Andrew Rappaport and Fred Butler are both return guests. There is no formal topic this month, instead we have a roundtable discussion, something we have done twice before as December episodes and really enjoyed. The topic starters for discussion are the topics discussed in the previous episodes of the show from 2020.

Outline of the Discussion
  • ITEC
    • The story of ITEC goes back to Nate Saint, in the 1950s, who was a missionary pilot in Ecuador, and was killed by an indigenous tribe while trying to make contact. His son Steve was raised in that very same tribe as Nate’s family & friends were able to get into the tribe and do the work Nate was working to start. Steve later started ITEC (Indigenous peoples Technology and Education Center) to support indigenous people groups as they build churches.
    • ITEC works to solve everyday problems for people who live in areas without basic amenities like electricity, running water, or roads leading to population centers.
  • Ephesians
    • Andrew appreciated the general overview of the Book of Ephesians.
    • Fred recommends reading good Bible commentaries as a method of devotion.
    • Andrew recommends memorizing books. He does so by listening to audio Bibles over and over on a daily basis (at double speed) with the Dwell app. Memorizing the book helps to understand the general layout of the book, and even years later is helpful in understanding the text better.
  • Social Justice
    • Jamal Bandy brings a refreshing perspective on Social Justice.
    • Black Lives Matter is one manifestation of Social Justice.
    • Social Justice is causing church splits and divorces.
    • Critical Theory, and the subset Critical Race Theory is Marxist to the core.
  • Noahide Laws
    • Noahide/Noetic laws are a way that Judaism seeks to evangelize Christians. It’s a form of creeping Judaizing.
  • Discussion Cornucopia with Chris Hohnholz
    • Andrew appreciated the discussion of the wellbeing of pastors.
    • Legalism is a big issue, and it often presents itself subtly.
    • The Legalism discussion tied in with the later discussion with Justin Peters on discernment.
  • Attributes of God
    • Andrew really liked the Decrees of God.
    • Theology starts with the Attributes of God.
  • The Bible Project
    • Fred was introduced to the Bible Project early through friends & family and could tell pretty quickly that there was something “off” with them.
    • It’s not so much what they say, as much as what they don’t say.
  • Made in the Image of God
    • We explored the idea that if we’re made in the image of God, then our sin reflects negatively on Him, and testifies that God is a god of sin. In other words, all sin is blasphemous by nature.
    • To be made in God’s image means we hold the communicable attributes of God.
    • Being made in God’s image does not mean that we are all God’s children.
  • Problems with Pre-Trib
    • Andrew & Fred both hold (to varying degree) to the Pre-trib view, so we decided to talk about the importance of the Millennium, which we all agree on.
    • Amillennialism is, as Fred describes it, an over-realized understanding of Covenant Theology.
  • Discernment
    • Fred has long loved & respected Justin Peters’ ability to get into discernment in a way that really shows why bad teaching is bad, and not just to tear people down.
    • Andrew thinks that Todd Friel and Justin Peters are the two best people on discernment.
    • Discernment ministries usually start out well. They put a lot of time into exposing bad teaching. Then they often move on to other ministries. As they move through from one ministry to the next, they start cutting corners, and that’s when they start to fail.
    • Andrew tells of some criticism of John Piper, and an area that Piper is criticized about is really theology that Piper gets from Jonathan Edwards.
  • Assurance of Salvation
    • People often confuse assurance of salvation with eternal security. There’s a difference between the two doctrines.
Related Episodes
  • Topics above are linked to the original episodes from which the discussion started.