Transcription
Wes Huff just went on the flagrant podcast and got into a great conversation until Andrew Schultz pressed him on belief in Jesus. Watch this. His own followers didn't believe in him until he came back. And now we got to believe with him and we didn't even get to see him come back. We have to have this, this undying faith that even his own closest followers couldn't have. And he has a higher expectation for us than them. What an interesting challenge. Jesus' own followers failed to have faith, and yet we're supposed to have what they could not. Have we finally found the most difficult challenge to Christianity yet?
What if I told you this question is actually a debate trick? And when you see how this works, it's going to level up your ability to engage others for Christ. We're about to get into all of that, and we'll see how Wes Huff did right now.
So, here we go. Welcome back to Weiss Disciple. My name is Nate, and I'm helping you become the effective Christian that you are meant to be. Before I jumped into this ministry full-time, I was a pastor and a debate teacher. And it's from that unique experience that I make these videos. Don't forget to like, sub, and share this one around if it blesses you.
Don't you think God recognizes it? Like, don't you think God is smart enough to be like, "Hey, this person just found a way around the system. He just said, 'Yo, I believe in that guy.'" And then he's just out here continuing to kill people. And this other person is like, "I don't know if I believe in him, but I am that."
So, so what they're talking about right here are two types of folks, right? Christians who believe in Jesus and those who do not believe in God, but they desire to live by the prescriptions that the Bible gives, right? So like forgive others, you know, take care of your family, uh be generous, give to charity, stuff like that. Now, I don't think this hypothetical person exists because nobody can obey all of the prescriptions that the Bible gives and reject God at the same time, you know? I mean, think about that, right? Because uh one of the most famous prescriptions that comes out of the Bible is in the it's the Deuteronomy 6. It's the Schma, right? You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and might. How can you follow this prescription to love God and let him be your God if you reject God at the same time? That doesn't make any sense, right?
So, Schulz is not providing an accurate depiction of a person who wants to live by the Bible but also rejects God. At best, I'd say the person who rejects God and wants to live by the Bible is still rejecting uh what the Bible teaches. A lot of it at the end of the day, including much of what Jesus taught, which is to believe and follow after him.
Isn't it also weird that he died for all of your sins except one? Every sin except one. Don't believe in him. Like you don't believe in him, so you're going to hell. Everything else, you're good. But you don't believe that's the one sin. Most of his own followers didn't believe. So, so that's an interesting question. Did you hear that? Jesus died for all sins except for one, which is don't believe in him. If you don't believe in Jesus, that's a sin. So, so Jesus will die for all the sins of the world, but he won't tolerate you not believing in him.
Now, uh this is just like the clip that I played in the intro, right? This actually trades on a debate trick. And I'm curious if you caught it. Let me know in the comments below, you know, especially those of you who have been with me on debate videos in the past because basically what I'm asking you to do is to deconstruct these particular arguments in real time, you know, and I'd love to get your thoughts. I'm actually going to I'm going to play this clip, but we're going to come back to this in a moment. Believe in him until he came back. And now we got to believe with him and we didn't even get to see him come back. I can't believe his own followers, the people who saw him do all the cool stuff. The second he dies are like, "Yeah, he was bullshitting." And then he comes back, they're like, "Okay, we're on board." Yet, we have to have this, this undying faith that even his own closest followers couldn't have. And he has a higher expectation for us than them. Because if he did come back, I guarantee we'd be like, "Hey, I'm back. I'm doing all your homies, too." But why do you have a higher expectation for us when we never even met you?
So, okay. So, so Schultz asks a different question, same debate trick. And and and by the way, I'm I'm I'm using debate trick, right? I'm using that phrase. It's not exactly a trick if it's not done on purpose. Okay? But what Schultz and his other friend are doing is they're asking a question that trades on an incredibly uh specific yet improper framing of the issue. And the friend didn't do it as much as Schulz did, but both did the same thing.
