Ben HammondPenal Substitution is at the heart of the atonement. Without it, all theology crumbles.
In this video, we look at the necessity of Penal Substitution: 1. It is necessary for a complete theology 2. It factors in the consequence of sin 3. It elevates the character of God
God cannot set aside His justice or His mercy--He must have both all the time. Penal Substitution resolves this conflict in that He required payment, but we did not have to pay it--He did it Himself.
Penal Substitution: The Heart of the Atonement (What Really Happened at the Cross? Part 7)Ben Hammond2023-07-20 | Penal Substitution is at the heart of the atonement. Without it, all theology crumbles.
In this video, we look at the necessity of Penal Substitution: 1. It is necessary for a complete theology 2. It factors in the consequence of sin 3. It elevates the character of God
God cannot set aside His justice or His mercy--He must have both all the time. Penal Substitution resolves this conflict in that He required payment, but we did not have to pay it--He did it Himself.
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1SCOTUS: Roe v. Wade, Casey, and Dobbs | Abortion - The Holocaust of a Civilized Society, Part 4Ben Hammond2026-03-05 | To understand how abortion has impacted American life, we have to look at how it was handled by the Supreme Court (SCOTUS).
First we have Roe v. Wade from 1973, which invalidated many state and federal abortion laws and established a trimester framework for when abortions should be allowed or prohibited. The reasoning was based on the so-called "right to privacy" Griswold found in the 14th Amendment.
Next is Planned Parenthood v. Casey from 1992. In this case, the Supreme Court upheld the "essential holding" of Roe, that there is a constitutional right to abortion, but abolished the trimester framework and replaced it with the "undue burden" standard.
In 2022, both Roe and Casey were overturned by Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which determined that abortion is, in fact, not a constitutional right and never was seen as a right until Roe.
Video 1: Eugenics and Malthusianism: The Heartbeat of Abortion (youtu.be/8FAbTrQptzM) Video 2: Birth Control: The Catalyst for abortion (youtu.be/KEJBLQvO9og) Video 3: The Truth about Margaret Sanger (youtu.be/uSVDfcwufrU) Video 4: SCOTUS: Roe v. Wade, Casey, and Dobbs (This video)
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1The Truth about Margaret Sanger | Abortion - The Holocaust of a Civilized Society, Part 3Ben Hammond2026-02-17 | Margaret Sanger is what we could call "the matriarch of birth control." In the early 1900s, she became a world-renowned advocate of birth control, challenging the Comstock Act in America. While she did not directly found Planned Parenthood, she did establish the entity that led to it and was involved in its formation.
Margaret Sanger did not promote abortion, but our purpose for understanding her is because of her support of eugenics, her advocation of the sexual revolution, and her push to make birth control readily available. As we saw in a recent video, birth control became the catalyst for acceptance of abortion.
Video 1: Eugenics and Malthusianism: The Heartbeat of Abortion (youtu.be/8FAbTrQptzM) Video 2: Birth Control: The Catalyst for abortion (youtu.be/KEJBLQvO9og) Video 3: The Truth about Margaret Sanger (this video) Video 4: SCOTUS: Roe v. Wade, Casey, and Dobbs (youtu.be/L6lf3Nt_G7w)
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1How Birth Control Led to Abortion | Abortion - The Holocaust of a Civilized Society, Part 2Ben Hammond2026-02-06 | What do birth control and abortion have in common? A lot. Not that they are the same, but they have the following in common:
1. Shared history Margaret Sanger was the leading proponent of birth control in the early twentieth century. Although she did not promote abortion, she founded an organization that later would become Planned Parenthood.
2. Shared focus Abortion and the early birth control movement both share a focus on women's rights or bodily autonomy. That's why you hear statements such as, "My body, my choice."
3. Shifted understanding of sex Sex was designed by God to fit under the category of marriage, in which pregnancy was at least a theoretical possibility. Along with that possibility comes responsibility. The birth control movement decoupled the pleasure of sex from the responsibility, thus resulting in consequence-free sex. If the contraception didn't work, abortion could be used as a backup plan.
To understand the birth control movement, we also need to consider the Comstock Act as well as the 1965 Supreme Court ruling known as Griswold vs. Connecticut. In that case, the Supreme Court invented a "right to privacy" that would later be used in Roe vs. Wade.
Video 1: Eugenics and Malthusianism: The Heartbeat of Abortion (youtu.be/8FAbTrQptzM) Video 2: Birth Control: The Catalyst for abortion (this video) Video 3: The Truth about Margaret Sanger (youtu.be/uSVDfcwufrU) Video 4: SCOTUS: Roe v. Wade, Casey, and Dobbs (youtu.be/L6lf3Nt_G7w)
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1Eugenics and Malthusianism | Abortion - The Holocaust of a Civilized Society, Part 1Ben Hammond2026-01-23 | What is at the heart of abortion? The answer may surprise you--in fact, it may be something you've never even heard of. You may have heard of eugenics, but there is another philosophy that underlies the process to widespread acceptance of abortion--Malthusianism.
