Search — Theology Explorer

Filter results by source database — Scripture Commentary, Theology, Mike Winger, or Pulpit. Click a tab to narrow to one database.

...more

All (3732) Scripture Commentary (1418) Theology (156) Mike Winger (2139) Pulpit (19)

Mike Winger idea 2021-03-19

1 Corinthians 5:11 "do not eat with them" — does not apply to family relationships

Listener Melissa Heeg asks whether 1 Corinthians 5:11's instruction not to eat with a sinning "brother" applies to family gatherings.

1 Peter 3 1 Corinthians 5:11 1 Peter 3 Lifestyle sin 1 Corinthians 5:11

Mike Winger idea 2021-03-19

Helping a nominal Christian spouse grow in biblical knowledge

Listener Tasteful Chicken has a wife who believes in Jesus and prays but does not read the Bible; her lifestyle does not align with Scripture.

Pastoral care Discipleship in marriage Nominal Christianity

Mike Winger idea 2021-03-19

Sharing Jesus with children when an atheist spouse objects

Listener Sheila is a new believer; her atheist husband does not want her sharing Jesus with their daughter because the daughter will think he's going to hell.

1 Corinthians 5:11 "do not eat with them" — does not apply to family relationships

Helping a nominal Christian spouse grow in biblical knowledge

Sharing Jesus with children when an atheist spouse objects

Ephesians 4:7-16 overview: gifts given to the church equip saints toward unity.

The faith (with definite article) refers to the body of Christian doctrine, not personal belief.

Unity of the faith in Ephesians 4 involves shared core doctrine, knowledge of Christ, and Christlike character.

Putting out a fleece (asking God for a sign) is not inherently wrong but carries dangers of presumption and heart projection.

God physically appearing to everyone would not necessarily eliminate unbelief; unbelief is often a heart issue, not an evidence problem.

Modern (rabbinic) Judaism differs fundamentally from biblical Judaism; good works now replace the sacrificial system.

Psalm 82 gods (elohim) most likely refers to earthly rulers ironically addressed as divine beings, not literal supernatural deities.

Christians can hold various views on Genesis 1 and the Big Bang; the Big Bang is actually strong evidence for God.

The gospel presentation should be adapted to the individual; the content stays constant but the approach changes.

The Holy Spirit speaks through fruit, track record, and confirmation from other believers; not every decision requires supernatural direction.

Mark 5 demoniac: Jesus was not tricked by the demons; the swine destruction may have been demonic sabotage that God repurposed for good.

Joseph Smith was a demonstrably false prophet; modern Mormonism is a victim of his fraud.

The youths mauled by bears in 2 Kings 2 were not small children but likely young adult men mocking Elisha's prophetic authority.

Timeless beings don't have beginnings or endings — these are temporal concepts. God, existing timelessly, doesn't need a cause. This also rules out pagan deities and the Mormon concept of God.

Objection to Premise 2: maybe the universe is infinite in the past. Response: an actually infinite past is impossible — you could never traverse infinite moments to arrive at the present.

Objection: the cause could be a teacup orbiting Saturn or universe-creating pixies instead of God. Response: they're just describing God's attributes and labeling it something else; Occam's razor reduces pixies to one being.

Objection: this only gets you to generic theism, not the Christian God. Response: each attribute (spaceless, timeless, etc.) was justified, not ad hoc; the Kalam is meant to be followed by evidence for the resurrection to identify the God.

Classical apologetics typically combines the Kalam with design arguments and a moral argument (showing God has moral principles and loves people), building a cumulative case before presenting Christ.

Q&A: An infinite universe causing our universe in a "bounce" still faces the same problems — an infinite past of cycles can't be traversed, and a meta-timeline outside ours would need its own cause.

Mike Winger introduces a panel response to Genetically Modified Skeptic's video "4 Questions That Could Make You an Atheist," joined by Braxton Hunter, Cameron Bertuzzi, and John McCrae.

The JW blood transfusion example actually comes from Watchtower proclamations, not biblical interpretation. John notes the Bible's manuscript tradition makes it more reliable than modern media like video. Even supernatural direct knowledge could still be questioned by skeptics.

Drew's Question 2: Shouldn't you worship the cruelest God imaginable? If Pascal's wager is about maximizing reward and minimizing punishment, inventing a maximally cruel God improves the wager by creating a true dichotomy.

Christianity would be the worst survival-promoting religion if it were invented for that purpose — it teaches loving enemies, not retaliating, turning the other cheek. Early Christians were pacifists for 300 years. This contradicts the "made up for survival" hypothesis.

Drew's Question 4: If God knows who will choose him, why not only create those people and skip earthly suffering? If free will is the answer, that implies heaven lacks free will (since there's no suffering there), making earth better than heaven.

The panelists stress that responses to atheist content are meant to open conversation, not tear people down. YouTube is an uncharted mission field. Apologists should collaborate rather than compete.

Pro-choice language like "clump of cells," "remove the pregnancy," and "evacuate the uterus" are propagandistic euphemisms designed to avoid acknowledging that a living human being is being killed.

Fourth artwork shows Valentine candy hearts with pro-choice slogans: "abortion is freedom," "abortion is normal," "shout your abortion." The strategy: repeat loudly and often enough until people believe it.

Both pro-life and pro-choice movements believe they hold the moral high ground. The pro-choice movement has inverted morality — helping a woman kill her offspring is seen as a moral good. The conversation breaks down because they're talking past each other.

Even if you're unsure about early-term abortion, the "maybe" should compel you to oppose it — you wouldn't demolish a building that "maybe" has people in it. And if you draw the line anywhere, you should be fighting for that line instead of voting for unrestricted abortion.

Mike reads his private message to Tatiana Gill — respectful, seeking understanding, asking specific questions. She blocked him within 15 minutes. This reflects the pro-choice movement's tendency to silence opposition rather than engage.

Q&A: The witness of the Holy Spirit is not primarily an emotion but a witness (like testimony) — the Spirit confirms truths like "I am a child of God" (Romans 8). It can come through Scripture, prayer, or ongoing experience and can be temporarily quenched.

Q&A: The argument that life only begins "in the womb" (to justify destroying IVF embryos) fails — it's a location argument. If location determines life, a baby outside the womb would be less alive, which is absurd.

Q&A: Family members with distorted gospels — separate fellowship/church from family. 1 Peter teaches a wife should stay committed to an unbelieving husband. Family is not the same as church partnership; maintain relationship while not partnering in false ministry.

Reason 2 (Teaser Money): Learning that scientific consensus (95% of biologists) affirms human life begins at conception. Since he already believed humans are made in God's image, the biological confirmation made the moral conclusion obvious.

Q&A: Losing virginity doesn't eliminate the point of sexual purity going forward. The principle of "I already blew it so why bother" would justify stealing cars forever after the first theft. Sexual faithfulness continues to matter after sexual failure.

Q: Feeling attacked by the enemy. Read Galatians on victory over the flesh (crucified with Christ, walk in Spirit vs flesh). Prayer and fasting (Jesus said "this kind only comes out by prayer and fasting"). Deal with obvious sin areas. Trust God even in situations beyond your capacity.

Q: Can you lose your salvation? Mike is genuinely unsettled on this. The question is about apostasy (rejecting Christ), not just sinning. He doesn't have a public teaching on it because he hasn't fully worked through the relevant Scriptures to his own satisfaction.

Bible Link Settings