Greg Koukl: Non-Christian Sources to Substantial Christian Claims

Greg Koukl: Non-Christian Sources to Substantial Christian Claims

Greg Koukl: Non-Christian Sources to Substantial Christian Claims

1882 Posts

33 views

0



Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason looks at the question, “Can you direct me to any non-Christian sources that deal with Christian beliefs prior to the Council of Nicea?”

#StandtoReason #Apologetics #Christianity

——————————– CONNECT ——————————–

Website: https://www.str.org/​​​​​​
STR University: https://training.str.org/​​​​​
STR App: https://www.str.org/apps
Twitter: https://twitter.com/STRtweets​​​​​​
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/standtoreason93
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/standtoreason
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/stand-to-reason/

Have a question or comment? Call Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason live Tuesdays 4-6pm Pacific Time – (855) 243-9975. If you’d like to submit your question ahead of time, fill out the online form here: https://www.str.org/training/broadcast.

———————————- GIVE ———————————-

Support the work of Stand to Reason: https://www.str.org/donate​​​​​​

source

33 thoughts on “Greg Koukl: Non-Christian Sources to Substantial Christian Claims

  1. Troy VanVliet

    Anyone, presenting their arguments and objections to Christianity, will find that it is in fact true..But ONLY if you ask HONEST questions and take the time to truly research it, not just believe the ignorant sceptics

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  2. Troy VanVliet

    The word Trinity does not need to be used in the New Testament..It describes it. You can't find the word omniscience in the Bible either, but it describes God as being omniscient.

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  3. Spearo Ninja

    The council of nicea had some very "OFF" views.

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  4. Spearo Ninja

    I'd like to know why people still believe the trinity. It is NOT in the Bible. Godhead is…. trinity is NOT. Trinitarian doctrine was created by the catholic church.

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  5. Rolfye

    It doesn't mean he was dumber, smarter, or anything else. It just means he was wrong.
    As for your comment that "anything which humans can understand can't be God, because God is so much higher than humans," I'm sorry, but this is completely antithetical to Christianity. The Christian God is the God of light. There are any number of scripture references I could point you to, but as this conversation is really getting rather tiresome, I'll let it go for now.

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  6. Rolfye

    Luther and Augustine were both at 5 times as smart as any person alive today? Would you include Einstein in that? I'm not trying to be mean here, please don't say things like that, b/c it just makes you sound stupid.
    That someone may find some particular self-evidence difficult to swallow as being self-evident, doesn't mean it isn't so. There have been many brutal men throughout history who have argued against what they've known was self-evident. Luther was wrong, that's all.

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  7. Randy Helzerman

    (cont to rofyle) the very fact that you don't find your conception of god confusing should worry you. Some theologians have put it this way: anything which humans can understand can't be God, because God is so much higher than humans–God transcends human understanding. Think about the sheer presummptuousness, indeed, sacreligiousness, of saying that you understand the nature of God. How could any human possibly do any such thing?

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  8. Randy Helzerman

    (cont, to rofyle) The very fact that (1) your conception of god is self evident to you, and (2) Luther and Augustine's conception of god was NOT self evident to them means that You and They are talking about two different things. I don't mean to insult your intelligence 😉 but both Luthor and Agustine were at least 5 times as smart as any person alive today is. Any concept which they found confusing, we would find confusing as well, because we are not as smart as they are. (cont)

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  9. Randy Helzerman

    Hi rofyle, if you had read closely my previous replies, you will see that I didn't not challenge the self-evident nature of your conception of god at all. Nor did I challenge your argument. Your argument and your conception of God make perfect sense to me. But, the very fact that they make sense is proof positive that you aren't talking about the same thing which Augustine and Luther were talking about, because their conception of god was not at all self-evident to them at all. (cont)

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  10. Rolfye

    Randy:
    Again, this is close to being a red herring. I made a comment in which I argued that the concept of the Trinity is self-evident. I then provided an illustration stating as such. Youve zeroed in on the illustration however, electing to ignore the argument, while attempting to make the illustration say something I never argued. Now, perhaps this was my fault for not prefacing my argument with the words: This argument and illustration is in direct reference to the CONCEPT of Trinity