Don't let the names scare you--they are actually simple concepts to understand. If we can grasp them, we can understand the birth control movement of the early 1900s, which ultimately led to abortion being accepted and celebrated in American society.
Video 1: Eugenics and Malthusianism: The Heartbeat of Abortion (This video) Video 2: Birth Control: The Catalyst for Abortion (youtu.be/KEJBLQvO9og) Video 3: The Truth about Margaret Sanger (youtu.be/uSVDfcwufrU) Video 4: SCOTUS: Roe v. Wade, Casey, and Dobbs (youtu.be/L6lf3Nt_G7w)
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1Have we been wrong about Hell? | Friendly response to Kirk CameronBen Hammond2025-12-17 | Social media is ablaze with Kirk Cameron's seeming embracing of annihilation--the idea that the unsaved do not experience eternal conscious torment, but that, after paying for their sins, cease to exist.
I do not believe this is the right interpretation of Scripture, and I outline why in this video.
This is not an "attack Kirk Cameron" video--it is simply a response to his thoughts.
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1UMC pastor giving up pretending to be a man?Ben Hammond2025-12-04 | "Pastor" Phil Phanuef announced to his congregation that he is transitioning out of manhood. The Fox News article reads: "Pastor announces gender transition during service with congregation: 'Giving up pretending to be a man'"
He claims to be asexual rather than embarking on the path to becoming a woman, but it is obvious that he is trying to become a woman. Of course, that is impossible.
There are so many things wrong with this, and I'll share them in this video.
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1Sharper than a two-edged sword | Hebrews 4:12Ben Hammond2025-11-18 | What is living and powerful, and sharper than a two-edged sword? Most would say, "The Bible." In some ways, that is true, but the actual meaning is much deeper than specific than that.
We find this phrase in Hebrews 4:12 -- "For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. "
If we look at this passage in context, we will see that it is more than a generic statement that the Bible is like a sharp sword. The author is using the analogy of the Old Testament Israelites whose lack of faith caused them not to enter the promised land of rest. Because of that, the promise remains, and those who have faith will receive it.
BUT--it is important to note that ONLY those with faith will receive it. It is not for those who pretend to have faith or who merely look like they have faith. God will not be fooled.
That's where the sharp two-edged sword comes in. God's promise is not just thrown out there--it goes only to those who have faith. His word (the promise of a rest) discerns who will receive it, and faith is the requirement.
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1Chiles vs. Salazar | Conversion Therapy at the Supreme CourtBen Hammond2025-10-08 | On October 7, 2025, the Supreme Court heard arguments in Chiles vs. Salazer, in which Christian counselor Kaley Chiles is trying to overturn a Colorado law prohibiting conversion therapy. She is doing so based on her First Amendment right to free speech.
The underlying philosopy of the defendants is threefold: homosexual desires are natural, gender is assigned, and the liberal understanding of gender is scientifically proven.
However, there are two major problems with this view: 1. It is stupid 2. It defies creation order
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1SBC Cooperative Program: Responding to Dr. Jeff Iorg of the Executive CommitteeBen Hammond2025-09-28 | Last week Dr. Jeff Iorg, president and CEO of the SBC Executive Committee, gave a speech to the EC about Cooperative Program giving. This is my response.
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1AI in Ministry: Some Thoughts on Pastors using Artificial IntelligenceBen Hammond2025-08-26 | Like it or not, Artificial Intelligence (AI) is here and it's here to stay. Should we use it? Should we be scared of it? Can we, or better yet, should we, use it in ministry?
You may have heard of ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot, Claude, or a host of other AI services. Maybe you've even played with them a little bit. If you have, I guarantee that you've been quite impressed.
If you are going to use AI in ministry (and you probably are already, even if you don't realize it), I have some things to think about. There are both benefits and warning associated with AI.
Benefit: It helps with research Benefit: It helps find syntax errors Benefit: It can help you come up with fresh ideas
Warning: It can be wrong Warning: It can make you lazy Warning: It can make you cheat
There are many other things I can say about AI, and probably will at some point. But for now, I want to help you begin to think about this and learn how to use it as a tool and not a replacement for actual work.
For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, says the LORD, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you a future and a hope. (Jeremiah 29:11)
But is this a verse that should adorn our computer wallpaper and hang on our mirrors? The answer is...sure, if you actually know what it is saying.
Context is crucial, as always. God is prophesying to Israel during the 70-year Babylonian captivity that He will bring them back to their land. He had made eternal promises to Israel and would keep them. Read the whole chapter and you'll get it.
We can learn three things from this passage:
1. It shows us something about God—He loves His people.
2. God keeps His promises—He promised Abraham a land, descendants, and a blessing. He also promised to bring Israel out of the captivity, and He did.
3. It shows that God does not abandon His people. This was specifically for Israel, but we also have promises. Read the book of Revelation.
I posted this video primarily to help us correctly understand the Bible. Although we love a verse, we need to make sure we understand it in its original context.
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1IRS clarifies the Johnson Amendment does this mean churches can now speak the truth?Ben Hammond2025-07-09 | This week the IRS issued a Joint Motion for Entry of Consent Judgment. The National Religious Broadcasters, Intercessors for America, and a couple churches had sued the IRS over the Johnson Amendment, and this was the settlement offered to the court. It basically stated that the IRS will not apply the Johnson Amendment to Churches.