So, if you've seen my debate stuff before, I've talked about laying a framework, you know, and what I mean by that is when a debater narrates the debate to the judge, right? So that the judge understands how to think about the topic or how to think through the issue at hand, it's they're doing what's called laying a framework. All right? And a good debate opponent is going to lay a framework that is advantageous to their position. I mean, that's a given. I I'm not even saying anything controversial right now. What Schulz's friend just did was he framed the discussion around some flawed assumptions. So remember he said, well, you know, Jesus died for all sins except for one, which is, you know, the sin of not believing in him. And the suggestion is, you know, hey, isn't that silly? Why not just die for one more sin and everyone will be fine, right? The problem is, um, Schultz's friend doesn't understand what the phrase Jesus died for your sins means. And look, I I I get it. I mean, you know, we this is a common Christian talking point and it's thrown around a lot, especially on Sunday, you know, Sunday mornings, but this is a really great uh sort of avenue to pursue for a moment. What does that phrase really mean? If Jesus died for your sins, there must be some specific purpose for him to do so, right? Have you ever thought about this? Hopefully, you have as a Christian, right? What is that purpose? Look at this. He is Jesus is the propitiation for our sins and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. Now golly this is a theologically rich statement to make but look at what is being communicated here. Jesus is the propitiation. He is the in other words the satisfaction of divine justice. That's that's what the word means. And in order to satisfy this justice or another way to say that is to uh satisfy God's wrath, Jesus died. But look at the rest of the statement, right? Jesus died for our sins. So there is divine justice that will come against our sins and Jesus is the satisfaction or uh the appeasement of this justice that will come against our sins. So clearly we we see some of the purpose of this particular event, right? Jesus died for our sins, right? But again, like do we have all of the information? Like so like ultimately to accomplish what does Jesus die? So I made that sound like Yoda was asking, but you know what I mean? So I'm trying to walk through the thought process out loud, right? Uh Jesus died in order to accomplish what specifically. Take a look at this. Uh for God so loved the world that he gave his only son that whoever believes in him should not perish. But here it is have eternal life. Ah see okay now we're getting some more information right Jesus died for our sins so that we would have eternal life. Well okay wait a second aid what is eternal life right it seems pedantic and elementary but there's a point for this. Okay just just track with me more. Jesus said in John 17:3, "This is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God in Jesus Christ whom you have sent." eternal life is that people would know you, the one true God in Jesus Christ whom you have sent. But if you if you really pay attention to what Jesus is saying and you understand this biblically speaking, this is not any old kind of knowledge. And I've said this multiple times in previous videos. This what Jesus is reaching for here is intimate relational knowing. It's the same type of intimate knowledge that Adam had with his wife in uh Genesis what is it 4 and children were produced out of that dynamic. This is the same type of knowing that Jesus is getting at here. It's very close relational and intimate knowledge. That's why Jesus died for our sins. It's about making a way to return us to the dynamic that mankind once had with God in the Garden of Eden so that we would know God intimately and he would know us in relationship as well. That's why Jesus died for our sins.
But you see what happened with the, you know, the friends question. Schultz is kind of doing this too. He doesn't understand why Jesus died for our sins. Doesn't understand that. And so he says, "Whoa, why doesn't Jesus also die for those who don't want to know him?" Huh? I mean, that's that's basically what he just asked. And that's the problem. When Jesus says, "Believe in me in the Gospels," he's not saying, um, "Believe in the truth value of the proposition that I am God." What Jesus is saying is, "Put your trust in me so that we can enter into relationship together." This is a relational invitation to not only know Jesus but to trust him and to remain loyal and faithful to him. That's why the relationship that the church has with Jesus is characterized as a marriage. That's because what Jesus invites us into is a relational dynamic much like a marriage. Look at this. So, so this is another one of those moments where Jesus tells his disciples, "Hey, believe in me." Right? But watch what Jesus says next because this is interesting. And you totally miss it. Everybody does. If you're not familiar with the first century, let not your hearts be troubled. Believe in God. Believe also in me. So there it is, right? Watch this. In my father's house are many rooms. If it were not so, would I have told you that I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and I will take you to myself that where I am, you may be also. Hm. Okay. Very interesting. So Jesus does say believe in God and believe in him. But then he literally goes on to talk about marriage. That's what Jesus is getting at when he talks about his father's house and going to prepare a place for his disciples. This is what bridegrooms would do, ladies and gentlemen, in the first century when they got married. They would become betrothed to uh their bride and then they would go away for a duration of time by the way that they did not know how long it would be. they would go back to their father's house and they would start building a place for him and his spouse to live. And then when this um new addition to the home is complete, the bridegroom would then return. He would come back and claim his bride and take her back to be with him in marriage. This is what Jesus is saying that he is going to do for his disciples and for all of us for those who what believe in him. this phrase believe in me. It refers to a relationship that Jesus invites us into. And Schultz doesn't get this either. Like I I can't believe if his own followers, the people who saw him do all the cool stuff, the second he dies are like, "Yeah, he was bullshitting." And then he comes back, they're like, "Okay, we're on board." Yet, we have to have this, this undying faith that even his own closest followers couldn't have. And he has a higher expectation for us than them. I guess he could find because if he did come back, I guarantee we'd be like, "Hey, I'm back. I do with all your homies there too. But why do you have a higher expectation for us and we never even met you?
