Wonderkins
Puritan Board Freshman
Hey folks.
I have a couple friends who are twin brothers. They both became Christians 5 or 6 years ago. They both immediately found and attached themselves to both the Bible Project and Michael Heiser.
At first there was no problem. They were learning. But all this time later, they have little to no interest in attending a church. One of them I think is attending a catholic church for the sake of his new catholic wife. The other just doesn't go. Their jobs with the railroad have contributed to some of the inability to attend. But I don't feel like it's a great reason.
They both look especially to Michael Heiser because of him being a Hebrew scholar. They seem to take that as he knows better than they could get at church. One of the brothers refers to American churches as watered-down western churches. A recent conversation just revealed a lot of disdain for the church as a whole. And I firmly believe it's a result of the Bible Project and Michael Heiser.
So other than the obvious other issues you may have picked up on, my main question is this:
If you needed to learn about something biblical, would you ever go to a scholar over a solid pastor? Should we look at a trained scholar the same way we would a biblical pastor?
I've compared some of Heiser's teachings to men like Calvin, Spurgeon, Ligon Duncan, MacArthur, etc. When all these great theologians teach one thing in basic agreement, and then a guy like Heiser comes along being basically one of a few guys teaching the opposite, does the majority win? I know there are more. He's just the most prominent.
I hope this makes sense. I'm trying not to make it about my specific feelings on Michael Heiser and the like, but more about whether the fruits of his influence is a good thing.
I have a couple friends who are twin brothers. They both became Christians 5 or 6 years ago. They both immediately found and attached themselves to both the Bible Project and Michael Heiser.
At first there was no problem. They were learning. But all this time later, they have little to no interest in attending a church. One of them I think is attending a catholic church for the sake of his new catholic wife. The other just doesn't go. Their jobs with the railroad have contributed to some of the inability to attend. But I don't feel like it's a great reason.
They both look especially to Michael Heiser because of him being a Hebrew scholar. They seem to take that as he knows better than they could get at church. One of the brothers refers to American churches as watered-down western churches. A recent conversation just revealed a lot of disdain for the church as a whole. And I firmly believe it's a result of the Bible Project and Michael Heiser.
So other than the obvious other issues you may have picked up on, my main question is this:
If you needed to learn about something biblical, would you ever go to a scholar over a solid pastor? Should we look at a trained scholar the same way we would a biblical pastor?
I've compared some of Heiser's teachings to men like Calvin, Spurgeon, Ligon Duncan, MacArthur, etc. When all these great theologians teach one thing in basic agreement, and then a guy like Heiser comes along being basically one of a few guys teaching the opposite, does the majority win? I know there are more. He's just the most prominent.
I hope this makes sense. I'm trying not to make it about my specific feelings on Michael Heiser and the like, but more about whether the fruits of his influence is a good thing.