Real Bible Rob: Affirming Christianity Podcast Real Bible Rob - Inclusive Christianity Discussions Real Bible Rob | PCUSA Ministry Insights

Real Bible Rob: Affirming Christianity Podcast Real Bible Rob - Inclusive Christianity Discussions Real Bible Rob | PCUSA Ministry Insights

By Rob Christ | Inclusive ChristianityReligion & SpiritualityChristianitySpiritualityReligion
Download on the App Store

Real Bible Rob: Affirming Christianity Podcast Real Bible Rob - Inclusive Christianity Discussions Real Bible Rob | PCUSA Ministry Insights episodes

  • When Jesus used an ethnic slur - How He learned in Matthew 15:21-28

    Send us Fan Mail

    The story of Jesus speaking to the Canaanite woman in Matthew 15:21-28 (called the Syrophoenician Woman in Mark 7:24–30) is filled with meaning. It is vexing: Why does Jesus call her a dog? It is amazing: Why would Jesus speak to a foreign woman? It is filled with Jewish contradiction: Why does Jesus risk ritual uncleanliness by associating with her? Jesus was in a foreign land and he carried all the expectations and prejudices that a first century Jewish man would have with him. The most straight forward explanation for Jesus's initial indifference, his unkind ethnic slur, and his praise of her faith is that he overcame prejudice and opened his mind. But this is extremely offensive to many Christians. They say, "No, Jesus is perfect. He learned everything from the Father. He said this to the Canaanite woman as a test." But it is actually heretical to say that Jesus didn't learn and didn't make mistakes. It is a sneaky form of docetism (believing Jesus wasn't fully human) that is extremely common in Christianity. It negates the incarnation and the cross. It comes from a misinformed view of platonic perfection, sin and divinity. In this insightful episode, I examine what scholars think about this very informative passage in Matthew and the meaning of power.  

    https://juniaproject.com/power-dynamics-jesus-canaanite-woman-matthew-15/ Harriett Reed Congdon on Prof. Frances Taylor Gench's discussion of power dynamics in the story. 
    https://theseattleschool.edu/blog/grenz-parker/ about Prof. Angela Parker's womanist interpretation of Matthew 15.
    "Back to the Well: Women’s Encounters with Jesus in the Gospels" by Frances Taylor Gench, 2004.

    21 Jesus left that place and went away to the district of Tyre and Sidon. 22 Just then a Canaanite woman from that region came out and started shouting, “Have mercy on me, Lord, Son of David; my daughter is tormented by a demon.” 23 But he did not answer her at all. And his disciples came and urged him, saying, “Send her away, for she keeps shouting after us.” 24 He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” 25 But she came and knelt before him, saying, “Lord, help me.” 26 He answered, “It is not fair to take the children’s food and throw it to the dogs.” 27 She said, “Yes, Lord, yet even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’[f] table.” 28 Then Jesus answered her, “Woman, great is your faith! Let it be done for you as you wish.” And her daughter was healed from that moment.

    Many modern Christians are Docetist. 
    In the history of Christianity, docetism (from the Koine Greek: δοκεῖν/δόκησις dokeĩn "to seem", dókēsis "apparition, phantom") was the doctrine that the phenomenon of Jesus, his historical and bodily existence, and above all the human form of Jesus, was mere semblance without any true reality. Broadly, it is taken as the belief that Jesus only seemed to be human, and that his human form was an illusion.

    34 min
  • Speaking in Tongues and Heteroglossia with Professor Ekaputra Tupamahu

    Send us Fan Mail

    I am delighted to welcome Dr. Ekaputra Tupamahu to the podcast. Dr. Tupamahu is an Associate Professor of New Testament and Chair of the Bible, History, and Theology program at Portland Seminary. He received his PhD from Vanderbilt University. And he was my professor of New Testament when I was in seminary. He is an awesome teacher. He exposed me to variety of biblical interpretation approaches and to great scholars like postcolonial scholar Fernando Segovia and womanist scholar Mitzi Smith. As a person who had studied traditional American and European biblical scholarship, it was refreshing and eye-opening to hear them. Today, we will discuss his great book "Contesting Languages: Heteroglossia and the Politics of Language in the Early Church." Coming from a charismatic Christian background, it is fascinating to hear his perspective on speaking in tongues, ecstatic expression, and language translation and interpretation in the New Testament.  

    Welcome Dr. Tupamahu! 