So do you see the flawed assumption underneath the statement? Because if you engage folks for Christ, you're going to see this very same thing. This is this is partly why I wanted to do this video because people do this all the time. What Andrew Schultz and his friend are doing here, people make this same mistake. They take the biblical concept of faith which has its own specific definition and then they see phrases connected to faith like believe in me right and they don't let the Bible define it instead they interpret it in a very modern western sense and that's the fundamental mistake and then based on this particular framework built on a flawed assumption of what faith is then they ask their questions then they present their challenges your job if you want to get out there and you want to engage others for Christ. And some of you, I know you want to get on the debate stage, too, right? Your job is to be able to in the moment identify what these flawed assumptions are. And you can do it, by the way. It just takes practice. Like I said, a lot of folks think that faith is intellectually asending to some kind of proposition or, you know, a set of propositions. That's not what the Bible is getting at when it talks about faith. It c it may entail that but faith cannot be reduced down to simply that. There is a much bigger picture to appreciate here.
So have you ever heard of what's called the rule of first usage? Okay. When Jewish scholars want to understand the meaning of a word in the Bible, right? Well, and I guess this is true of Christian scholars as well. They look at the first time the word is used in the Bible because when a word in the Bible is first used, it sets the stage for how this word should be understood throughout the rest of the scripture. This is called the rule of first usage or the law of first usage. Now the Hebrew word for faith is ammon. Okay. The question is where is emina first used in the Bible? And the answer is unexpectedly uh Exodus 17. I mean the the word itself explicitly is discovered here the first time in this chapter uh Joshua and the Israelites have to fight an enemy. They're they're they're fighting an enemy named Amalecch right there in verse 10. It's understood that Amalcch is a very powerful opponent and it will be near impossible to defeat Amalecch without God's help. Okay? And so Moses says to Joshua and the Israelites, "Hey, I'm going to go fight with you. Um, and as you fight, the way I'm going to do it is I'm just going to raise my staff. Right? This is the Moses is going to raise the famous staff that he used to part the Red Sea and to defeat the Pharaoh's magicians. And obviously, we know as Bible believers, it's not that there's some kind of magic in the staff. It's just that God is working uh through Moses and his staff, right? So Moses says, "Hey, I'm going to raise my staff and God is going to give you victory as you fight." Sounds great, right? The problem is Moses is very old. Okay. And so I don't know why I chuckled, but anyway. So we find in verses 11 to 12, Moses raises his staff, but then his arms get tired. Look at this. So actually, let me back up. Verse 10. So Joshua did as Moses told him and fought with Amalecch. While Moses, Aaron, and her went up to the top of the hill. Whenever Moses held up his hand, Israel prevailed. And whenever he lowered his hand, Amalcch prevailed. But Moses' hands grew weary. Here it is. So they took a stone and put it under him, and he sat on it while Aaron and her held up his hands. Let me stop here. So the Israelites decide, hey, we got an issue, right? Let's prop a rock for Moses to sit on. And Aaron and another guy hold up Moses' arms. essentially Aaron and her hold up his arms so that the Israelites can ultimately defeat Amalcch. But it's in verse 12 right here that we see the word faith used for the very first time. See if you can catch it. Moses' hands grew weary. So they took a stone and put it under him. And he sat on it while Aaron and her held up his hands, one on one side and the other on the other side. So his hands were steady until the going down of the sun. Okay, did you see it? So his hands were steady. In other words, his hands were faithful. They were amuna. Now think about that. Think about what this means. Faith is really a word that also entails being steady. Steadiness. faithfulness is also um steadfastness which is actually another word you find very often in the Bible because if you do a whole study on this which I that's a rabbit trail for another time but like you can also see that not only should we be uh steadfast to God but the Bible says that the Lord is steadfast with us with God's people right so in other words we're not talking about belief in certain propositions. We're talking about being reliable, right? You notice this? We're talking about being consistent, about being steady. That's biblical faith. Now, does faith entail beliefs? Of course it does. But biblical faith can really only be understood in the context of devotion and loyalty. Right? We're talk what we're talking about now is covenantal relationship. And guess what? There it is. Right? Now, we're right back to the language that Jesus was reaching for in John 17:3. This is eternal life that they know you, that they intimately know you. That is the problem with Schultz's challenge. He doesn't understand what faith is.
So, the mistake here would be to um and and note this, right? For those of you that want to do this, well, the mistake here would be to just simply answer the question because if you simply answer the question, you have to concede the framework. And that's the that's the mistake. What you have to do, what Wes Huff must do is go to the assumption. Go to the root and fix the flawed assumption. That's the only way to truly engage this type of challenge. Will Wes Huff do that? All right, let's find out.
