this generation.
Psalm 2, Isaiah 11:9, and the question “by what standard” or “how do we define Justice/what is true” have been helpful for me in understanding this topic
Just finished listening, and again I loved this. I'm the sidelines guy giving advice to the professional by saying this, but I would have loved to see you ask follow up questions to his questions, like, "How do your doctrines answer your questions?" I loved hearing your answers, and I learned from them, but it typically seemed to take the position of defense. (Defense not in a negative sense) Of course, there's always the possibility that this was not the place for that. And just so you know, I didn't want to see you go on "offense" to "destroy" Mr. Winger, but I was truly interested in how he solved the problems that come from the question, "To what do civil governments appeal to define evil as they fulfill their God-ordained mission of restraining it?"
I guess I might say to Mike's point about God not judging the nations because they did not uphold the Sabbath is kind of a moot point really. The people of God are expected to worship and meditate on their God and Savior and there is a very specific day for this. This idea of the Sabbath was not shared by the other nations and yet God still judges them in His time. The idea of "common law" being shared by all, why would it follow that to this God we (as all people groups) ought to set aside one day of rest? But to God's people they knew and with knowledge comes sin if violated. Those coming from the outside into the camp would learn quickly. But just because it is not spelled out does not suppose that one of the reasons God chooses to judge a nation would not be that. All law breaking is sin and Christians can certainly entertain reasons why bad things happen. We live in an ignorant time now where the Sabbath laws were done away with and yet, "everything continues as before". Yet here we are dealing with science and strategies in order to make land produce crops year after year without even rotating crops. Is this a violation of God's law to manage the land as good stewards of God's wonderful creation? Yes. Probably so. Will one of God's judgements potentially be worldwide famine? Quite possibly. But it does not deter me that this judgement is not spelled out against foreign nations as reason why they are removed from the land in which they resided. The fact is that God's people take these things serious and we are to do things differently and therefore a theonomic government would require Sabbath rest laws as our nation once had – and our production would be the wonder of the earth again and other nations would follow suit pretty quickly as the evidence of honoring God's laws would be obvious. But Joel just answered it perfectly anyways!
This has been excellent. I respect Mike though I side totally with Joel. I respect Mike because of his passionate interest in the truth of God's word. He is humble (they both are very respectful) and has a attitude of wanting to know. I say this because it is Joel's podcast and he is the one doing the explaining about theonomy. This is prerequisite in knowing a man is a lover of God when he can have a transparent attitude and can be open to listen and learn and come to an honest conclusion…or not actually. Maybe someone can't settle an idea in his/her mind for some time. But irregardless of what side of the fence he ends up sitting, I would never count Mike out as I would never count my Arminian mother out. Got some things wrong, but God is gracious and has the ability to teach his own servants.
You should wear a seatbelt as it's good stewardship of your body and you're needed for the provision of your family, but it shouldn't be mandated by government.
This conversation is so good. So encouraging to see such charity of thought and doctrine between brothers.