In this video, we explain what the Johnson Amendment is (an amendment to the 501(c)3 section of the tax code) and look at what the joint motion actually says.
Ultimately, this should not change anything we do or say, because we should always be speaking the truth and doing what is right. The IRS is simply stating that they recognize this and that a pastor speaking to his congregation is similar to a family conversation. Therefore, he can safely instruct them on political issues and candidates. The document also states that applying the Johnson Amendment to churches would violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1Southern Baptist Convention 2025 Highlights: The Good and the Bad from DallasBen Hammond2025-06-17 | Last week (June 10-11, 2025) the Southern Baptist Convention met in Dallas, Texas. In my opinion, it was a mixed bag. Some good things happened, and some not-so-good things happened. Some of the resolutions were very good—for example, the resolution on gender & marriage, as well as the resolution standing against chemical abortion pills.
There were three major issues that I knew would come up. Here were the results:
1. A constitutional amendment limited the office of pastor to men failed 2. A motion to abolish the ERLC failed 3. A motion to required transparency within the entities failed
I will go into more detail in the video.
If you want to see my video from last year on how the SBC works, visit it here: youtu.be/P4ISOVSg57c
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1We are Saved...IF We Hold Fast | Hebrews 3:6-19Ben Hammond2025-05-30 | How tightly do we have to hold to our salvation in order to keep it? The writer of Hebrews states that we are of Christ's house "if we hold fast the confidence and rejoicing of the hope firm to the end" (Hebrews 3:6). What does this mean? Do we earn our salvation only if we remain faithful until the end?
No, I don't think that is what the author of Hebrews is saying. He is stating that if we truly believe, we will remain faithful, at least to a certain degree. We act on what we believe--just like the Israelites of old. They refused to go into the Promised Land because they did not believe God.
“Big deal,” you say. “I’m not a Catholic.” In some ways, I would agree with you. On one level, I don’t really care who 133 cardinals think should be the next so-called “vicar of Christ.” I can easily do without all the pageantry and excessive celebration of the Catholic Church. The pope is not the leader of global Christianity and has no direct effect on me. On another level, the pope holds a crucial position that affects all of us. Currently, 1.4 billion people identify with the Roman Catholic Church. To them, what the pope believes and says holds immense weight. He is much more than some random dude draped in a white robe and riding in the popemobile—he is the primary proponent of doctrine and practice. What he believes matters to his followers.
The newly elected pope (as well as a vast majority of the electing cardinals) was appointed as a cardinal by his predecessor, Francis. Francis was known to fall on the liberal end of the spectrum, most notably on the issue of homosexual marriage. His response of “Who am I do judge?” when asked about the subject should have disqualified him from any type of church leadership. If one of my church members asked for advice about such a clear biblical teaching, I would be obligated to give a clear answer. Francis, however, refused.
This brings us back to why it matters. The 1.4 billion Catholics around the world do not live in a Vatican vacuum. They are everyday people who live in our neighborhoods, work with us, vote with us, and make public policy. While the pope does not influence me, he does influence them. Over time, even the most outrageous views become normal if we hear them enough from people we respect. If the new pope holds liberal views, conservatives will be on the “outside” and liberal views will become even more mainstream.
In time, if we pay close enough attention, we will find out what Pope Leo XIV believes. If he proves to hold liberal views, the media will paint those views as belonging to mainstream Christianity and the rest of us will be considered a weird fanatical fringe. On the other hand, if he proposes conservative views, he will be maligned as a hateful bigot. But whatever he believes we all, Catholic or not, should take our direction from the Bible, not any man—regardless of how regal his title sounds.
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1Help! My Spiritual Mentor Failed Me | Hebrews 3:1-6Ben Hammond2025-04-30 | Have you ever been let down by a spiritual leader or mentor in your life? We have a phenomenon today of "deconstruction," whereby prominent Christians often question and thus "deconstruct" their faith. Sometimes they don't deconstruct their faith, but get caught up in sin and lose their ministries. What do we do? Should we also question our own faith?
Fortunately, the Bible speaks to this. In Hebrews 3:1-6, the author tells the Hebrew Christians that although Moses was a great guy, Jesus was better. They were not to follow Moses, but Jesus.
The advice is the same to us. We can learn from the teaching and example of leaders (and even musicians), but we should believe what we believe because it is true, not because someone else believes it.
But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, that He, by the grace of God, might taste death for everyone. For it was fitting for Him, for whom are all things and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings. (Hebrews 2:9-10)
However, if someone is made perfect, that doesn't that mean they they were previously imperfect? If that were the case with Jesus, then He couldn't have been God.
The point here is that Jesus experienced something in the flesh that He could not have experienced any other way--suffering. It is not a moral perfection that He attained, but an experiential perfection. He was able to suffer in the flesh (crucifixion), making the sacrifice for us.
