How sound is this theology?

[Neostarwcc]

So my wife likes this youtube channel called Theocast. They are a channel that claim to be reformed but yet teach my wife theology that I'm uncomfortable with. Like for example, one doesn't have to read the Bible to be Christian and that it's optional. That we don't have to follow Jesus or live the Christian life to be Christians. This doesn't mix well with me because the reformed are big on "living the Christian life" their Channel almost seems to contradict reformed theology at every turn yet, my wife loves to watch them for that point. To me, they're not reformed at all and I was wondering the opinions of other Christians. Should I unsubsidized from this channel and tell my wife not to watch their videos anymore? Or am I just being stupid and what they have to say is biblical in your opinion?

 

[Friedrich Rubinstein]

Perhaps you could read Romans chapters 12-15 with your wife (which is all about living a Christian life) and let her see the contrast between the Bible and that YT-channel for herself?

 

[Maria Billingsley]

So my wife likes this youtube channel called Theocast. They are a channel that claim to be reformed but yet teach my wife theology that I'm uncomfortable with. Like for example, one doesn't have to read the Bible to be Christian and that it's optional. That we don't have to follow Jesus or live the Christian life to be Christians. This doesn't mix well with me because the reformed are big on "living the Christian life" their Channel almost seems to contradict reformed theology at every turn yet, my wife loves to watch them for that point. To me, they're not reformed at all and I was wondering the opinions of other Christians. Should I unsubsidized from this channel and tell my wife not to watch their videos anymore? Or am I just being stupid and what they have to say is biblical in your opinion?

I just listed to 5 minutes of their latest video called " Jesus is not the Gospel ".
I think they are just repackaging regeneration.
Blessings

 

[SavedByGrace3]

It is not really a matter of "we have to" do certain things or behave certain ways, it is more like it is the inevitable and natural result of being born again. We WANT to read the Bible. We WANT to have fellowship with other believers. We WANT to behave holy and righteously. We Want to do these things in the same way, when we were unbelievers lost in darkness, wanted to do what was contrary to God, love, life, and soundness.
Hey, it is just what we do. We are that kind of tree!

 

[CallofChrist]

*deleted*

 

[DragonFox91]

No, it's not good theology. Christians are called to follow Jesus & be familiar w/ Scripture.

I'd find out what she likes about the videos, why she watches them, & make sure she understands that it's not good theology.

 

[BNR32FAN]

So my wife likes this youtube channel called Theocast. They are a channel that claim to be reformed but yet teach my wife theology that I'm uncomfortable with. Like for example, one doesn't have to read the Bible to be Christian and that it's optional. That we don't have to follow Jesus or live the Christian life to be Christians. This doesn't mix well with me because the reformed are big on "living the Christian life" their Channel almost seems to contradict reformed theology at every turn yet, my wife loves to watch them for that point. To me, they're not reformed at all and I was wondering the opinions of other Christians. Should I unsubsidized from this channel and tell my wife not to watch their videos anymore? Or am I just being stupid and what they have to say is biblical in your opinion?

I wouldn’t worry about the channel best bet is to prove them wrong by quoting the scriptures so she can see for herself what the Bible actually teaches and come to her own conclusion that they are wrong. As far as reading the Bible I don’t believe that is necessary to be a Christian a person can learn Christ’s teachings from others and if they accept Him and abide in His teachings then they are still a Christian. As far as following Christ’s teachings I would quote Matthew 7:21-28, Matthew 24:32-51, and continue on into Matthew 25:1-46.

 

[Hammster]

So my wife likes this youtube channel called Theocast. They are a channel that claim to be reformed but yet teach my wife theology that I'm uncomfortable with. Like for example, one doesn't have to read the Bible to be Christian and that it's optional. That we don't have to follow Jesus or live the Christian life to be Christians. This doesn't mix well with me because the reformed are big on "living the Christian life" their Channel almost seems to contradict reformed theology at every turn yet, my wife loves to watch them for that point. To me, they're not reformed at all and I was wondering the opinions of other Christians. Should I unsubsidized from this channel and tell my wife not to watch their videos anymore? Or am I just being stupid and what they have to say is biblical in your opinion?