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  11. Rolfye

    Randy: (2)
    (three-in-one), rather than to any one specific doctrine concerning the Trinity. Three times however, Ive explained my exact position on the Trinity that the Son, the Father, and the Spirit are three distinct Persons in one Being, that in this life, the Son and the Father are both known and experienced through the Spirit; that under the terms of the Old Covenant, the Spirit was known and experienced as raw power, but that under the terms of the New, He resides within each born

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  12. Rolfye

    Randy: (3)
    again Christian, clothed in the Personality of the Son, demonstrating both the Father and the Son with mercy and compassion; hence the numerous references to the Spirit of Christ, rather than just the Spirit.

    It would seem rather evident then, that by providing the details of my position, my illustration therefore is in direct relation to the original argument, and not to any specific doctrine. I dont know more succinctly I can put it, then to put it succinctly. For the

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  13. Rolfye

    Randy: (4)
    fourth time, my illustration is in direct reference to the concept of three-in-one, rather than to any specific details of any specific doctrine!
    But bear with me, and permit me a moment of foolishness. Allow me to introduce a red herring of my own. It seems rather obvious that youre either unwilling or unable to challenge my argument that the concept of three-in-one is self-evident. Why? I understand if youre unable, you are after all yourself, a more-in-one. I also

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  14. Rolfye

    Randy: (5)
    understand if youre unwilling, you would be after all, assuming a defeated position. I suppose my question then is, why is the concept of three-in-one so difficult for you to grasp, when its so obviously evident? What other self-evidences have you fought to ignore?

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  15. Randy Helzerman

    Your example might not be your own, but it is completely beside the point, because your example shows that you have a nontrinitarian conception of God. Its like me daring you to prove me wrong by saying "bear in mind that my example of Origin shows that Jesus wasn't God". Sorry dude, Luther said it, and to my knowlege, no ORTHODOX theologian has ever contradicted him. I don't think I have the burden of proof here.

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  16. Rolfye

    Randy:
    Prove this please. Prove there is not a single Christian theologian in all the history of the church who would agree with me that the concept of the Trinity is self evident. Bear in mind, the illustration I gave you…. is not my own. 🙂

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  17. Randy Helzerman

    Hi Rofyle, there is not a single christian theologian–in the history of the church– who would agree with you that the trinity is self evident. You are simply, flatly, wrong on this issue. But I'm not the one you have to convince here; which God you worship is between you and your God.

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  18. Rolfye

    Lastly however, I believe what you're doing here is inadvertently introducing a red herring. Again, let me restate, my argument here has to do with the overall, general concept of the Trinity, not to any specific doctrine. This is what my illustration sets out to prove, that the overall, general concept of the Trinity is self evident. I must insist therefore, that the conversation remain on topic. I am speaking to the overall, general concept of the Trinity, not to any specific doctrine.

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  19. Rolfye

    Randy:
    I'm afraid you're misrepresenting what I said. Ripped from my comment: "Although two distinct Persons, Spirit and Son, the Spirit is clothed in the Person of the Son." That is a far different thing than saying the Spirit has been assimilated. My argument is rather that the Spirit comes clothed in the personality and works of the Son, and that is absolutely the position of the church fathers. It is through the Spirit that the believer meets with both the Son and the Father.

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  20. Randy Helzerman

    (cont) Considering the holy spirit to be the spirit of christ/the same person as christ is an explicitly anti-trinitarian position. Yeah, again, this doesn't mean you are wrong about God, but you are most certainly not a trinitarian, and your conception of God is quite different from that of the church fathers.

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  21. Randy Helzerman

    (cont, to rofyle) Again, I'm not saying you are wrong about God–who know what God is like, I certainly don't. But you are quite wrong in thinking that you are a trinitarian. You are not. This assimilation of the holy spirit to being the Spirit of Christ has been rejected as heretical every time it has been considered by a church council. In fact, the original version of the Nicean creed didn't even have the holy spirit eminating from Jesus, but rather, only from God the Father. (cont)

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  22. Randy Helzerman

    Hi rofyle, well, this is not a matter of interpretation, or you have your opinion/I have mine. There is a right and a wrong answer to this question. I don't know what the real nature of God is, but if I had to bet, I'd go with Luther over you 🙂 The position you are advocating here is very common in American (and some strands of British) christianity, but it is simply not a trinitarian position. You and Luther are literally worshiping two different Gods. (cont)

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  23. Rolfye

    of any one specific doctrine, is in fact self evident, which was my point from the very start. We are all more-in-one. Therefore, the concept of a God being more-in-one is something rather obvious.