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1But we see Jesus! He will fix what we broke | Hebrews 2:5-9Ben Hammond2025-03-06 | But we see Jesus! The word "but" says it all. When we sinned, we messed everything up. We were headed for death. BUT, we see Jesus, who took death in our place and will fix everything.
For He has not put the world to come, of which we speak, in subjection to angels. But one testified in a certain place, saying: "WHAT IS MAN THAT YOU ARE MINDFUL OF HIM, OR THE SON OF MAN THAT YOU TAKE CARE OF HIM? YOU HAVE MADE HIM A LITTLE LOWER THAN THE ANGELS; YOU HAVE CROWNED HIM WITH GLORY AND HONOR, AND SET HIM OVER THE WORKS OF YOUR HANDS. YOU HAVE PUT ALL THINGS IN SUBJECTION UNDER HIS FEET." For in that He put all in subjection under him, He left nothing that is not put under him. But now we do not yet see all things put under him. But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, that He, by the grace of God, might taste death for everyone. (Hebrews 2:5-9)
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1Four of Trumps Executive Orders that Should be UnnecessaryBen Hammond2025-02-20 | President Donald Trump has been signing a flurry of executive orders since he took office. Four of these stand out to me as unnecessary, but extremely necessary. The first two are focused on the gender lunacy that we have experienced the past several years and the second two deal with abortion.
1. Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government
The name says it all. There are only two genders and it's about time a president realized that. It's simply a return to common sense.
2. Keeping Men out of Women's Sports
What do we call a man who wants to play in women's sports? He is either confused, a pervert, or a sissy.
3. Enforcing the Hyde Amendment
The Hyde Amendment is a “rider” that is attached to annual appropriations bills. Primarily it is attached to the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education (LHHS) Appropriations bill. However, it also can show up in bills to fund the Department of Defense, Foreign Operations, and other appropriations bills.
The Amendment prohibits federal funding for abortion, which means that Medicaid and Medicare will not pay for it (due to its presence in the LHHS bills).
4. The Mexico City Policy
The Mexico City Policy, also known as the "Global Gag Rule," is a U.S. government policy that blocks U.S. federal funding for foreign non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that provide abortion counseling or referrals or advocate to decriminalize abortion. Democrat presidents rescind it and Republican presidents reinstate it.
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1Jesus is Better than the Angels! | Hebrews 1:5-2:4Ben Hammond2025-01-31 | Many people make it a hobby to collect little angel figurines. But do those cute little decorations accurately depict angels? Well...no. But that's not my point. Hebrews 1:5-2:4 discusses angels, but for the purpose of showing that Jesus is better than them.
The recipients of Hebrews were being tempted to walk away from Jesus and go back to the religious activities of the Law. The writers emphatically says, "No! Don't do it!" God gave the Law to Moses through angels as mediators, so it was a good thing--but not as good as Jesus.
Jesus is better than anything in the Law, because He is the fulfillment of the Law. The author asks an important question: If the word spoken by angels (the Law) brought punishment for those who rejected it, how shall we escape if we reject the better message of Jesus?
Well, aside from the fact that Christianity is named after Him (specifically, his title--Christ), He is the one upon whom the whole thing rests. With Jesus, we have Christianity. Without Him, w have nothing.
The author of Hebrews starts off with describing who Jesus is. After all, the whole purpose of his writing is to tell them that "Jesus is better" than the Law.
Specifically, in Hebrews 1:1-4, he mentions these ways that Jesus is better: -Jesus is God's message to us -Jesus is the heir of all things -Jesus is the creator of everything -Jesus is the God we can see -Jesus is the sustainer of everything -Jesus purged our sins
Sneak preview: No, I cannot tell you definitively who wrote the book, but I can share some ideas that have become popular. We do know that the author knew Timothy and had a good understanding of the Jewish sacrificial system.
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1How We Can Really End Abortion (Its Not Through Laws)Ben Hammond2024-11-08 | During Election 2024, I saw a humorous meme floating around social media. It was a map of where kangaroo ownership is legal in the United States. I have no intention of owning a kangaroo, but I found an interesting correlation between kangaroo ownership and abortion.
What is the correlation? It is this: even if kangaroo ownership were legal in every state, that would not mean every person is going to own a kangaroo. In the same way, if abortion were legal in every state, not every person is going to have an abortion.
We need laws and politicians who will respect the fundamental God-given right to life. But laws do not perform abortions--people do. If we can change the desire to have abortion, the laws will become irrelevant.
We need to teach people the value of life and show them the atrocity of abortion. Our goal is to save the lives of babies more than to make abortion illegal.
In Election 2024, ten states literally had abortion on the ballot, and it passed in seven of those states. My hope is that those amendments will become moot because no one wants to have an abortion.
However, I think there are at least four reasons why we should go to the polls:
1. The government is God’s business 2. If we keep it to ourselves, it won’t be long before that is the only way we can keep it. 3. The law is a teacher 4. Silence is consent
Don't forget to check out my video "Can a Christian Vote Democrat?" here: youtu.be/8qqE0VOPW-g
In this video, I show a simple outline that describes the layout of the book.
The overall point: Jesus is better! The recipients were being tempted to walk away from Jesus and return to the Law. Why would they do that when they have something better?
