Search — Theology Explorer

Ezekiel 26 Zechariah 9 Zechariah 7:1 Ezekiel 26 Alexander the Great prophecy of Tyre

Objection and response: the pronoun shift in Ezekiel 26 and Zechariah 9

Addressing the objection that the plural pronoun in Ezekiel 26 still refers only to Nebuchadnezzar.

Isaiah 52:13 Isaiah 6:1 Isaiah 2 Suffering Servant deity of Christ Jonathan McLatchie

Argument for the deity of Christ from Isaiah 52:13 — "high and lifted up"

McLatchie presents one of four arguments for the deity of the Messiah embedded within Isaiah 52-53.

Isaiah 53 Isaiah 42 Isaiah 49 Isaiah 53 Suffering Servant messianic prophecy

Objection: Isaiah 53 is about Israel, not Jesus — and response

McLatchie addresses the modern rabbinic argument that Isaiah 53's Suffering Servant is a personification of the nation of Israel.

divine inspiration Jonathan McLatchie unity of Scripture

Unity of the Bible as a second argument for divine inspiration

Mike Winger introduces the unity of Scripture as a distinct argument from prophecy for divine inspiration.

Mark 2 Isaiah 63:7-10 Psalm 78:40 Holy Spirit Mark 2 Jonathan McLatchie

Isaiah 63 — Three persons of the Trinity in the Old Testament

McLatchie presents Isaiah 63:7-10 as containing all three persons of the Trinity within a single Old Testament passage.

Islam divine inspiration Quran

Why unity argument doesn't work for Islam — Quran vs. Bible authorship

Cameron Bertuzzi's question: if unity of Scripture argues for divine inspiration, why doesn't it work for the Quran?

undesigned coincidences eyewitness testimony Jonathan McLatchie

Undesigned coincidences — definition and how they demonstrate historicity

Winger asks McLatchie to explain undesigned coincidences as a distinct argument for the historicity of the New Testament.

John the Baptist Mark 10:2-12 Josephus John the Baptist Herod Antipas

Extra-biblical corroboration: Mark 10 — why Jesus taught about divorce in that context

McLatchie uses Mark 10's divorce passage to show Josephus provides context explaining why the teaching is historically plausible.

deity of Christ Jonathan McLatchie pagan deity parallels

Objection: Jesus's deity borrowed from pagan deities — and response

Addressing the popular online claim that the deity of Jesus was borrowed from pagan mythologies.

Jonathan McLatchie biological fine-tuning intelligent design

Doug Axe's research — probability of functional proteins

McLatchie cites Douglas Axe's research on the ratio of functional to non-functional protein sequences.

Jonathan McLatchie biological fine-tuning intelligent design

Fine-tuning of the genetic code itself

McLatchie argues that the genetic code is itself exquisitely fine-tuned beyond what chance could produce.

Mormonism polytheism monotheism

Why natural theology arguments point to the God of Christianity, not Hinduism

McLatchie explains why the cosmological and design arguments favor the Abrahamic God over polytheistic conceptions.

1 Corinthians 15:3-7 Galatians 1:18-19 Paul Peter resurrection creed

1 Corinthians 15 creedal tradition — early apostolic testimony to the resurrection

McLatchie analyzes 1 Corinthians 15:3-7 as a pre-Pauline creed containing the earliest testimony to the resurrection.

John 21 Paul Peter Origen

Martyrdom of Peter and Paul as evidence for the sincerity of resurrection belief

McLatchie cites the willingness of the apostles to die for their testimony as evidence they genuinely believed in the resurrection.

1 Corinthians 15 James the brother of Jesus Luke 24:34 Peter 1 Corinthians 15 resurrection of Jesus

Criterion of restraint — no narratives of private resurrection appearances to Peter and James

McLatchie introduces the "criterion of restraint" as further corroboration of the resurrection's historicity.

Mary Magdalene empty tomb criterion of embarrassment

Empty tomb evidence — women as primary witnesses

McLatchie presents the role of women as primary witnesses to the empty tomb as evidence for its historicity.

Matthew 28 empty tomb resurrection of Jesus Matthew 28

Earliest Jewish polemic presupposes the empty tomb — Matthew 28

McLatchie points to the earliest Jewish counter-argument to the resurrection as presupposing the tomb was empty.

Luke 8:2-3 Luke 24:10 Luke 23:55 Luke 8:2-3 Mary Magdalene Joanna

Undesigned coincidence within Luke: women from Galilee thread through Luke 8, 23, and 24

McLatchie presents an intra-Gospel undesigned coincidence within Luke demonstrating the authentic, non-fabricated character of the resurrection narrative.

apologetics cumulative case apologetics Jonathan McLatchie

The cumulative case — power and robustness of multiple converging arguments

McLatchie explains the logic and strength of the cumulative case approach as the seventh and final major point.

apologetics Jonathan McLatchie Apologetics Academy

Closing remarks and resources — Apologetics Academy

Winger and McLatchie wrap up the livestream with closing remarks and resource recommendations.

