Search — Theology Explorer

James (brother of Jesus) Acts 15:20-21 table fellowship James (brother of Jesus) Acts 15:20-21

Acts 15:19-21 -- James decrees four abstentions for Gentiles: things contaminated by idols, fornication, what is strangled, and blood. The reason given: Moses has been preached in every city.

James's four-fold decree for Gentiles

Acts 15 Acts 15 Hebrew Roots movement 119 Ministries

Hebrew Roots claim: Acts 15 is only about salvation, not sanctification. Winger argues the meeting appears to address both and that the claim is artificially restrictive.

Critique of Hebrew Roots interpretation of Acts 15

Acts 15 Acts 15 Torah observance salvation vs. sanctification

Three arguments that Acts 15 addresses sanctification, not just salvation: (1) text never limits it to salvation; (2) if future Torah teaching was expected, why not clarify here; (3) they gave four specific sanctification commands, not the whole law

Winger's three-part argument that Acts 15 covers sanctification as well

Leviticus 17-18 Acts 15:20 John Polhill table fellowship Apostolic Decree Leviticus 17-18

The four Apostolic Decree commands correspond to Leviticus 17-18, which lists things God judges Gentile nations for -- suggesting these were universal moral standards applicable even outside the law

Analysis of the four commands and their OT background

Acts 15:20-21 table fellowship dietary laws Acts 15:20-21

Two interpretations of the four commands: (1) universal moral standards for all Gentile believers, or (2) specifically for Jewish-Gentile table fellowship. Winger favors table fellowship.

Competing interpretations of the Apostolic Decree

Acts 15 Acts 13 discipleship Acts 15 Torah observance

Hebrew Roots response to Acts 15: it was only temporary, with full Torah teaching coming later. Winger demolishes this by pointing to the years of prior discipleship at Antioch.

Response to the Hebrew Roots 'temporary decree' argument for Acts 15

Matthew 5 Matthew 28 argument from silence Great Commission Matthew 5

Challenge to Hebrew Roots movement: if Matthew 5 and 28 teach Torah for all, why does Acts never once tell Gentiles to obey the law? The silence disproves the interpretation.

Summary challenge to Hebrew Roots reading of Acts

Timothy Jewish identity fulfillment theology

Timothy was not circumcised because he was Jewish -- he was circumcised for ministry effectiveness. This distinction is critical: it is fulfillment theology, not law-keeping.

Clarification on Timothy's circumcision motivation

Torah observance Jewish believers fulfillment theology

Summary: Gentiles who get saved in Acts never receive Torah instructions; Jews are never asked to stop. Both groups are united by Jesus, not by the law.

Summary of Acts survey to this point

1 Corinthians 9 Acts 18:18 Nazirite vow Paul the Apostle 1 Corinthians 9

Acts 18:18 -- Paul keeps a Nazirite vow (hair cut) years after the resurrection. Consistent with Jewish believers continuing optional Torah practices.

Survey of Acts 18:18, Paul's Nazirite vow

Acts 20:17 Ephesian elders Paul the Apostle feast days

Key observation: the Ephesian elders are not going to Jerusalem for Pentecost -- Paul is the exception, not the rule. Gentile believers are not flocking to Jerusalem for feasts.

Analysis of Acts 20:17, Paul's address to Ephesian elders

Acts 20:27 Torah observance Ephesus Paul the Apostle

Acts 20:27 -- Paul declares he gave the Ephesians the whole counsel of God. If Torah observance was required, he would have included it -- but he did not.

Paul's claim to have given the whole counsel of God

Acts 15 Acts 21 Acts 15 Torah observance Acts 21

Acts 21 addresses the opposite error: not telling Jews to stop obeying the law. Acts 15 covered Gentiles; Acts 21 covers Jews. Both errors must be avoided.