The book is divided into three major sections, each with a teaching and an exhortation:
Teaching: Jesus is better than the angels Exhortation: Do not neglect the message of Jesus
Teaching: Jesus is better than Moses Exhortation: Do not harden your hearts
Teaching: Jesus is better than the high priests Exhortation: Be faithful
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1Three lessons from the 2024 OlympicsBen Hammond2024-08-15 | The 2024 Olympics in Paris have ended, but their legacy continues. Along with the predictable highs and lows of winning and losing medals, we have been served up a feast of controversy and debauchery. Of course, this is to be expected any time the world attempts to come together to chase the elusive pipe dream of unity.
We can learn a lot from the Olympics, but I wanted to pull out three primary lessons that would be helpful to all of us.
1. The Olympics show us a snapshot of the direction society is headed 2. We are wise to consider all the facts before taking sides on a matter 3. We need to ask ourselves this question: Is it worth it to be a disciple of Jesus Christ?
Jesus made this clear:
And there went great multitudes with him: and he turned, and said unto them, if any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple. (Luke 14:25-27)
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1SBC24: Female Pastors and the Law Amendment (My first Southern Baptist Convention, Video 4)Ben Hammond2024-06-25 | Should females be pastors? Not according to I Timothy 3. This is recognized in the Baptist Faith & Message 2000, which serves as the statement of faith for the Southern Baptist Convention.
In light of this, last year the convention voted that two churches were not in "friendly cooperation" with the SBC. One of those churches was Saddleback (of Rick Warren fame). This year First Baptist Church of Alexandria, Virginia, went on the chopping block. Almost 92% of the messengers voted to disfellowship that church because of its egalitarian views.
While the messengers overwhelmingly stood for the complementarian beliefs of the BF&M, they did not reflect this in the vote on the Law Amendment. The Law Amendment, which required 2/3 majority to pass, would have enshrined within the SBC constitution the statement that the office of pastor was reserved for men. Because only about 62% voted in favor, it failed.
There are likely many reasons for the failure of the Law Amendment: unabashed egalitarianism, protection of women in non-senior pastor roles, or fear of SBC control over the practice of autonomous churches.
It is my opinion that the amendment should have passed because any person whose job is "pastoral" enough to be called a pastor must live up to the biblical qualifications, one of which is being a male.
Videos on this topic: Video 1: What is the Southern Baptist Convention? (youtu.be/P4ISOVSg57c) Video 2: SBC24 Annual Meeting: Observations and Motions (youtu.be/Z6hzWbQIJIM) Video 3: SBC24 Annual Meeting: Controversial Topics (youtu.be/SLpWYmQk-Ao) Video 4: SBC24: Women Pastors and the Law Amendment (This video)
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1SBC24: Controversial Topics (My first Southern Baptist Convention, Video 3)Ben Hammond2024-06-20 | Some very important things take place at the annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention. In this video, I will discuss some of them.
One, of course, is the election of the SBC president. This year, after two runoffs, Clint Pressley was elected as the new president.
The messengers also voted on several resolutions. There was not enough time, however, to consider all of them.
Videos on this topic: Video 1: What is the Southern Baptist Convention? (youtu.be/P4ISOVSg57c) Video 2: SBC24 Annual Meeting: Observations and Motions (SBC24: Observations and Motions (youtu.be/Z6hzWbQIJIM) Video 3: SBC24 Annual Meeting: Controversial Topics (This video) Video 4: SBC24: Women Pastors and the Law Amendment (youtu.be/XpBpHd2fKSQ)
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1SBC24: Observations and Motions (My first Southern Baptist Convention, Video 2)Ben Hammond2024-06-17 | What happens at the annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention? Although I have been the pastor of an SBC church for seven years, SBC24 was my first annual meeting. In this video, I share some of my general observations, followed by my take on some of the motions that were made.
Although most motions are either ruled out of order or are referred to committees, these were among those debated at the convention: 1. Censure of Al Mohler, Bart Barber, and Ben Mandrell (failed) 2. Request the president form a fact-finding committee to review the work of the Abuse Reform and Implementation Task Force (failed) 3. Review of NAMB’s legal activities between 2017 and 2024 (failed) 4. Abolish the ERLC (failed) 6. Remove pledges of allegiance to earthly kingdoms from all Convention activities (failed)
Videos on this topic: Video 1: What is the Southern Baptist Convention? (youtu.be/P4ISOVSg57c) Video 2: SBC24 Annual Meeting: Observations and Motions (This video) Video 3: SBC24 Annual Meeting: Controversial Topics (youtu.be/SLpWYmQk-Ao) Video 4: SBC24: Women Pastors and the Law Amendment (youtu.be/XpBpHd2fKSQ)
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1What is the Southern Baptist Convention? (My first Southern Baptist Convention, Video 1)Ben Hammond2024-06-14 | Although I have been the pastor of an SBC church for seven years, I attended my first convention annual meeting in June of 2024. I will describe what happened in the next three videos. However, in this first video we will look at the Southern Baptist Convention itself--what exactly is it?
