Reformed Theology: Ask R.C.

He believes that we living in the end times that we read about in the book of Revelation Dr. RC Sproul addresses that have other questions mixed on Renewing Your Mind. Welcome to the program on we been on looking to get a picture from those early days of the wooden rebelling studies people young and old together there in the living room setting.

Some of them sitting on the floor and RC is making a point in dramatic fashion, only answering one of the many questions those really looking her students asked.

That's of his ministry started in over his 45 years of ministry.

RC fielded hundreds of questions we are blessed to have a treasure trove of the in archives, along with Darcy's clear and concise answer please to feature some of them today your on Renewing Your Mind so let's get started with our first question jury on Facebook wants to know if Dr. Spruill were to nail a modern 95 theses to the door today. What might be his top 2 to 3 issues for the church to address.

That's a great question. While I would say that that the three issues that I would try to address our first of all, the gospel which is in danger of being obscured in the 21st century as it is been many times in the past and we talk about the motto of the 16th century Reformation Positano Brussels looks after darkness to light the gospel had been hidden during the dark ages and out came back to life and that's happening again and again and again. The gospel has to be republished with clarity and boldness in every generation, closely linked to that is our understanding of Jesus throughout church history, there been for centuries where the Church's understanding of the person work of Christ were critical and would profoundly challenged by heretics and unbelievers.

For centuries, which culminated in the Council of Nicaea, the fifth century that culminated in Joseph Donner 451 the 19th century with the unbridled assault of 19th century liberalism against the classic orthodox understanding of the person and work of Christ, which then carried over into the 20th century, but it didn't go away. At the turn of the 21st century, we still have a crisis not just out in the world, but in the church about who Jesus is and what he has accomplished so the gospel of personal Christ and with that gospel a personal crisis. The doctrine of justification, that battle has to be fought in every generation number certainly is front and center right now. The other issue that ICS is crucial to our day is worship.

I think we've lost a sense of biblical worship that's killing us. Dr. scroll. We had a question on Facebook asking how can we defend the doctrine of Sola scriptural by using Scripture so often it's been said that if you argue from the Bible to the infallibility of Scripture of the mayor and see the Bible over inspiration Scripture you're caught in the bonds of a vicious circle. And we know that circular reasoning is an informal fallacy which invalidates an argument now if you reason from Scripture.

This way, and save the Bible claims to be the word of God, since it is the word of God than the claim that it is the word of God must be an unassailable truth that would be traveling in the worst of all possible circles that would be vicious in its circularity and would be in my opinion, an invalid argument, but at the same time we argue for the infallibility and inspiration. Scripture, taking into account that it makes that claim and that significant if it never made the claim to be the word of God and we wouldn't have the burden of trying to defend that claim, but we start with Scripture and art I like to start here and asked the question, can we go to the New Testament. For example, and see it as a basically reliable historical source. If we can demonstrate that is generally reliable as reliable as Suetonius or Tacitus or any of the other ancient historians, then we don't have to dive into radical skepticism or cynicism since a basically reliable historical log than have to be infallible than have to be inspired. Everything like that just a historical or an F on the basis of that basically reliable historical document we can get reliable information about Jesus of Nazareth information is reliable enough to persuade us and convince us that there is found reason to believe that Jesus of Nazareth was at least at the very least, a prophet of God and a prophet of God is somebody who teaches the truth of God and if we can come to the conclusion from that historical information and data that Jesus was a prophet and he prophesied about himself that he was more than a prophet. Then, if we take this prophets prophecy seriously than we have to take the conclusion that he draws but then we go to the next step where we know if we know anything about Jesus. Historically, we know what his view of the Scriptures was other. Many critical scholars who say yes, we acknowledge that Jesus accepted and taught the prevailing Jewish view of the canon of Scripture as being the word of God. However, in his humanity. He wasn't omniscient and so he can be excused for adopting uncritically. This Jewish view of the Bible and we hear that kind of arguing frequently. I responded that by saying well touching his human nature. We don't believe that Jesus was omniscient. Omniscience is a divine attribute.

