What Alisa Childers Gets Wrong About Deconstruction with Tom Oord

What Alisa Childers Gets Wrong About Deconstruction with Tom Oord | The New Evangelicals

Рет қаралды 4,681

Күн бұрын

Tim brings on theologian Tom Oord to review a new book written by Alisa Childers and Tim Barnett warning about the dangers of the deconstruction how it will lead to apostasy.
Subscribe and never miss a video! - www.youtube.com/@TheNewEvange...
Follow us on social media!
Instagram - / thenewevangelicals
Facebook - groups/thene...
Threads - www.threads.net/@thenewevange...
TikTok - / thenewevangelicals
Twitter - / newvangelicals
Check out our website for merch, educational materials, and how to join our community! - www.thenewevangelicals.com/
If you'd like to support our work, you can DONATE here! - www.thenewevangelicals.com/do...
The New Evangelicals exists to support those who are tired of how evangelical church has been done before and want to see an authentic faith lived out with Jesus at the center. On this channel, you'll see videos from our founder Tim Whitaker and our incredible guests as they react and respond biblically to topics such as Christian Nationalism, church hurt, terrible Christian movies, bad conservative Christian takes, and MUCH more!
We are committed to building a caring community that emulates the ways of Jesus by reclaiming the evangelical tradition and embracing values that build a better way forward. If you’ve been marginalized by your faith, you are welcome here. We’ve built an empathetic and inclusive space that encourages authentic conversations, connections and faith. Whether you consider yourself a Christian, an exvangelical, someone who's questioning your faith, or someone who's left the faith entirely, you are welcome here!
#thenewevangelicals #christianity #deconstruction

Пікірлер: 87

@rabrojonel 4 ай бұрын

36:38 "It's okay to ask questions, but don't deconstruct." In other words, they are saying the quiet part out loud - it's okay to ask questions as long as you come to the same answers as us.

@darrellanderson6650 4 ай бұрын

Yes. Just double down on what you believed before. That is only a temporary fix. It means you have to do a weekly KZfaq video in order to convince yourself that you were always right in the first place. Alisa is headed for another deconstruction but does not know it yet.

@anthonybarber3872 3 ай бұрын

@@darrellanderson6650 That's quite a statement, what makes you say that?

@HokaHeywarrior 4 ай бұрын

Alisa says shes decontructed but seems to know little about textual criticism and the diversity of early christianity. The catholic church can at least claim an old tradition but even the catholic church has its limits when it runs into the jewish tradition that jesus comes from. The early church knew it and why they did not go with marcion they had to keep the older jewish tradition to claim ancient validity

@MrSeedi76 4 ай бұрын

Funniest thing I heard her say was that "people who deconstruct abandon what the church has believed for thousands of years" - completely oblivious to the fact that fundamentalistic evangelicalism is a relatively new religious movement that has its roots in the 19th century. Another question is what she actually means by "church"? The Roman catholic church still insists that it's the only "church" there is and protestant denominations aren't even worthy of the name "church". So a bold statement to make that deconstruction means "abandoning what the church believed for thousands of years".

@jonathansmiddy7224 4 ай бұрын

I can't take religion seriously because I've got 35 different churches within a 5 mile radius of my house. ✌️❤️

@MrSeedi76 4 ай бұрын

That's like saying "I can't take food seriously, there are 30 different supermarkets in my area".

@joygibbons5482 4 ай бұрын

@@MrSeedi76 no it’s not. Nobody is claiming that someone who prefers oatmeal to cornflakes is a heretic.

@nuttysquirrel8816 4 ай бұрын

26:53 _”I have no reason to doubt the motives of these writers. I have no reason to think that they’re being duplicitous, or ornery, or mean. But I do have reason to doubt their ability to connect the dots intellectually…”_ 🤣😂😆

@user-pd5qz2vt2c 4 ай бұрын

The more I know about the bible, the more my head spins.

@greglogan7706 2 ай бұрын

Real christianity has nothing to do with the Bible

@christopherjp1 4 ай бұрын

39:15 this is exactly right. This has definitely been my experience - people want some sort of absolute authority and certainly. They’re scared if it doesn’t exist.

@Magnulus76 Ай бұрын

Childers chose her church for secular, political reasons, and then wants to try to justify it after the fact. Most Neo-Fundamentalists are exactly like that. These churches grew in reaction to the civil rights movement, and equal rights for women, going mainstream in Mainline Protestantism.

@CanadianAnglican 4 ай бұрын

Thanks for the great video. It definitely helped me learn 🙏🏿✝️❤️

@davidolson8537 3 ай бұрын

Thank you for this thoughtful conversation.