Many people outside the SBC are surprised to hear that the SBC actually has no authority over any church. Every SBC church is completely autonomous and considered Southern Baptist for two reasons--they are "closely associated" with the Baptist Faith & Message (the SBC doctrinal statement) and financially support at least one SBC entity.
The SBC entities are: Executive Committee NAMB IMB ERLC – Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission Lifeway Christian Resources Theological Seminaries (6 of them) Guidestone Financial Resources
In this video, we will look at how the SBC allocates its funds. We will also consider some major changes we made at my church because of some concern with the higher levels of the SBC and to be more efficient in our missions giving.
Videos on this topic: Video 1: What is the Southern Baptist Convention? (This video) Video 2: SBC24 Annual Meeting: Observations and (youtu.be/Z6hzWbQIJIM) Video 3: SBC24 Annual Meeting: Controversial Topics (SBC24: Controversial Topics (youtu.be/SLpWYmQk-Ao) Video 4: SBC24: Women Pastors and the Law Amendment (youtu.be/XpBpHd2fKSQ)
Apparently, He would. After all, He said it Himself.
But when He was alone, those around Him with the twelve asked Him about the parable. And He said to them, "To you it has been given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God; but to those who are outside, all things come in parables, so that 'Seeing they may see and not perceive, and hearing they may hear and not understand; lest they should turn, and their sins be forgiven them.'" (Mark 4:10-12)
What do we do with this?
Jesus had just told the parable of the sower and the seeds, and He told His followers that He spoke in parables so some could understand and some could not. Why would He do this?
The answer is that many people had already determined that they would not believe, so God would continue to harden their hearts to fulfill His purposes. To explain Himself, He quoted from Isaiah 6.
In this video, we will take a deeper look at why Jesus would hide the truth from some people.
Yes, He did. We see this in both Romans 9 and the original account in the book of Exodus.
If we look closely, though, we see that while God did harden Pharaoh's heart, Pharaoh hardened it himself first. God does not harden an otherwise soft heart. He sometimes will put people with hard hearts in positions where they will be further hardened.
Here are some points to consider: 1. Pharaoh made the first decision to rebel 2. God put Pharaoh in a position where he would rebel 3. God had a purpose on Pharaoh's rebellion
Purpose 1: He would bless Israel Purpose 2: He would punish Egypt
Good question. The underlying assumption is that God’s sovereignty and man’s free will are incompatible. However, it seems to me that there is not inconsistency or tension between sovereignty and free will. Why? Because a sovereign God is powerful enough to accomplish His will through our free will.
That, by the way, is a higher view of sovereignty than you find in Calvinism.
Of course, how we define “sovereign” is important. It does not mean that God does meticulously control everything, but that He could if He wanted to. But what He wanted to do was give us the ability to choose whether or not we will obey Him.
Why would He give us the ability to choose for ourselves?
1. He receives glory when we choose to obey 2. He receives glory when He forgives 3. He receives glory when He punishes
Sometimes people ask questions like this, which, in my opinion, are silly. God cannot do the logically impossible and He doesn't do stupid things.
However, this does bring up a crucial question: How much can God really do? Or another question: How much does He do?
Thus we have the debate over God's sovereignty. Can God determine everything that happens? If so, does He? How does salvation fit into this?
The Calvinist view is that God determines who will be saved (unconditional election). If anyone disagrees, the Calvinist reverts to the argument of sovereignty. If God does not determine everything, then He is not sovereign, correct?
Incorrect.
Sovereignty does not about what God does, but what God can do.
Most people on either side of the Calvinism debate will probably say that we have freedom to make our own choices. However—when we start to define free will, we find that we have different definitions. Free will might mean free will, and it might not.
We have two definitions of free will:
Libertarian free will - We have the freedom to choose one thing or another. We could have chosen differently than we did.
Compatibilism - Our free will is compatible with God's determinism. In the end, compatibilism is not really free will at all--it is simply determinism that feels like freedom.
I believe that the Bible teaches libertarian free will--we can freely make our own choices and deal with the consequences. However, the Bible is also clear that God's plan will ultimately be fulfilled. God's sovereignty is so powerful that He can work through our free will to accomplish His plans. This is, in my opinion, a stronger view of sovereignty than we find in the Calvinist system.
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1Why Do I Critique Calvinism? (Why I Am Not a Calvinist, Part 16)Ben Hammond2024-02-16 | Why do I spend time and energy studying and critiquing Calvinism? Well, it's definitely not because I think Calvinists are not Christians. Many good people subscribe to Calvinism and I learn a lot from their other teaching. However, I believe they are wrong in this area of their doctrine.
In this video, I share three reasons why I think it should be critiqued other than the fact that I do not think it is biblical).
1. To defend the power of God
God is sovereign, and He can work His plan through our free will.
2. To defend the character of God
God is love--and He loves everyone. Also, God is sovereign enough to get His will done even through our free will (as we have already mentioned).
3. To stress the importance of evangelism
Calvinists do not believe we should not evangelize, but, in my opinion, Calvinism should should strip it of some of its intensity.