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  24. Rolfye

    Randy:
    No, I'm afraid this too is incorrect. Christians do not experience a different person than the Son when they experience the Spirit. Although two distinct Persons, Spirit and Son, the Spirit is clothed in the Person of the Son, so that the constant reference to Spirit in the NT is "the Spirit of Christ."
    More importantly however, my analogy is not in reference to any specific doctrine of the Trinity, but rather as to the general concept. The general concept of the Trinity, regardless

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  25. Randy Helzerman

    (cont, to rofyle) but again, dude, I'm not the one you should be talking to here. Other christians here on youtube will tell you the same thing.

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  26. Randy Helzerman

    Hi rofyle, I never said the trinity was 3 physically seperate individuals. If you look back you will see that I said 3 distinct persons with one substance, which is the Nicaean position, and has been affirmed. But the Nicaean position is quite different from your analogy of your kid not experiencing your sonship. Your kid experiences the same person as your wife experiences. But when christians experience the holy spirit they experience a different person than when they experience the son.

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  27. Rolfye

    Everyone of us exist within three different planes of personality: child, friend, lover; father, son, husband; mother, daughter, wife. Now if Im going to hold to there being a God, and if Im going to hold to this God as being my creator, is it such a stretch then to imagine that this same God does at least in SOME RESPECT resemble this three-planed existence (be it within three distinct Personages or as One acting as three)?

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  28. Rolfye

    My daughter for instance, experiences me as Dad. She does not experience me as Son. She is quite aware of Son however, and on occasions when she gets in trouble, shell appeal to Son by calling grandma in the hopes that Son will make Dad see her viewpoint on things. Are Son and Dad separate persons? Sure, they are. Are they separate entities however? Absolutely not. They are two aspects of one being me. Now that really is self-evident.

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  29. Rolfye

    we learn that Aslan himself is the Great Emperor, the one who himself sings Narnia into existence. But all this really is besides the point, because I didnt offer my analogy as a pointer to any specific doctrine concerning the Trinity, but rather as a means to explain that the general concept is indeed self-evident. Luthers argument was that a consideration of God would lead to monotheism (1 Person as 1 being), but not to Trinity (3 Persons as 1 being). My argument is: yes it does.

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  30. Rolfye

    The first ecumenical council at Nicaea in 325 introduced the term homoousios meaning, of one substance. This is the accepted doctrine of Trinity today, that there exists Three distinct Persons within one being (not 3 separate squares, but a single 3-d cube). I think one of the best illustrations of this is found in C S Lewis The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. In LW&W, we learn that Aslan is the son of the Great Emperor, the one who made Narnia. In the Magicians Nephew however,

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  31. Rolfye

    randy:
    No, Im sorry, its not at all true to say that orthodox Christianity has always seen the Trinity as 3 persons in the way you mean it (as 3 physically separate individuals). This is Polytheism, and it is true to say that this view has been and is condemned as heretical. Tertullian said, The Father is the whole substance, while the Son, indeed, is a derivation and portion of the whole. Luther himself argued that the term Threeness was blasphemous (pg. 166).

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  32. Rolfye

    randy:
    No, Im sorry, its not at all true to say that orthodox Christianity has always seen the Trinity as 3 persons in the way you mean it (as 3 physically separate individuals). This is Polytheism, and it is true to say that this view has been and is condemned as heretical. Tertullian said, The Father is the whole substance, while the Son, indeed, is a derivation and portion of the whole. Luther himself argued that the term Threeness was blasphemous (pg. 166).

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply
  33. Randy Helzerman

    (cont, to rofyle) Again, I'm not the best to explain it, because I'm an atheist and not an orthodox christian, but there are others on YouTube here who could help you, KabaneTheChristian is one, PeacefulApe is another.

    March 10, 2022 at 3:34 am Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.