That's not communicable to a human nature. Jesus touching his divine nature was omniscient, but his human nature wasn't so. And in that regard, he could be capable of not having absolute perfect knowledge. However, Jesus claimed that he taught nothing except that which he received from the father and that all that he taught had the imprimatur from the father and he also said that he was the very incarnation of truth not I walked into my classroom in philosophy or theology.

And I said my students look I want you to know that unlike in the teacher anything in this class except what God has revealed to me and I want you to know that I am the truth, and then I give them an incorrect view of sacred Scripture. Then I have sent and so what's at stake here in terms of Jesus testimony to the Scriptures is not his omniscience but his sinlessness and so Jesus must be correct in all the things that he claims to be true or he sends as the Scriptures themselves tell us with the teaching comes the greater judgment and so on. So you see how we've moved from a basic premise of general reliability to a knowledge of Jesus historical view at the Scriptures more than general reliable so the reason why the church believes that the Bible is inspired word of God is that because where acquiescing to the teaching of our Lord John in Maitland, Florida wants to know how does the fact that all people know God based on Romans 118 unbelievers suppressing the truth in unrighteousness affect our defense of Christianity wealth. I can remember of being invited to speak giving the case for the existence of God on a college campus to the atheist club there and I went through a defense of theism, and so on. But I went back to the Romans passage and I said no. Happy to try to discuss with you all the intellectual questions that are involved in trying to prove and demonstrate the existence of God. But I want to put my cards on the table in front and tell you in light of what the apostle teaches here I'm persuaded that I'm carrying coals to Newcastle because you already know very well that there is a God and your problem is not that you don't know that God exists. Your problem is you hate the God that you know exist. So your problems in the final analysis, not an intellectual one is a moral one. So you gotta know that's wrong, galore they were ready to tar and feather may you know every reaction. Although there are no that they were apoplectic. They were absolutely furious about but again what I was referring to was that Paul's teaching in Romans one we makes it clear that God has revealed himself through the creation to every human being and that that revelation is not obscure but that it is in the Greek Fonte Ross Latin money fast from its manifest. It's clear and some theologians to say yes there is a clear revelation of himself from God that he gives in and through nature or through the created order, but because of the sinfulness of human things in our fallen nature and the effects of sin upon our minds that revelation doesn't get through. We block it we suppress it we flee from it. So never really gets true, but that's not what Paul says because the judgment that he expresses there is this knowing God they refuse to honor him as God, nor were they grateful.

This is the basis for the universal indictment of the whole human race under the wrath of God, the one excuse that is taken away is ignorance. No one on the judgment day complete ignorance of God because he has revealed himself and that revelation gets through. Again, the problem is that the fallen man refuses to acknowledge what he knows to be true.

Now how that influences our defense of these will being reformed in my theology, I believe that although the rational defense that I can get. If I can give a perfect argument a compelling argument and irrefutable argument for the existence of God, which frankly I believe I can and not that it started with me but if I could do that unless the Holy Spirit accompanies that argument, and changes the heart of that person who hears the argument that person will never submit or acquiesce to the argument misses some people say, why even bother mine. We just proclaim it, let it go at that and I civilly most common said. First of all, to stop the miles of the obstreperous when we give a defense and intellectual defense of the truth claims of Christianity that puts restraints on the unbeliever and the militant atheists in their arguments. Second of all, it is preparation for evangelist. We are not called to jump into the darkness. In a blind leap of faith and hope that Jesus will catch us the faith that we propose and the gospel that we preach is one that is not learned by the actions of reason alone or by what we call rationalism, but the content of the gospel is reasonable. It is rational and really the person can't submit by faith when their heart. The something that the mind tells him is absurd. I don't ever ask people to jump into the observer jump in the darkness we also jump out of the darkness and into the light and so there is a place there for the defense of the faith as set prolegomena to the preaching of the gospel, and also you hear all the time about young people were raised in the church my profession of faith.