I do not do this to pick a fight, but to add my voice to the many who share on this subject. If you disagree with my conclusions, let me know, but in a friendly way, and I'll do the same for you.
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1The Golden Chain of Redemption in Romans 8:29-30 (Why I Am Not a Calvinist, Part 15)Ben Hammond2024-02-06 | For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified. (Romans 8:29-30)
Calvinists see this as the "golden chain of redemption." God elects, predestines, calls, justifies, and glorifies. While we all agree that these do happen in a "chain," the definition of some of these words differ.
Most importantly, the chain begins with "foreknew." This word means "to know beforehand." God knows who will receive Him, and predestined these to one day become like His Son. Keeping in mind that the context of the passage deals with suffering Christians, the point is that there is something to anticipate. Even when we experience suffering, we can look forward to one day being glorified, never again to deal with the pains of this life.
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1The Origin of Calvinism and Arminianism (Why I Am Not a Calvinist, Part 14)Ben Hammond2024-01-22 | Where did the Calvinist/Arminian divide originate? In this video, we go through the history of how it happened. We will consider the followers of John Calvin and how they disagreed with the followers of Jacob Arminius, which led to the Synod of Dort and the resulting canons.
The followers of Arminius presented five negative articles and five positive articles.
In the end, the States General of the Netherlands ruled in favor of the followers of John Calvin, and produced the Canons of Dort, which included "Five Heads of Doctrine."
The Five Heads of Doctrine: • Of Divine Predestination • Of the Death of Christ and the Redemption of Men Thereby • Of the Corruption of Man • Of Man’s Conversion to God • Of the Perseverance of the Saints
The beliefs in the Five Heads eventually became known as the acrostic TULIP.
Total Depravity Unconditional Election Limited Atonement Irresistible Grace Perseverance of the Saints
The Arminians and Calvinists, of course, never reconciled and the divide exists today.
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1The Order of Salvation in Calvinism, Arminianism and the Bible (Why I Am Not a Calvinist, Part 13)Ben Hammond2024-01-09 | One fundamental difference between Calvinism, Arminianism, and what I call "Biblical Salvation" is the order of salvation. Which comes first?
In this video we look at a graphic I put together to help understand the differences.
Calvinism: Total depravity requires election, which causes faith. Arminianism: Total depravity requires prevenient grace, which enables faith, which causes regeneration. Biblical Salvation: Corruption requires the gospel, which leads to faith, which caused regeneration.
#Calvinism #Arminianism #soteriology #salvation #order #biblical #Bible #totaldepravity #grace #prevenient #regeneration #faith #perseverance #provisionismPenal Substitution=Cosmic Child Abuse? (What Really Happened at the Cross? Part 15)Ben Hammond2023-12-12 | Is God a bloodthirsty sadist? Is God guilty of cosmic child abuse?
Apparently He is, if Penal Substitution is true (at least according to some people). The charge is that God lashes out in unbridled anger over sin, and poor Jesus happened to be the unfortunate soul that was closest. God then unleashed His anger on Jesus, who didn't really want to take part in the whole scheme.
Is that, however, a correct characterization of Penal Substitution? Not at all.
In this video, we will look at two refutations of Penal Substitution: 1. God is a bloodthirsty sadist 2. God is guilty of cosmic child abuse
Here are some refutations of the refutation: 1. God punishes sin not because He is angry, but because He is just. 2. God made the payment Himself 3. Jesus was a willing partner 4. This is a misunderstanding of the Trinity
Please watch all the videos in this Penal Substitution series!
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1Penal Substitution=Universalism or Limited Atonement? (What Really Happened at the Cross? Part 14)Ben Hammond2023-11-16 | Does Penal Substitution require that everyone be saved? After all, if Jesus paid for the sins of everyone, that means that everyone's sins are paid for and universalism is true.
Or, on the other hand, could it be that Jesus did not actually pay for everyone's sins and Limited Atonement is true?
The answer is actually very simple--neither universalism nor limited atonement are true. Rather, the death of Jesus paid for all sin, but the payment is not applied to one's account until he receives it by faith.
In other words, it is available to all, but applied only to those who believe.
Join me in looking at yet another refutation to Penal Substitutionary Atonement.
Please watch all the videos in this Penal Substitution series!
#atonement #penalsubstitution #universalism #limitedatonement #TULIP #Jesus #refutation #guilty #payment #expiation #sin #vicarious #penalty #sacrifice #theories #mercy #righteousness #salvation #Passover youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1The Innocent for the Guilty? (What Really Happened at the Cross? Part 13)Ben Hammond2023-11-07 | If Penal Substitution is true, then the innocent would have taken the punishment for the guilty. A refutation against PSA is that this cannot happen.
However, we see that, in fact, it does happen. The innocent can take punishment for the guilty. Besides, Jesus took on the guilt of our sin (II Corinthians 5:21), although He was not guilty based on his own actions.
For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. (2 Corinthians 5:21)
Please watch all the videos in this Penal Substitution series!
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1The death of Jesus was Enough! (What Really Happened at the Cross? Part 12)Ben Hammond2023-10-19 | One of the refutations against Penal Substitution is that the payment of Jesus would be insufficient to cover every sin for every person who has ever or will ever live.