I’m an ask-a-question kind of guy. So I would ask her to ask herself how do they know any of this is true.

 

[The Righterzpen]

To me, they're not reformed at all and I was wondering the opinions of other Christians.

I watched their entire "Following Jesus is not the gospel" podcast / video. I didn't come away with the same impression you got out of it.

Like for example, one doesn't have to read the Bible to be Christian and that it's optional. That we don't have to follow Jesus or live the Christian life to be Christians. This doesn't mix well with me because the reformed are big on "living the Christian life" their Channel almost seems to contradict reformed theology at every turn yet, my wife loves to watch them for that point.

Granted, this is the only video of their's that I've watched; so if there are others that are more theologically questionable than this one; I'm not aware of them, I haven't seen them.

I did not see them as being "antinomian" or advocating "not living the Christian life". Their emphasis was simply on one will manifest living a Godly life as a consequence of regeneration. Mimicking what Jesus did without actually being regenerated is a "gospel of works". Which when they say "following Jesus is not the gospel"; technically they are correct because regeneration by the Holy Spirit is the only thing that makes genuine obedience possible. Their example was Judas "followed Jesus" but obviously was not redeemed.

So as far as "reformed theology" / "doctrines of grace"; I didn't see what they were saying as "Biblically unsound". Although I can see where people would miss the point of the Scriptural truth, that faith and obedience follows genuine regeneration and is not a prerequisite to. Maybe you might want to go back and listen a little more carefully to what they are saying. (That would be my "advise"; for whatever "my advise" is worth. LOL)

Yet from a purely practical human interaction stand point though (dealing with loved ones); what follows has been my experience: I have a 20 year old son with autism and epilepsy who lives with me and he has some "un-Christian behavioral characteristics" I'm not wild about. (He can certainly "cuss like a sailor" when he's playing his video games.)

Outside of that though, he's not particularly rebellious. He's not hostile, angry, depressed or uncooperative. He doesn't argue with me when I tell him he's got to take a shower to get ready to go to an appointment and if I need his help with something; he'll lend a hand. Our household is pretty quiet and peaceful.

Besides his video games, cartoons and silly YouTube videos he watches, he also listens to Bible studies on Twitch and things like that. As per his Bible study groups; they are pretty simplistic and I don't know how theologically sound they really are? But I just keep talking to him about the stuff related to God that matters to him. He knows some basic Bible stories, but he doesn't really have the academic capacity to study. On account of the cognitive problems his epilepsy causes; he's only got a 6th grade education. So he's definitely not going to study the way I do. He just does not have the capacity for that.

But we do have frequent conversations about God related to things that impact him; (like having a serious chronic medical condition with still a lot of unanswered questions). He's endured a lot of loss in life. We talk about that. He's got a fair amount of limitations that he's well aware of. He's not intellectually disabled, so he knows his life is very different than most 20 year old's. We talk about that. We talk about "trying to find our purpose in life".

Now I came to realize this is the best way to teach him Biblical truth because in times past when I'd get frustrated with him over his (seeming to me to be "lack of interest"); all that ever accomplished was literally to make him cry. I realized the problem isn't "lack of desire to learn"; as much as it's a certain degree of lack of ability.

Now of course, my son has his own set of sins and points of lack of discipline / places where he falls short. We all do. God know's I have my own set of issues. But, I can encourage him and point him to truth, because ultimately his relationship to God is between the two of them. I have to trust God that He's working in my son at the things GOD wants him to grown in; not necessarily what I THINK he should grow in. And I also know that ultimately it's the Holy Spirit that's going to guide him in all that truth. I can't make him see what he lacks the ability to see, either via plain human immaturity or very real and substantive "medial issues of the flesh".