    Reference: "Contesting Languages: Heteroglossia and the Politics of Language in the Early Church" by Ekaputra Tupamahu, 2023

    Teaser Questions:

    Please tell us a bit about yourself. What brought you to biblical studies and Vanderbilt. Your Indonesian heritage plans a big role in your faith and approach to biblical studies. Tell us about this.

    When your book "Contesting Languages" came out in 2023, it offered a unique perspective on glossia: the language of immigrants in an English dominated society and what speaking in various tongues really means. What is the main premise for your research and book? 

    You mentioned your charismatic background several times. Ecstatic speech is fascinating. It has different meanings for different people. What are the various modes and uses of ecstatic speech? When is it worship? When is it an expression of the Holy Spirit? 

    What are the theories about the speaking of tongues in Acts 2? What is difference between translation and speaking in other languages and ecstatic speech? Is there overlap? 

    I remember asking you questions about the use of Greek and Latin in Corinth. Speaking in Greek as the lingua franca was a given, but you mentioned that Latin was the language of government and the courts. Was it likely, for example, that Phoebe as the carrier Paul's letter to the Romans spoke Latin? 

    Heteroglossia was a major challenge in the spread of Christianity. You speak about 1 Corinthians 14 in an very interesting way, about Paul's use of language to exert control. It seems that the speaking of tongues that "no one understands" to "build up themselves" is different than the mutual intelligibility of Acts 2. How are they different? 

    Mitzi Smith said, "Paul's efforts in First Corinthians 14 don't get a pass." What does this mean to you? 

    As Reformed Christian, Presbyterian, my world is filled with people who crave biblical certainty, which leads to theological certainty. The more I study scripture in context, the more I realize this has more to do with the desires and the psychology of the readers than the text itself. What are your views on the drive to biblical inerrancy and historical criticism? 

    What do you say to young seminarians who are so certain about their views when they start and how they change during their seminary experience? I have been sparring with a young seminarian who is a very popular YouTube influencer named The Redeemed Zoomer. Do you have suggestions for me to connect with them? 

    53 min
  • The Strong Willed Child Stephanie Warren on What's Needed to Reform From Evangelicalism

    Send us Fan Mail

    I am delighted to welcome Stephanie Warren to the podcast. Stephanie has a major presence on social media for years as the Exvangelicalxennial and now as The Strong Willed Child, sharing personal stories exposing the hypocrisy and harm of purity culture, James Dobson and the abuse in evangelical churches. Sometimes funny, sometimes angry, sometimes hopeful, always heartbreaking, she has done great work to help Christian millennials women and men what happened to them in last few decade. Stephanie also very generously couched me four years ago when I started to post online. She has such an important voice for many. In this episode, Stephanie gives a hopeful vision for deconstruction and a gentler society. 

    Welcome Stephanie! Thank you so much for speaking with us. 

    Teasers:
    Of course, I'd like to hear about Dobson and purity culture and whether people are waking up to the harm of these. I also have a lot of new data and insights about how bro culture is affecting mainline churches and exvangelical pipeline to highly liturgical churches, especially among men. I'd like to hear you thoughts about whether this is a real spiritual movement or just reclaiming trad culture. 

    How do you see the rise of bro culture

    I really like those topics. I don't think this is a spiritual movement; I think it is a reformation. Historically speaking, those happen every five hundred years. Christianity: canonizing the Bible, the Crusades, Lutheranism, the split of mainline Protestantism, and the evangelical movement. Reformations take 150-200 years before historians call it a reformation. I am not sure where we will end up, but I do think it is a reformation.

    How did people talk about Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan when you were growing up? How do you see these figures today? What is the parallels to what we are seeing now. 

    1 hr 11 min
  • No Reform without Reckoning with Charmella Williams

    Send us Fan Mail

    I am so happy to speak with Charmella Williams again! She is a big thinker and a clear speaker about history and about what it means to be a successful black woman in our confusing time. Last time she spoke about the racial reckoning in America and how this has given her a sense of hope and pessimism as the same time. Now that the mask has been ripped the mask off of the church's racism and power grabbing with the rise of Christian nationalism, we are a knife edge. Will independent thinking women find faith again, or will they abandon it further? This crisis of faith has exposed the divide between men and women. While young white men are trending more conservative and traditionalists, taking the church with them in frightening directs, where is everyone else going? I really wanted to hear Charmellla's unfiltered opinion. Is there any hope for coming together? Does faith and church play any role? 