They go to college and they have an unbridled assault against their faith by the skeptical professors in the classroom and one of the tasks of apologetics of the intellectual defense of the faith is to undergird the Christian I can remember when I was exposed to all that kind of stuff is a college students in the seminary student I can always answer the questions of people race but I knew people who could and so I was grateful to God that we had scholars in the Orthodox Christian faith gave a compelling intellectual defense for the truth claims of of the Christian faith because of word in doubt and our faith is mixed without were less confident were less bold, were less aggressive in the proclamation of the gospel's other.

These are just a few of the reasons why we continue to be engaged in this enterprise we continue our highlights of Q&A sessions with Dr. Spruill now with a question from another ask RC Leibowitz that Dave asked how do I respond to a female friend who feels jilted by a Christianity that says she cannot have leadership over men or preach from the pulpit. While the question of ordination of women in the church is not as simple as a lot of people think it is for this reason, ordination means different things in different Christian communions and what I find in the minimalist positioned at the very least that the apostle Paul prohibits women from having in the New Testament is often pain, which I understand to be government or juridical authority. If you have a church where ordination automatically confers governing authority in the church that I would say. According to Paul's teaching intimacy that that is not allowed, but there are other churches where women are involved in ministry and very much involved in the life of the church and even in positions of leadership where they are under the governing authority of like a session made up of men. And so that's why say it's not simple to answer that question because it depends on the ecclesiastical structure in which it takes place but what ever you come out with on that this is not mean that as a woman, you're not able to be profoundly involved in the work of the ministry of Jesus Christ in the church in a thousand different ways, but I see that you're not allowed to do is govern. I remember when Dr. Gershon was teaching in seminary. There they had a woman professor, teaching systematic theology, and he even took the position as conservatives and he was that a woman has the ability and authority to the seminary professor, I would agree with that but I think I'm taking is brought a position on this is a liberal position of that is you can take and still be faithful to the authority of Scripture. Kathy in her studio audience has a question for RC To go ahead even immediately living in the end times lately reading that the contamination yes and no. LSU think I've fallen in the new orthodoxy, paradoxical theology, let me explain that in one sense, everything that takes place after the ascension of Christ is in the end times. Then time started in the New Testament were still in the end times. I presume that what you're asking me is are we at the end of the end time so that were coming close to the return of Jesus as it was set forth in the book of Revelation.

Now on the big questions in understanding the book of Revelation, and interpreting the book of Revelation is tied to when it was written the majority report of the dating of the writing of the book of Revelation is that it took place in the decade of the 90s of the first century, there has been some significant scholarly work. In recent years that argues and I believe persuasively that the book of Revelation was written before the fall of Jerusalem in the 60s during the time of Nero. When Nero's most famous nickname throughout the Empire was the beast, and so the question is if we could know for sure when the book of Revelation was written, we would have a better handle on what period of history it was describing I'm in a minority report here, but in the all the discourse in Matthews gospel as well as in Luke and Mark is when Jesus talks about the signs of the times and he talks about the destruction of the temple and the destruction of Jerusalem and he said this generation will not pass away to all of these things are fulfilled. Now that phrase has been one of the most hotly debated statements ever to come from Jesus. I want to a liberal seminary and I heard eyes it seems to me, I didn't actually but it seemed that I heard every day in class that Jesus taught that he was coming back within 40 years and he failed to keep his promise. That's one of the reasons why we can't believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God.

And so in terms of higher critical assaults on the trustworthiness of Scripture and the trustworthiness of Jesus. The point of attack is on Jesus predictions about the nearness of the coming of the fulfillment of his prophecies there in the all of the discourse. Notice also the timeframe references that are throughout the book of Revelation, where it talks about those things that are near at hand. And so that all my question is this where the things of Jesus talking about of the all of the discourse and in the book of Revelation were those principally pointing to events that were going to take place in the first century, culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and of the exile of the Jews. That's one view another view is is that all of these things refer to distant future times and some people say what the bulbs there was a primary and a second are there. So this becomes very complicated in piecing it all together but in any case, however, we understand Revelation 1. It was written and what it was referring to whether all of the discourse were still looking forward to the return of Jesus. And he hasn't come yet and I take great hope and optimism, and this is it. Every day that passes he's that much closer, and when I see what's going on around us today. I have every reason to think were getting closer and closer and closer.