So no, I don't monitor his Internet activities. (Although I easily could; I have access to his accounts since I'm the one paying all the bills. I'm also the payee on his Social Security check.) But we talk about truth. We've talked about all kinds of stuff. We've talked about the LGBTQ+++ issues some of his gaming friends face. We've talked about pedophiles and porn, sex and drugs, alcoholism, suicide, depression, PTSD, social stuff going on in this world, Covid, the vaccines and how all that, as well as politics has impacted both our lives; stressors related to inflation, the war in the Ukraine, etc.

I can't shelter him from bad theology any more than I can shelter him from the other issues in this life; or the pain of this life. My "job" and goal is to teach him Biblical truth. Human beings don't like to feel like they are being controlled and manipulated. Maybe part of the "positive side" of "rebellion" is that we want to learn stuff on our own time table.

And I love my son more than any other mere mortal in this world. I've sacrificed a lot for this kid and I'd give my own life to save his if it came to that. So my choices of the space I have to give him to help him grow aren't from any lack of care on my part. He needs to grow at his own pace.

So no, I wouldn't advise trying to monitor what your wife watches. Adults need to let adults be adults.

 

[JM]

I've listened dozens and dozens of their podcasts when they first started out and found them to be Reformed and orthodox.

 

[Don Maurer]

I did not listen to the video's, but have some questions.

So my wife likes this youtube channel called Theocast. They are a channel that claim to be reformed but yet teach my wife theology that I'm uncomfortable with. Like for example, one doesn't have to read the Bible to be Christian and that it's optional.

I have a question here.

Q#1 When you say "one doesn't have to read the Bible to be Christian." There are multiple senses in which that can be taken.
1- A Christian has no moral duty to pay any attention to the scriptures?
2- If a person is illiterate and cannot read, he can still be a Christian, because he can still have faith alone. I went to Bolivia to the jungle to teach in a bible school. Some of the women did not have a bible, they were not sufficiently literate in Spanish to read the Spanish bibles. One woman spoke 3 tribal languages and still did not speak Spanish. Many of their husbands knew Spanish and had bibles. The women seem to have great faith and I think they were saved.

That we don't have to follow Jesus or live the Christian life to be Christians.

Q#2 My concern here is again how to understand your words.
1- A Christian has no moral duty to follow Christ's teachings? This would of course be antinomian and would be against reformed theology in numerous ways. The 5th point of the doctrines of Grace is the "perseverance of the saints." We do follow Christ.
2- Another possible interpretation of your words is that you feel that the term "follow Christ" is a a part of the human requirements for justification. If that is what they are saying in the video, I would strongly affirm the youtube videos. The reformed doctrine of justification, or salvation, is that we are justified by faith alone. If you claim to be justified because of something you did (other than faith), such as your a follower of Jesus, then there would be an issue with your salvation because justification is by faith alone. The key word is "alone." We follow Christ not to get saved, but because Christ's shed blood saved us.

This doesn't mix well with me because the reformed are big on "living the Christian life" their Channel almost seems to contradict reformed theology at every turn yet, my wife loves to watch them for that point. To me, they're not reformed at all and I was wondering the opinions of other Christians. Should I unsubsidized from this channel and tell my wife not to watch their videos anymore? Or am I just being stupid and what they have to say is biblical in your opinion?

I did listen to the opening of "following Jesus is not the gospel."

At about 27 - 33 seconds he says that he will speak about "the gospel, and the nature of justification. We are going to talk about the 'order of salvation' and things that flow out of the new birth. There are things that are fruits of the gospel that are not the good news..."

What he said is in accord with #2 in the previous paragraph. The guy in the podcast is presenting a gospel of justification by faith alone and not mixing in the consequences of believing the gospel with the gospel itself.