    Welcome Charmella! I can't wait to hear your thoughts a year after we spoke last time. 

    Teaser questions:

    Please give a quick intro of yourself. Our last conversation posted on Nov. 8, 2025. You were deep into Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States". You continue to post about your insights on it. What some new insights since last year? 

    You did a video recently about Abrahamic religions and patriarchy. I think it was in honor of Gloria Steinem. You started by describing misogyny, mostly in Islam, but then made the parallel to closed minded Southern Baptist Christians. You were quite angry. What spurred that? 

    You mentioned Male Gods. James Talarico famously said that God is non-binary, which is objectively true from the Bible, but it caused huge backlash, saying he is woke, he is weak, he is a feminist, etc. Why are they so angry? Is this a symptom of what you are talking about? 

    What is third wave feminism and what is the fourth wave? How does this relate to faith and spirituality? Is this why young women have abandoned the church?

    One of my motivations to invite you on the podcast is that I spend a lot of time with religious people and traditionalists. Some of them are white young man in the theobro world. 

    More often it is perplexed Gen X and Boomers who are confused why our mainline churches are shrinking and why the highly patriarchal churches have attracted both men and women. Is this just church swapping or real growth? 

    I'd like to have an honest discussion about liberal white women vs. black women. When are they allies? And when is the liberal just performance?

    Religious conservatives often point to black Christian men, some who are very patriarchal, as a sign that we need to be more conservative to heal the church. This is especially true about recent African immigrants and the growth of Christianity in Africa. Is this just a racist trope or is there truth in this? 

    I will tell you about a movement of conservative men, who try to portray themselves as the future of the church. But it seems to have little traction with women and with people of color. What are the getting wrong?

    When did the church do right? And when did it do wrong? The Presbyterian Church embraced Civil Rights and started being called woke and has lost 40% of its membership. How do you think people who have rejected the mainline churches will worship in the future? 

    Nazis weren't real Christians. Well then, were slaveholders real Christians? What about MAGA people today?

    This is what I wrote you in my invitation email. 
    Crisis of faith is what I want to talk about. So many people talk about going back to orthodoxy and "tradition." It seems that this is the last thing that people who are reckoning with spirituality want or need now. Spiritual practice can be good, but using it as a shield against truth is foolish. While the discussion could be informed by your personal journey, I think I am more interested in talking about what you are observing in the culture. Is gen Z retrenching or finding something new? As a successful and independent woman in a capitalist society, what do you think is the zeitgeist around progressivism and what role faith plays in that?

    1 hr 18 min
  • The Last Seder of James, Episcopal Church and Contemplative Christianity with Rev. Ryan Wiksell

    Send us Fan Mail

    I'm delighted to welcome The Rev. Ryan Wiksell today. Ryan is an Episcopal Priest in Kansas City, Missouri. He is also my friend and I am his Anamchara, or Celtic soul friend. We both belong to the Community of Aidan and Hilda, a dispersed Celtic Christian community in the USA, UK, Canada and Australia. Ryan has a fascinating journey in charismatic and liturgical Christianity and Ryan is an co-author of a new book, The Last Seder of James: A Journey Through Passover. He has so much to share about his ministry, his appreciation for contemplative practices, and a deep understanding of the meaning of Passover and the other Jewish holy days. 

    Welcome Ryan, it is so nice to see you again. And to share our friendship with the audience. 

    Teaser Questions:

    Give us a brief background about you. What brought you to the ministry and to serve your congregation? You've seen some new life in the congregation. Tell us how you are connecting with them. 

    You've told me about how your charismatic background informs your ministry today in a different way. What is it like to serve a liturgical church now. It seems that many younger people have been on a similar path. Are you seeing that too?

    Your book is fascinating because it helps understanding what it must have been like for James, Jesus's brother in Jerusalem and John his beloved disciple in the decades after Jesus's resurrection. 

    While it is a fictional account, it realistically some of inevitable personal tensions between the characters and the common devotion they had to Jesus and his ministry. 

    It is also deeply Jewish in its language and perspective. I think this accurately portrays the closeness between Christian and Jewish communities in the first century before they were ripped apart by strife and imperialism in later centuries. 

    I am reading Paula Fredriksen's Ancient Christianities which describes the diversity of the Christianity before the imperial Constantinian takeover of the Roman. What are your views about the wide variety of Christian expressions? 