But of course a lot of that is my hope and I also realized it could be another 2000 years before he comes. I'm not in the making predictions of dates and days of the hours of that sort of thing. But we should certainly be vigilant today and we should be looking for the coming of Christ that you can so RC you hold to what's called a partial prioress view is that correct. Yes, not a full printer. Three of the four predators and teachers that all of the New Testament prophecies regarding the future kingdom and the future coming of Christ for all fulfilled in the first century. I believe that I still think there's much more to happen. But I also think that, and I'm in a minority at this point I should tell you that I think that we radically underestimated the significance of what took place in 70 A.D. and the destruction of Jerusalem. So how many chapters of the book of Revelation. Did you believe have been fulfilled and that person to report our office would be most of them up until the last couple chapters where The new heaven and new earth in the final consummation of the kingdom of God. So the study to look for it. I better understand astutely that in the whole scope of systematic theology. Theology is very broad science we do with the doctrine of God we deal with the salvation of no sin in the Holy Spirit and Christology and then we have the science of eschatology which a study of the last things.

First of all of all of those different subdivisions of theology, probably the most controversial and the most difficult is eschatology because smoke dealing with future events that were not looking back on.

We don't have the 2020 vision of hindsight. Secondly, so much of the information about the future prophecies of the New Testament come to us in highly imaginative and symbolic language which makes it very easy to miss understand now when I talk about the different kinds of areas of theology as a theologian, my confidence and convictions of this doctrine and that doctrine are not always equal.

I'm 100% convinced of the doctrine of justification by faith alone. Okay I have any doubts in my mind in that funny doubts about the deity of Christ or his substitutionary atonement. Those things are. I have total assurance of what you asked me about questions and eschatology and Ousley maybe… Maybe it's that I don't have views that are so solidified in cement that I get vehemently dogmatic doctors roles.

Transparency appears admirable is that some things in Scripture will remain a mystery to us. Those matters were Scripture is clear. RC was clear. Thanks for listening to Renewing Your Mind on this Thursday. We think the answer is that the doctors pulled Dave through the years are a wonderful resource. In fact, her team went back to the archives and pull together 65 separate sessions that he was part of we put them on a single USB resource drive and for your donation of any amount today we'd like to send it to you. We've also included a digital library of crucial questions, booklets and doctors roles e-book now that's a good question, recalling at the ask RC resource drive. You can request it with your gift when you call us at 800-435-4343. You can also do that online as well or web address is Renewing Your Mind.Ward will it's hard to believe but this month marks three years since Dr. Strohl went home to be with the Lord. We dinner, Pres. and CEO Chris Larson is here with me in the studio. Chris I know that there quite often. You set down in insured meals and had many discussions with RC about the future of this ministry, would you tell us about those we did. We enjoyed some wonderful times together with Dr. Strohl and Mrs. full of course was there many times as well. We we miss RC he was a dear friend and a pastor and a theologian and one of my chief mentors in life and when he thought about licking her ministries. It was clear he would come back to this time and time again he had in mind for us to have a growing and global outreach. As long as we are faithful and that's why here at year-end that the support that we receive from Renewing Your Mind listeners for all that we are engaged in here at licking her ministries is so important. We are so thankful for it. Leader stands on the authority of God's word in the gospel of Jesus Christ. We know that if we lose that we've lost everything, but because we have that we have a hope and a message for the world and that's what the broadcast of Renewing Your Mind is doing day in and day out, and so were thankful for you listening but were also thankful for your support. Thank you Chris, we are listener supported and we depend on your financial gifts. They will allow us to begin 2021 ready to meet the many needs we see around the world.

You can go online to give your gift@lincolnair.org/donate and today is the last opportunity to give a urine gift and along with Chris, let me add my thanks. Tomorrow we will begin the new year with one more ask RC session and here's a preview hi Dr. Strohl, my name's Zachariah Loftus and first Corinthians 13 verses nine through 10. This is for we know in part and we prophesy in part. When the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. My question is in regards the sign gifts. Would you please explain whether or not you believe the scientists assist RC will answer that question in many other so I hope you'll join us Friday for Renewing Your Mind