Introduction to Acts 21 analysis

James (brother of Jesus) Acts 21:20-21 Paul the Apostle James (brother of Jesus) Law of Moses

Acts 21:20-21 -- thousands of Jewish believers are zealous for the law; there is a rumor that Paul teaches Jews to forsake Moses and stop circumcising their children

Survey of Acts 21:20-21

Acts 21 Torah observance Acts 21 Jewish believers

Three conclusions from Acts 21: (1) Jews may continue obeying the law (beware Pharisaical additions); (2) Gentiles still have only the four commands; (3) Jewish believers in Jerusalem years later are still Torah-observant -- and that is fine.

Summary of Acts 21 analysis

Sabbath observance Gentile believers Lord's Day (Sunday worship)

Q&A: Gentiles and Sabbath/Sunday worship -- Winger says the day of worship does not matter; the Sabbath has not shifted from Saturday to Sunday

Q&A on Sabbath observance for Gentiles

Law of Moses Ten Commandments law of Christ

Q&A: the Ten Commandments are not selectively binding because they are in the Ten Commandments -- believers are not under the law, but follow the heart of God as fulfilled in Christ

Q&A on Ten Commandments and Sabbath

New Covenant Law of Moses Levites

Q&A: tithing -- the tithe is a Mosaic law (10% to Levites/temple) and is not required for believers; Christians should give freely as the Lord directs to the poor, persecuted, and ministers

Q&A on tithing

Revelation 20-21 eschatology Law of Moses new heavens and new earth

Q&A: Revelation 20-21 as the end of the Mosaic law -- Winger is uncertain; notes a real transition happens in new heavens/new earth but declines to definitively call it the end of the law

Q&A on eschatology and the law

Hebrew Roots movement Messianic Judaism Jewish believers

Q&A: difference between Hebrew Roots movement (HRM) and Messianic Judaism -- HRM is predominantly Gentiles taking on Torah; Messianic Judaism is Jews who believe Jesus is Messiah

Q&A distinguishing HRM from Messianic Judaism

Romans 3:20 knowledge of sin Law of Moses law and sin connection

Romans 3:20 establishes a connection between the law and the knowledge of sin

Scriptural support for the law-sin connection

Galatians 3:21-22 law and sin connection Galatians 3:21-22 imprisoned under sin

Galatians 3:21-22 — the law imprisons everything under sin so that promise comes by faith

Scriptural support for law-sin connection

Romans 6:14 dominion Greek exegesis Romans 6:14

Greek word analysis: kyrieuō (dominion) vs. hypo (under) in Romans 6:14

Greek word-level critique of 119 Ministries' interpretation

Romans Romans exegesis Law of Moses

The unqualified "the law" appears 35+ times in Romans before 6:14 and always refers to the Law of Moses

Argument from Pauline usage in Romans

Romans 3:19 accountability Law of Moses under the law

Romans 3:19 — the law speaks to those under it; clearly Jewish people

Surveying Pauline uses — second instance

Galatians 3:23 Law of Moses under the law Galatians 3:23

Galatians 3:23 — before faith we were held captive "under the law," referring to the Law of Moses for Jews

Surveying Pauline uses — fourth instance

Galatians 3:21-28 in Christ covenant Hebrew Roots Movement

Galatians 3:21-28 read in full: no Jew or Greek distinction in Christ undermines Hebrew Roots' position

Extended scriptural reading to demonstrate freedom from the law

Galatians 4:21 circumcision Law of Moses fulfillment theology

Galatians 4:21 — "you who want to be under the law" addresses those seeking circumcision and Mosaic obedience

Surveying Pauline uses — seventh instance

Galatians 5:18 Law of Moses under the law Galatians 5:18

Galatians 5:18 — "if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law"

Surveying Pauline uses — eighth/ninth instance

Hebrew Roots Movement Law of Moses Old Testament application

Main conclusion: the phrase "under the law" refutes Torah observance as a Christian obligation

Winger's summary conclusion for the episode

false teaching 119 Ministries charitable interpretation

Are Hebrew Roots teachers false teachers? Winger extends charity, attributing error to wrong assumptions not bad faith

Q&A: question about false teaching

logical fallacy grace under the law

Responding to syllogism: judgment for sin requires being under the law

Q&A: Timmy Pine presents a logical argument

Law of Moses Sabbath Mosaic covenant

What does being under the Law of Moses actually entail? An all-or-nothing covenant