    What is your contemplative practice? What does Celtic Christianity and being a soul friend mean to you? 

    1 hr 15 min
  • Are you “Born Again?” Cult code signaling is not what John 3 is about.

    Send us Fan Mail

    I am very interested how evangelical Christians use language to signal conformity. A major goal of my online ministry is to point out these code words, often based on the misuse of scripture, and to debunk their common usage. "Born Again" is certainly one of the more sneaky cult code words. It is seems biblical in John 3:3 and 3:7 but when it is pulled out for cult signaling about who is saved and who is not saved, it is particularly pernicious. I have posted several times about John 3:3. I also posted about the cult-like use of Romans 12:2 to separate Christians from "the world." Both verses require considerable nuance to understand in context, which unfortunately makes them perfect candidates for appropriation and misuse. In this episode, I discuss how these verses are used for signaling evangelical separation and why most mainline Christians and Catholics don't use these phrases. I discuss how this is a used for the larger project of Christian dominance. 

    NRSVue John 3:3 
    Jesus answered him, “Very truly, I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God without being born from above.

    NIV
    Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.”

    Living Bible
     Jesus replied, “With all the earnestness I possess I tell you this: Unless you are born again, you can never get into the Kingdom of God.”

    NRSVue Romans 12:2 
     Do not be conformed to this age, but be transformed by the renewing of the mind, so that you may discern what is the will of God—what is good and acceptable and perfect.

    NIV
    Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.

    ESV 
    Do not be conformed to this world,[a] but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.

    My recent social media post:
    "To my John 3:3 “having been born from above” often translated as “born again” video, I have often been asked “have you been saved?” or “are you born again?” Which are very weird questions to ask a mainline pastor who regularly professes my faith online. Where does this come from? It is the exclusionary tribal language that has been drilled to the heads of evangelicals, Your in or your out, that's it. John 3:3 has nothing do with heaven or being saved. Jesus told Nicodemus to be spiritually awakened. In context, Jesus never said Nicodemus or the Pharisees were not saved. He said they were spiritually blind, relying on their special status to be right with God. It's ironic when mod xians use these verses for separation & exclusion. They are constantly worried who’s saved or not. They are being as spiritually blind as Nicodemus was."

    47 min
  • How Purity Policing harms the Presbyterian Church (USA) and the mission of Christianity

    Send us Fan Mail

    Life is complicated & faithfulness to God happens in unexpected ways. I spoke with the Redeemed Zoomer, Richard Ackerman, a few episodes ago about his General Assembly overture requiring ordained elders to affirm monogamy. Faithfulness to monogamy is not a real problem in the PCUSA, but his overture effectively institutes a morality police. The PCUSA tried this in 1998 “live in fidelity within the covenant of marriage of a man and a woman or chastity in singleness” amend. That hurt so many good & faithful ppl & set the church back decades. Both Richard and I greatly admire Karl Barth who did amazing things for the reformed church in the 20th century. But this overture would have forced Barth out of the church because he had a complicated marriage. Purity policing is like what Jesus takes about the Pharisees in Matthew 23. In verses 23 and 24, Jesus said, “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint, dill, and cumin and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. It is these you ought to have practiced without neglecting the others. You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel!" This so relevant to the distractions that the purity minded folks in the PCUSA are trying to institute. In this thoughtful episode I discuss the nuances of the faithfulness to the bible and confessions and the danger of using them for policing. Our book of order says that the we should not use the historic confessions as litmus tests and that we have freedom of conscience, but these amendments do exactly that. 

    On the Real Bible Rob for Teens podcast @redeemed_zoomer commented
    I wanna be clear that the LAST thing I wanted in writing the anti-polyamory overture was to make our church look bad. I care a TON about the image of the PCUSA as someone who regularly tries to get people to join it, and I get mocked online publicly anytime the PCUSA does anything bad. I felt genuine regret about writing the overture after seeing the bad image it gave our beloved church. 

    The reason I wrote the anti-polyamory overture was because I genuinely believe the radical progressive minority that is vastly over-represented in our denomination's seminaries and high courts supports polyamory (they have all but said so) and will very soon try and push for its broader acceptance and normalization in the church

    The GEN-09 overture created a committee that will study "diverse family structures" and behind closed doors people have admitted that it's going to be the beginning of a campaign for the church to accept polyamory.