So the answer to that is that it's it's not like faith isn't simply about believing the right things, right? Because even in Matthew's gospel at the end, Jesus has been with them, right? Luke tells us 40 days and at the end he commissions them go make disciples of all nations and it says that they worshiped him but some still doubted been with the resurrected Jesus. What are they doubting about? And that's where I think that ultimately I think Christianity is true because I ultimately believe that the public publicly available evidence communicates that it's true. But salvation is not merely an intellectual endeavor. And that I can't just Ah, yeah. There it is. There it is, Wes. Yes, sir. Think of all the right things. And that gets me to where I need to be. There's something that's different. You're making my argument. Yeah. It's not about thinking it, it's about doing it. And I think it's not about doing it either. Okay. Yeah. It's it's it's about you being changed by the spirit to not just feel, think, or do the right things, but to actually be. So when Jesus says to Nicodemus, what defines changed by the spirit? So here's the thing. When Nicodemus, who's who's John, we're about to get there. We're about to get there. He gave his only son, right? Old John 3:16, the most famous verse. Um then Jesus says that you need to be born again. There's a play on words there in the Greek, which means both born again and born from above. It's the same term in the Greek. And Nicodemus takes it as I need to be born again. And he's like, "Well, how can I do that? Show me the bag of my mom. It doesn't work like that." And so, but there's something that goes beyond the like carnal in the life of the believer. That's what being born again means is that there's a a not an awakening in an eastern way, but an understanding of the fact that Christ has reached into your life and he's revealed something that is beyond the simple fact. Why? Like, so I love where he's going and I love what he said in response. And I would encourage all of us to really hit this note hard when this type of conversational challenge happens to you. Right? You have to tell people about the relational dynamic with God. That's what's missing from this conversation. You know, Schultz doesn't know anything about it and he thinks it's about obedience. You know, uh Schultz's friend doesn't know anything about it and he reduces faith down to a set of propositions. We as Christians have to help people understand God wants you to know him and he wants to know you back the same intimate way that spouses know each other. That's the invitation of Jesus to anyone who is willing. Does that entail knowing things about God? Absolutely. But it also entails experiencing intimacy with God. You cannot reduce faith down to propositions and obedience. You know that turns Christianity into a semester exam. I guess my concern is God is all knowing. Mhm. All powerful. Mhm. If you feel that change or transition in you. Mhm. You feeling a transition? Is that Yes. No. No. No. Like every woman who makes a man. Yes. But you don't think God is aware that that's him. What do you like? You think that that person on the island or the random person that grows up in Ohio or New York or Japan or anywhere that realizes that I'm going to live a better life and I'm going to be a better person and I'm going to do all these things which now we know through scripture says will give you eternal salvation. And the one thing he doesn't say, did you catch it? Doing things will give you eternal salvation. Nuh-uh. Not according to Jesus in John 17:3. Schulz is missing the relational dynamic, guys. Uh, which is the fundamental basis of being a Christian, right? Um, I've said it like this, like what you do for God must flow out of your intimacy with God. Here's another way to say it. And and I say like this as well. Christians walk a balance between being with God and doing things for God. This balance uh that we walk trades on relationship. A lot of Christians hardly spend time being with God, but they're constantly doing things for God all the time, doing doing. And then what happens? They grind grind grind. And at the end of the day, week, month, and year, they feel burnt out. They feel frustrated. And they feel far from God. They also tend to be legalists and Pharisees for reasons that should be obvious. But other Christians, they want to spend time with God, spend time with God, spend time with but not do very much of what God tells us to do, right? And these Christians are basically they're they're figuratively sitting on the sidelines refusing to get into the game of spreading the kingdom of God here on earth. But the bottom line is both aspects of the Christian life must be held in balance being with God and doing things for God. And again, Schultz and his friends need help figuring this out because if they understand what eternal life really is, what it really entails, they wouldn't be asking this question. You know what I mean?
Hey, this was a fascinating discussion. Okay, just another awesome opportunity for our brother Wes Huff to uh just keep getting the gospel out to more and more people. You know what I mean? Praise the Lord for that. I encourage you to watch the entire conversation. I'll leave a link in the notes for that below. Uh by the way, this might be a good time to remind you my debate master class series is finally live. If you are someone who desires to understand arguments and navigate difficult conversations, um, to get better at identifying flawed assumptions like the ones that we saw in the video, maybe you're even somebody who wants to get up on the debate stage someday or not, you know, then this debate master class is for you. So, in this series, I go over each segment of debate. I talk about my philosophy of winning. I teach you how to deconstruct arguments. I even give you my three-step method for asking cross-examination questions. So, I encourage you to check out the series. Go to wisdiple.org/masterclass.
And sign up today.
All right, friends. Now, it's your turn. What did you think of Andrew Schultz's challenge? How would you have responded? Let me know in the comments below.
As always, if you enjoyed the insights here, then you're going to love my Patreon community. I'm there every day doing a Bible study. You can grab these videos before they get to YouTube.
Hey friends, I have more videos for you coming up. Uh, but in the meantime, I'll say bye for now.