After 33 seconds, I shut down the podcast only because I need to do other things right now. I know I am making a snap judgment, but I am guessing I would agree with the podcast and your wife. I am also wondering about the depth of your understanding of how the reformed soteriology works. If I get time, I might more fully listen to the youtube podcast above.

 

[Neostarwcc]

I did not listen to the video's, but have some questions.


I have a question here.

Q#1 When you say "one doesn't have to read the Bible to be Christian." There are multiple senses in which that can be taken.
1- A Christian has no moral duty to pay any attention to the scriptures?
2- If a person is illiterate and cannot read, he can still be a Christian, because he can still have faith alone. I went to Bolivia to the jungle to teach in a bible school. Some of the women did not have a bible, they were not sufficiently literate in Spanish to read the Spanish bibles. One woman spoke 3 tribal languages and still did not speak Spanish. Many of their husbands knew Spanish and had bibles. The women seem to have great faith and I think they were saved.



Q#2 My concern here is again how to understand your words.
1- A Christian has no moral duty to follow Christ's teachings? This would of course be antinomian and would be against reformed theology in numerous ways. The 5th point of the doctrines of Grace is the "perseverance of the saints." We do follow Christ.
2- Another possible interpretation of your words is that you feel that the term "follow Christ" is a a part of the human requirements for justification. If that is what they are saying in the video, I would strongly affirm the youtube videos. The reformed doctrine of justification, or salvation, is that we are justified by faith alone. If you claim to be justified because of something you did (other than faith), such as your a follower of Jesus, then there would be an issue with your salvation because justification is by faith alone. The key word is "alone." We follow Christ not to get saved, but because Christ's shed blood saved us.




I did listen to the opening of "following Jesus is not the gospel."

At about 27 - 33 seconds he says that he will speak about "the gospel, and the nature of justification. We are going to talk about the 'order of salvation' and things that flow out of the new birth. There are things that are fruits of the gospel that are not the good news..."

What he said is in accord with #2 in the previous paragraph. The guy in the podcast is presenting a gospel of justification by faith alone and not mixing in the consequences of believing the gospel with the gospel itself.

After 33 seconds, I shut down the podcast only because I need to do other things right now. I know I am making a snap judgment, but I am guessing I would agree with the podcast and your wife. I am also wondering about the depth of your understanding of how the reformed soteriology works. If I get time, I might more fully listen to the youtube podcast above.

That actually happened to my grandmother, she died illiterate and unable to read. Yet, she was a strong Catholic but, usually in my grandmothers case my grandfather would read the Bible to her or would read whatever she wanted so I would say that even the illiterate are capable of reading the Bible. The Bible has become widely spread and is available in several languages now almost every language in the world.

I see your point though I guess you can make an inference from what the podcasters are saying it just makes me a little uncomfortable because all of the reformed preachers that I've heard (Including my lead Elder) preach the importance of following Jesus and getting into daily scripture reading. I never really saw these as optional before no matter what Christian faith you are. But, I suppose it could be argued that the early church didn't have access to a Bible like its accessed today. They heard the Bible in Church but the Bible still was a part of their everyday life. I hope I'm making sense.

 

[Don Maurer]

I see your point though I guess you can make an inference from what the podcasters are saying it just makes me a little uncomfortable because all of the reformed preachers that I've heard (Including my lead Elder) preach the importance of following Jesus and getting into daily scripture reading. I never really saw these as optional before no matter what Christian faith you are. But, I suppose it could be argued that the early church didn't have access to a Bible like its accessed today. They heard the Bible in Church but the Bible still was a part of their everyday life. I hope I'm making sense.

Neostarwcc, I am not sure we are on the same page concerning the video's. Again, I admit I did not listen to the complete video, but the part I listened to seemed to be talking about human criteria required for salvation or justification. This is not to say that following Jesus or reading your bible is unimportant. While I suspect that video was saying that following Jesus is not the human criteria for justification, where did they say it was unimportant?