『Theology Unplugged』のカバーアート

Theology Unplugged

Theology Unplugged

著者： C. Michael Patton
無料で聴く

Join C. Michael Patton and friends for Theology Unplugged, a weekly podcast that dives deep into Christian theology, exploring challenging questions, and offering insightful discussions to deepen your faith. Discover the truth, embrace the journey, and engage with thought-provoking topics every week.C. Michael Patton キリスト教 スピリチュアリティ 聖職・福音主義
エピソード
  • Talking Theology with My Daughter Kylee: Can the Church Replace Israel?

    Talking Theology with My Daughter Kylee: Can the Church Replace Israel?
    2026/08/06
    In this episode of Theology Unplugged, Michael is joined by his daughter Kylee for a lively and personal conversation about Israel, the Church, and the promises God made to Abraham.

    Michael reads and expands upon his recent article arguing that a promise may ultimately mean more than its original recipient understood, but it cannot mean less than what was originally communicated. If God promised Abraham that his physical descendants would inherit the land, can that promise later be reinterpreted as referring only to Christ, the Church, heaven, or the whole world?

    Christ is certainly the ultimate fulfillment of the Abrahamic covenant. He is the promised Seed through whom all the nations of the earth are blessed. But does Christ fulfill God’s promises by expanding them—or by replacing what God originally promised?

    Michael and Kylee explore authorial intent, sensus plenior, the relationship between Israel and the Church, and the danger of turning “greater fulfillment” into cancellation. Michael illustrates the issue through a promise involving a Hot Wheels collection and a 1969 Camaro. A real Camaro would certainly be greater than a toy Camaro—but would it fulfill the specific promise that was originally made?

    This informal father-daughter conversation works through the argument, reads between the lines, and asks what must be true if God’s promises are to remain stable and trustworthy.

    A promise may mean more than originally intended, but it cannot mean less. Greater fulfillment must mean expansion—not cancellation.

    Get involved:
    Michael's public blog: https://credohouse.org
    Courses and Manuscript Reproductions from Michael and other scholars: https://credocourses.com
    Join us as we go through the great Fathers of the Faith in a year: https://throughthechurchfathers.com
    Support Michael and receive exclusive podcasts, courses, and much more: https://patreon.com/cmichaelpatton
    続きを読む 一部表示
    1分未満
  • 89. Through Theology in a Year: The Bible Is Irrelevant

    89. Through Theology in a Year: The Bible Is Irrelevant
    2026/07/22
    Is the Bible filled with irrelevant details? In one sense, yes—and that may be one reason to trust it. The biblical writers frequently preserve small, vivid, seemingly unnecessary details that do not advance the plot, establish a doctrine, or strengthen an argument. Why include them at all?

    In this episode of Theology Unplugged, Michael continues developing the cumulative case for the historical reliability and inspiration of Scripture by examining incidental—or apparently irrelevant—details in the Gospel accounts. Eyewitnesses often remember odd specifics simply because they saw them. Fabricated stories, by contrast, frequently make every detail serve the plot or argument.

    These incidental details do not prove that an account is historical. A skilled storyteller can deliberately invent realistic details to create the appearance of authenticity. Nevertheless, when details are vivid, unnecessary, unexplained, and naturally embedded in the narrative, they may bear the marks of genuine memory rather than calculated invention.

    Michael considers five striking examples. Mark remembers that Jesus was asleep in the stern of the boat “on the cushion.” He records that the crowd sat down on green grass before the feeding of the multitude. John identifies the high priest’s servant as Malchus, while Luke specifies that Peter cut off his right ear. John also remembers that he outran Peter to the empty tomb—a detail that proves nothing by itself, but sounds exactly like the kind of personal fact an eyewitness would remember.

    The strangest example may be the unnamed young man who followed Jesus after His arrest and escaped by leaving behind his linen garment and running away naked. The incident appears nowhere else in the Gospels, contributes little to the main plot, and raises the possibility that the story originated with the young man himself. Richard Bauckham argues that such a detail may preserve the testimony of someone personally involved in the event.

    Michael also considers the broader pattern of Scripture. The Bible preserves embarrassing admissions, unresolved theological tensions, difficult doctrines, genuine ambiguities, and people who repeatedly misunderstand God’s plan. These features do not establish historicity individually, but together they make Scripture look less like carefully controlled religious propaganda and more like testimony grounded in real people, events, perspectives, and memories.

    The Bible is not irrelevant in its message. But some of its apparently irrelevant details may be among its most revealing marks of authenticity.

    Get involved:
    Michael's public blog: https://credohouse.org
    Courses and Manuscript Reproductions from Michael and other scholars: https://credocourses.com
    Join us as we go through the great Fathers of the Faith in a year: https://throughthechurchfathers.com
    Support Michael and receive exclusive podcasts, courses, and much more: https://patreon.com/cmichaelpatton
    続きを読む 一部表示
    1分未満
  • 88. Through Theology in a Year: Why the Gospels Are Embarrassing

    88. Through Theology in a Year: Why the Gospels Are Embarrassing
    2026/07/16
    Why do the Gospel writers preserve stories that appear awkward, damaging, or even embarrassing to the earliest Christians? If the Gospels were invented to persuade people to follow Jesus, why did their authors include details that made Jesus' family, His disciples, and some of His most important witnesses appear doubtful, confused, and unreliable?

    In this episode of Theology Unplugged, Michael continues developing the cumulative case for the historical reliability and inspiration of Scripture by examining the criterion of embarrassment. Historians recognize that people who fabricate stories normally avoid including material that damages their credibility. Nations celebrate their victories, movements polish the reputations of their founders, and religious communities generally portray their earliest leaders as courageous and faithful. The Gospels repeatedly do the opposite.

    Michael considers Jesus' baptism by John, whose baptism was associated with repentance and the forgiveness of sins. Why would the sinless Messiah submit to a baptism intended for sinners? He also examines the unbelief of Jesus' brothers, the claim that His family thought He was out of His mind, and John the Baptist's question from prison about whether Jesus truly was the one who was to come.

    The Gospel writers are equally candid about the failures of the disciples. Matthew records that some doubted even while standing before the risen Christ. Mark preserves Jesus' statement that no one knew the day or hour of His return—not even the Son. The Gospels place women at the center of the empty-tomb testimony despite the limited public and legal standing often given to women's testimony in the ancient world. They also preserve the strange account of Jesus cursing the fig tree when it was not the season for figs.

    Most significantly, the earliest Christians proclaimed a crucified and bodily risen Messiah. Crucifixion represented weakness, shame, rejection, and apparent divine curse. Bodily resurrection also sounded foolish to many within the Greco-Roman world. These were not culturally convenient beliefs created to make Christianity easier to accept. As Paul acknowledged, Christ crucified was a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles.

    The criterion of embarrassment does not prove that every Gospel account is historical, nor should it be applied mechanically or in isolation. Nevertheless, these embarrassing details contribute to a powerful cumulative argument when considered alongside the historical context, eyewitness characteristics, incidental details, manuscript evidence, and other marks of authenticity. The Gospels do not read like carefully sanitized propaganda. They preserve the story in all its difficulty because the writers believed these events actually happened.

    Get involved:
    Michael's public blog: https://credohouse.org
    Courses and Manuscript Reproductions from Michael and other scholars: https://credocourses.com
    Join us as we go through the great Fathers of the Faith in a year: https://throughthechurchfathers.com
    Support Michael and receive exclusive podcasts, courses, and much more: https://patreon.com/cmichaelpatton
    続きを読む 一部表示
    1分未満
adbl_web_anon_alc_button_suppression_t1
まだレビューはありません