Q&A: explaining the scope of Mosaic law

Genesis 3 Genesis 3 Eve grace

Was Eve under the law or under grace? Distinguishing pre-Mosaic commands from the Law of Moses

Q&A: Tom Kendrick about Eve

Acts circumcision Acts Jewish believers

Jewish believers who come to faith in Jesus should expect to continue being very Jewish

Q&A: Rachel asks about present-day Jews and circumcision/law observance

1 Corinthians Romans 14 1 Corinthians Romans 14 Christian liberty

Voluntarily keeping feast days or eating kosher for conscience's sake is acceptable; mandating it for others is wrong

Q&A: lularoe asks if observing feasts/clean eating condemns him

historical Jesus Mike Licona Jesus Myth movement

Upcoming guest: Mike Licona to discuss the Jesus Myth movement

Announcements at end of stream

Calvinism limited atonement TULIP

Definition of limited atonement: Jesus's death only paid for the sins of the elect

Winger defines limited atonement as the doctrine that God only provided payment for the sins of certain people (the elect), not for all humanity.

limited atonement TULIP extent of atonement

Comparison chart: limited atonement vs. universal atonement vs. universalism on extent and application

Winger presents a visual chart distinguishing three views based on extent and application of the atonement.

2 Corinthians 5:14-15 limited atonement 2 Corinthians 5:14-15 all have died

2 Corinthians 5:14-15 — the Calvinist logical argument for limited atonement from this text

Winger presents the viewer's question and the Calvinist logical argument drawn from 2 Corinthians 5:14-15.

2 Corinthians 5:14-15 limited atonement 2 Corinthians 5:14-15 fallacy of negative inference

Even granting the Calvinist reading of 2 Cor 5:14, it only affirms Jesus died for the elect — it does not deny he died for others

Winger grants the Calvinist interpretation hypothetically to show it still does not prove limited atonement.

2 Corinthians 5 evangelism limited atonement universal atonement

Universal atonement motivates evangelism; limited atonement undermines the sincere gospel call

Winger argues that Paul's evangelistic appeal in 2 Corinthians 5 flows directly from universal atonement and is inconsistent with limited atonement.

2 Corinthians 5:18-20 evangelism limited atonement 2 Corinthians 5:18-20

Paul's application of the theology confirms the universal-extent, limited-application reading: the missions mandate

How Paul applies his theology tells us what his real theology is; his application is the missions mandate.

2 Corinthians 5:21 imputation 2 Corinthians 5:21 extent of atonement

2 Corinthians 5:21 — 'he made him to be sin' reinforces universal atonement

Winger reads verse 21 as a statement about the totality of Christ's sacrifice, consistent with universal extent.

objective vs subjective atonement union with Christ conversion

Objective atonement 2,000 years ago vs. subjective appropriation at conversion

Winger explains how a believer can say they died with Christ even though they were not alive when Jesus died.

Romans 5:18-19 Romans 5:17 Adam justification universal atonement

Romans 5:18-19 — 'one act of righteousness leads to justification for all men' — universal extent, not universalism

Winger examines Romans 5:18-19 as another text supporting universal atonement but not universalism.

Romans 5:17 Romans 10:13 faith free will application of atonement

'Those who receive' in Romans 5:17 conditions justification on reception; Romans 10:13 confirms call-response salvation

Winger highlights the word 'receive' in Romans 5:17 as the hinge that prevents universal atonement from collapsing into universalism.

1 Timothy 4:10 extent of atonement application of atonement 1 Timothy 4:10

1 Timothy 4:10 — 'savior of all people, especially those who believe' — extent/application distinction in a single verse

Winger cites 1 Timothy 4:10 as a single verse that encodes the extent/application distinction.

2 Peter 2:1 false prophets limited atonement extent of atonement

2 Peter 2:1 — Christ bought even false prophets who deny him and face destruction, proving atonement extends beyond the elect

Winger uses 2 Peter 2:1 to demonstrate that Christ purchased those who are clearly not saved, refuting limited atonement.