    My goal was to show moderate progressives like yourself just how far the radical progressives in our denomination are willing to go. I would not be shocked at all if, in 2028, the GEN-09 committee recommends something like "deconstructing monogamy"

    @realbiblerob Reply
    Thanks so much for your comment. It helps me understand the context of the overture. Our conversation helped me a lot. I have very mixed feelings about the direction of the denomination. I share your concerns about the overly political and aggressive lurch to the left in some groups. I was not aware of GEN-09 and appreciate you highlighting it. At the same time however, we have to get progressive women on board, because many I speak with view the sexuality and monogamy discussions as a back door for returning patriarchy. That said, the young people I speak with appreciate what you are doing. From our conversation, I recognize that you are an asset and your group is potentially a point of unity in the future. I think a focus on confessions really helps especially if the next confession fulfills its  promise. Peace be with you.

    @realbiblerob follow up reply
    Dear Richard, I have thought about this so much and I am grateful for your honesty. Karl Barth, who and I both hold in such high regard, would have been excluded from the church by your overture. He had a complicated relationship with his wife and his mistress. He didn’t divorce his wife which would have been devastating to her in that era. I wouldn’t condone his arrangement, but the church and we would have been greatly impoverished by forcing him out of the church. Amendment B in 1998 did the same to many good and faithful elders, forcing them out of the church because they were not married but faithful couples. The morality police can be like the Pharisees in Matt 23, where they tithe their mint, dill and cumin while neglecting justice, mercy and faith. I hope you will see that these hard lines do more harm than good. Peace be with you and thank you for your witness.

    48 min
  • The Dispensations are not biblical and has its roots in antisemitic racism.

    Send us Fan Mail

    Dispensationalism is the 19th century theology that says you can neatly divide all of history in to 7 or 8 periods. It is the rationale for the Rapture. Even though it is widely believed and preached especially in America, it is not biblical and it is very harmful. I have spoken in detail about the Rapture and why it is not in scripture, in Season 1, Episode 66, "Rapture Abuse, 1 Thessalonians 4:17 and Acts 8:39" It is a creation of John Nelson Darby in 1833 and heavily promoted in the Scofield Reference Bible in 1909. It is still the standard Christianity of many Baptists and most Charismatic Christians, but it has a deep history in antisemitism. It is inherently Replacement Theology as I described in my last episode with Gabe Gordon, Season 2, Episode 33 "Replacement Theology. Why Supersessionism is so wrong." I describe how it is usually taught and then how it contrasts with Covenant Theology, which can also be supersessionist in a different way. 

    46 min
  • Redeemed Zoomer on the Future of Mainline Churches

    Send us Fan Mail

    I'm pleased to welcome Richard Ackerman, also known as the Redeemed Zoomer on YouTube, to the podcast. Richard is currently a seminary student at Dubuque Theological Seminary. But he is mostly known for his big presence on social media, especially YouTube, and his Operation Reconquista, now labeled Operation Reformation movement while he was a student at SMU. He then co-founded Presbyterians for the Kingdom. He seeks to support theologically conservative churches in the mainline denominations. As a PCUSA minister who is very active on social media, I come across his content and his supporters frequently. I wanted to speak with Richard to find to understand his point of view. 

    Welcome Richard!

    Teaser Questions:

    Please give a brief bio. What has led you to do the work you are doing? Are you surprised by the huge response you've received. You have a big public presence. How does this reflect on you personally?

    You show a strong sense of theological history. But it appears that you don’t have a formal theological education yet. Where does your knowledge come from?

    Define what you mean by Theologically Conservative and Liberal. In what ways has the PCUSA remained faithful and in what ways has it strayed in your opinion? 

    You are highly critical of the non-denominational mega church movements. Why do you think they grew so much in the last 50 years and what do you think they get wrong? Why are the mainline churches a better choice?

    Your focus on LGBTQ inclusion in the church seems to match some of the people that I have worked with for nearly 40 years in the church. Why is this so central to your messages about theological liberalism? Correlation without causation. Not a decline but awareness.

    The responses I get and see to your content comes exclusively from mostly young, white men. Do you have any statistics on the demographic engagement with your organizations? 

    Where do women pastors fit into your version of orthodoxy? 

    As you might be experiencing in your seminary experience, young women are rejecting the organized church in record numbers. Some have found a home in progressive churches, but most seem to turn away completely? What should we do to make the church more welcoming to them? 