However, if we consider it further, this is not a problem. There are two answers: 1. The infinite value of Jesus 2. The infinite value of the suffering of Jesus
The depth of the suffering of Jesus was more than enough to compensate for the punishment of our sins.
Here are all the videos in my "What Really Happened at the Cross?" playlist:
This is a claim made by many who reject PSA. In this video, however, we look at why this is incorrect. Besides the fact that we see penal substitution in the Bible, we have multiple quotes from well before the Reformation that indicate, at the very least, that penal substitution was understood and accepted by the church.
We consider quotes from Justin Martyr, the Epistle to Diognetus, Eusebius, Hilary of Poitiers, Athanasius, Gregory of Nanzianzus, Ambrose of Milan, Peter Abelard, John Chrysostom, and Augustine of Hippo.
Some people reject Penal Substitutionary Atonement because they don't like the idea of God's wrath. Of course, we cannot accept or reject an argument based on what we like or don't like. So, the question is this: Does God have wrath?
The answer is an unequivocal "Yes."
We see His wrath in many places in the Bible, including the beloved John 3:16. To understand how the "love" of God works in this verse, we need context.
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. (John 3:14-16)
The picture is one of wrath, hearkening back to the fiery serpents in the wilderness. As Moses lifted up the brass serpent on a pole to rescue people from God's judgment, Jesus will rescue us by being lifted up on the cross.
In this video, we also look at Romans 1, 2, and 5, as well as the cup of wrath in Mark 14:36--the wrath of God that Jesus would experience the next day.
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1Penal Substitution in Isaiah 53 (What Really Happened at the Cross? Part 9)Ben Hammond2023-08-17 | Of all the biblical passages that touch on the idea of penal substitution, Isaiah 53 is the king. In it, the "suffering servant" is clearly depicted as giving His life to make the punishment for others.
In this video, we will look at this incredible passage which prophesies the penal substitutionary atonement of Jesus Christ.
Who has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed? For He shall grow up before Him as a tender plant, And as a root out of dry ground. He has no form or comeliness; And when we see Him, There is no beauty that we should desire Him. He is despised and rejected by men, A Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. And we hid, as it were, our faces from Him; He was despised, and we did not esteem Him. Surely He has borne our griefs And carried our sorrows; Yet we esteemed Him stricken, Smitten by God, and afflicted. But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; The chastisement for our peace was upon Him, And by His stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; We have turned, every one, to his own way; And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed and He was afflicted, Yet He opened not His mouth; He was led as a lamb to the slaughter, And as a sheep before its shearers is silent, So He opened not His mouth. He was taken from prison and from judgment, And who will declare His generation? For He was cut off from the land of the living; For the transgressions of My people He was stricken. And they made His grave with the wicked—But with the rich at His death, Because He had done no violence, Nor was any deceit in His mouth. Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief. When You make His soul an offering for sin, He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days, And the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in His hand. He shall see the labor of His soul, and be satisfied. By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many, For He shall bear their iniquities. Therefore I will divide Him a portion with the great, And He shall divide the spoil with the strong, Because He poured out His soul unto death, And He was numbered with the transgressors, And He bore the sin of many, And made intercession for the transgressors. (Isaiah 53:1-12)
We will also consider Peter's quotation of Isaiah 53 in I Peter 2:21-25
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1Penal Substitution IS in the Bible! Part 1 (What Really Happened at the Cross? Part 8)Ben Hammond2023-07-31 | It has become the popular thing to disregard the idea of penal substitution. Starting with this video, we will look at several rebuttals that people make. One such rebuttal is that it is a new doctrine devised by the Reformers. This leads us to the question, "Do we find penal substitution in the Bible?"
While we will not find a chapter in the Bible entitled "Why You Should Believe in Penal Substitution," we see penalty and substitution throughout its pages.
In this video we will discuss Genesis 3:21, Exodus 12:1-14 ( the Passover), John 11:47-52, I Peter 3:18, Galatians 3:10-13, I John 2:2, I John 4:10, and John 10:10.
youtube.com/channel/UCW3e7xQd0mThCLvu2QIVSxw?sub_confirmation=1The Moral Influence Theory of the Atonement (What Really Happened at the Cross? Part 6)Ben Hammond2023-06-21 | The moral influence theory (moral example theory) of the atonement, attributed to Abelard and Schleiermacher, basically states that the life and death of Jesus served primarily as an example for how we should love others. It was not that we deserved a penalty and Jesus paid it, but that His incredible love was manifested in His incarnation and crucifixion, prompting us to progressively earn salvation as we follow His example.
Evaluation of the moral influence theory:
True claim: The death of Jesus did serve as an example.
Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross. (Philippians 2:5-8)
False claim: The only effect of the death of Jesus is His example
If the primary purpose of Jesus’ death was to be an example, then salvation would come about by works as we contemplate the work of Jesus and attempt to live out His example in our lives.
False claim: Jesus was not our substitute
As we will see in later videos about penal substitution, He was indeed our substitute.