Acts 2:36 Acts 2:36 Peter (Apostle) Jewish audience

Acts 2:36 confirms Peter is addressing a Jewish audience (house of Israel), reinforcing that Acts 2 has no bearing on Gentile Torah observance

Analysis of Peter's Pentecost sermon audience

Acts 3:12 Acts 3:17 Acts 3:25-26 Messianic prophecy Abrahamic covenant Peter (Apostle)

Peter's sermon in Acts 3 is directed to 'men of Israel' -- Jewish-to-Jewish evangelism with a distinctly Jewish message connecting Jesus to Messianic expectation

Survey of Acts chapter 3 sermon

Acts 10 hermeneutics Acts 10 dietary laws

Critique of the alternative view: using the idea that all foods are clean to communicate a message while insisting all foods are not actually clean is logically incoherent

Logical critique of Hebrew Roots reading of Acts 10

Acts 13:38-39 Paul the Apostle justification Law of Moses

Acts 13:38-39 -- Paul: forgiveness is proclaimed through Jesus, and through him everyone who believes is freed from all things from which they could not be freed through the law of Moses

Paul's synagogue sermon in Pisidian Antioch

Law of Moses dietary laws feast days

Preaching against idolatry is not the same as imposing the law of Moses -- idolatry is condemned universally, not only in the law. Specific Mosaic laws (Sabbath, tithe to Levites, feast attendance) are never mentioned to Gentiles.

Response to Hebrew Roots claim that preaching against idolatry equals teaching Torah

Acts 15:6-11 Cornelius Holy Spirit salvation by grace

Acts 15:6-11 -- Peter's speech at the Jerusalem Council: God made no distinction between Jew and Gentile, cleansing their hearts by faith; why put on them a yoke their fathers could not bear? Salvation is by grace alone.

Peter's speech at Jerusalem Council

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

resurrection Gentile evangelism Messiah (title)

Q&A: difference between preaching Jesus as Christ to Jews vs. as Lord to Gentiles -- connects to what the audience already knows from Scripture

Q&A on Jewish vs. Gentile evangelism vocabulary

Romans 6:14 Hebrew Roots Movement Law of Moses Torah Observance

Series introduction: pivotal issue of whether Christians should obey the Law of Moses

Opening of Hebrew Roots part 4 livestream

Romans 6:14 119 Ministries under the law Romans 6:14

119 Ministries' interpretation of Romans 6:14 is the specific target of the episode

Naming the opposing interpreter

Romans 6:14 119 Ministries law of Christ under the law

119 Ministries' first interpretive move: raising the question of which law Paul means in Romans 6:14

Presenting 119 Ministries' argument before critique

Romans 6:14 hermeneutics exegesis Law of Moses

Winger's critique: 119 Ministries compares "the law of X" phrases to the unqualified phrase "the law"

First critique of 119 Ministries' method

Romans 6:14 false dichotomy 119 Ministries under the law

119 Ministries' second move: false dichotomy between "under sin" and "under Law of Moses"

Presenting the second interpretive move of 119 Ministries

Romans 6:14 dominion exegesis 119 Ministries

119 Ministries subtly changes the wording of Romans 6:14 from "dominion" to "under sin"

Third interpretive move: textual alteration

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

Romans 7:8 law and sin connection Romans 7:8 power of sin

Romans 7:8 — sin uses the commandment as an opportunity; apart from the law sin is dead

Scriptural support for 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

1 Corinthians 15:56 law and sin connection power of sin 1 Corinthians 15:56

1 Corinthians 15:56 — the power of sin is the law

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 6:14 Law of Moses 119 Ministries under the law

119 Ministries' conclusion: Romans 6:14 refers to the "law of sin and death," not the Law of Moses

Presenting 119 Ministries' final interpretive conclusion

false dichotomy 119 Ministries law of Christ

The false dichotomy makes 119's interpretation agreeable in isolation but wrong in exclusivity

Winger's summative critique of the false dichotomy

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 7 Romans 6:14 119 Ministries Romans 7 Romans 6:14

119 Ministries claims Romans 6:14 introduces the "law of sin and death" — but Paul actually introduces it in Romans 7

Critique of 119's ad hoc exegesis

1 John 4:3 circular reasoning Law of Moses 119 Ministries

119 Ministries' circular argument: freedom from law of sin requires obeying the Law of Moses via 1 John 4:3

Critique of 119's overall logical structure

Romans 6:14 Romans 6:15 Law of Moses under the law Romans 6:14

Romans 6:15 refutes 119's interpretation of Romans 6:14 by context

Contextual argument using the immediately following verse

hermeneutics Hebrew Roots Movement 119 Ministries

119 Ministries is used as the dialogue partner because they actually engage with challenging passages

Methodological note on choosing 119 Ministries

Romans 2:12 Law of Moses Romans 2:12 under the law

Romans 2:12 — "under the law" refers to Jews who have the Law of Moses

Surveying Pauline uses of "under the law" — first instance

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 4:4-5 redemption sinlessness of Jesus Law of Moses

Galatians 4:4-5 — Jesus was born "under the law" to redeem those under it; proves the phrase means Law of Moses, not mastery of sin

Surveying Pauline uses — sixth instance, highly significant