    It seems like people have used you as an avatar or even an enforcer? What is your goal for the church? What polity do you want changed? Do you affirm Belhar?

    You are very confident of your views and clearly on an anti-woke, anti LGBTQ campaign. What motivates you? When you mention DEI, this sounds more like a political movement? Why isn't it? 

    Beverly Gaventa quoted Karl Barth to me. In her Romans 14, she said "The danger in being right. Right in the worst possible way." You seem to be missing a main part of Barth's theology, the heartlessness and lack of grace. 

    It’s irresponsible to equate affirming Christians with 19th century liberal theology, because you are implying that they are non creedal and dishonoring scripture. That reformed theology and affirming lgbtq people is inherently incompatible. 

    I agree with the Confessional and Creedal, but why does that make LGBTQ, Women in Leadership, or even Biblical Inerrancy the top litmus tests in the PCUSA? How does this clash with Neo Orthodoxy? 

    Did you participate in GA this year? What are your impressions of it? Should we have thought police in the PCUSA? Do advocate for that?

    I have been a PCUSA elder since 1990 and I have watched the church its many forms. It appears to me that young conservatives have an idealized view of the what the church was and want to return to that image. What do you have to say about that? 

    What are your plans? Are you seeking ordination in the PCUSA? What do you intend to do with this? By the way, I am part of CPM and I have graded many ordination exams. I really enjoy speaking to people in preparation for the ministry.

    1 hr 22 min
  • Replacement theology. Why Supersession is so wrong with author Gabe Gordon

    Send us Fan Mail

    I'm so happy to welcome my Jewish Christian friend Gabe Gordon back to the podcast. Last year he spoke to my congregation about his book The Fundamentals of a Recovering Fundamentalist and we did a podcast episode. Supersessionism and the misuse of the Hebrew Bible by Christians was a major theme which Gabe has explored in greater detail. I have also spoken about Replacement Theology and Supersessionism in previous episodes, most notably "The Harm of Replacement Theology, Hebrews 8:6-13" in Season 1, Episode 56, from August 2, 2025. Since then, I dove into Romans 9-11 and discovered how much supersessionism has affected our interpretations of Paul. In this episode, I speak with Gabe about the role of supersessionism in supporting colonialism and the concept of Post-Colonial Traditionalism. We explore Acts 15 and the Jerusalem Council and how Galatians was affected by it. Then we dive into Gabe's ideas about how we can mend the Nicene Creed to remove its supersessionism. Then we touch on the Gospel of John and its antisemitic misuse. 

    Walter Brueggemann, the great Old Testament scholar I have been reading so much for sermons on Jeremiah, writes, "Thus we arrive at a profound tension between the OT text and the NT quotation, a tension reflective of a long history of Jewish-Christian competitive acrimony. The matter is not easily adjudicated, because the supersessionist (remember that word)case is given scriptural warrant in the Book of Hebrews. At best, Christians come derivatively and belatedly to share the promised newness [of the covenant]."

    Goldingay says that the new covenant is established by God's action of forgiveness and renewal as we see in Jeremiah. And the promises made to Israel in the Old Testament, including the new covenant, are not nullified or replaced by the New Testament but are fulfilled in a way that includes both Jews and Gentiles. Rather that replacement, it is progress that he is talking about. Goldingay sees Jeremiah 31:33 as a promise of a new covenant that deepens and expands the relationship between God and his people, without negating the covenant God made with Israel. Here is a theological traditionalist and conservative who recognizes the long sweep of God's purpose in progress. It is very refreshing to see. 

    Why dispensationalism is highly supersessionist. 

    Getting to Romans 11 is a time for reflection, because it is a capstone of a section of the book that is largely ignored. She said that we ignore chapters 9-11 at our peril. She warns in her commentary that "Skipping over chapters 9-11 could well undermine the letter as a whole." I asked her why she said that and her answer was very interesting. Whenever talking to a scholar who has spent a lifetime in a book of the Bible, it took a while for her comments to unfold and then it took a while for me to understand the impact of what she said.

    1 hr 25 min

About Real Bible Rob: Affirming Christianity Podcast Real Bible Rob - Inclusive Christianity Discussions Real Bible Rob | PCUSA Ministry Insights

From the publisher's feed

Exploring Bible interpretation and modern Christian faith, I am a Presbyterian USA minister who interprets the Bible in all of its messy and varied voices. I teach and preach spiritual growth to…