@Theoldmanandthesea13 4 ай бұрын

I probably cant get past the first page.

@darrellanderson6650 4 ай бұрын

Tim and Alisa and Sean McDowell are hanging onto the faith level of simplicity and trying to keep others at that level. They haven’t realized the mental gymnastics of apologetics. Those gymnastics eventually wear you down and you have to move on. My deconstruction was painful. It led me to severe depression. I had to seek professional help. Alisa and her group seem to think deconstruction is a choice and intentional. I never wanted to deconstruct but I am glad I did.

@hudsontd7778 4 ай бұрын

What was the Stronghold that started your deconstruction, was it a certain Doctrine?

@darrellanderson6650 4 ай бұрын

@@hudsontd7778 I would say it started with science and faith. Then the concept of Hell. It was kinda like that whack a mole game. It wore me out.

@hudsontd7778 4 ай бұрын

Ok that's fair, my view of deconstruction is actually being accountable to read the Bible for yourself and not outsourcing ALL sense making to a particular agreed upon interpretation by creeds/councils or church denomination. I Personally think reading the Bible with people in dialog whether they are Christian or not is ideal because reading Bible by self will mostly lead to confirmation bias and making the Bible say what we want it to say (Preconceived Presuppositions) by framing a narrative or story telling to fit are Presupposition instead of aiming for the Truth of the matter. This goes for both Christians and Non-Christians, I am a open theist and I do NOT believe in Hell as Eternal Consciousness Torment? Not many Christian churches teach what I believe but my deconstruction journey has lead me to where I am Now --> Hopeful So deconstruction saved me from bad doctrine that are gateway drugs to Unbelief but I still believe in God of the Bible and just because Mainline Christianity doesn't fit my reading of the Scripture doesn't mean I had to do a 180 into Unbelief.

@darrellanderson6650 3 ай бұрын

@@hudsontd7778 That is not deconstruction in my opinion. Deconstruction is your whole worldview falling apart. Like in the Matrix being ejected from your pod to the real world.

@kevinpinball 3 ай бұрын

I read the book. And the book explains this conversation perfectly.

@kevinpinball 3 ай бұрын

this whole conversation was confusing. Tom said he's a follower of Jesus, but also denies that Jesus is God. So how does Tom know what Jesus he is following?

@susemcx Ай бұрын

@@kevinpinball Do you want a response. Your comment seems kind of bad faith to me. Anyway, Tim says, "I am not saying I deny the Trinitarian view of Jesus and God and the Holy Spirit." He even emphasizes it with a hand gesture (32:30). It's understandable if the conversation is confusing when you don't really listen or only listen selectively.

@kevinpinball Ай бұрын

@@susemcx I was referring to what Tom said. I’d have to find it again. But did I hear Tom wrong? I thought he said Jesus didn’t claim to be God.

@thatevangarcia 4 ай бұрын

Great breakdown! On the laptop on a podium thing Dan Mclellan had an interview recently with someone that suggested the term factual beliefs. They’re still facts but you have to believe in them and they’re factual until better evidence arrives. Thought it was a good way to get explain what Tom mentions here about objectivity relying on our subjectivness. 🤙🏼🤙🏼

@lifesprint 4 ай бұрын

As I did 30 years ago NEED absolute certainty. Spiritual maturity and life experience proves both is certain

@canaansanchez6771 3 ай бұрын

This is a cool show. It's a good feeling to know I'm not alone

@user-gd3uz3lw4w 3 ай бұрын

People never experience deconstruction, then you won't understand,they have a point and is appropriate to challenge Alisa

@mrTjstephens1 4 ай бұрын

Paulogia and GMS both did a response to this book.

@shirleymcclintock3056 2 ай бұрын

Deconstructing is not sin. But on the other hand these people have a right to think whatever they want

@Shae-nc6ny 28 күн бұрын

True, but they have crossed over into territory that is not their own and trying to define what it is and how it should be done. This book is more divisive than helpful, and further proves the reasons people deconstruct in the first place.

@Shae-nc6ny 28 күн бұрын

33:43 They don't read biblibal scholars outside their own tradition... I find this in a lot of cases. It all works if you only stay inside the bubble you've made.

@NeedSomeNuance 4 ай бұрын

Do y’all ever have deconverts on?

@dhat1607 4 ай бұрын

A lot of conservative evangelicals are uncomfortable with the reality that the bible is already an interpretation of past events of God’s dealing with us. A high view of scripture would say this interpretation - the claims made by the bible as presented by the bible - is true and has authority. It is Gods opinion as to the meaning of past events, and what we ought to believe about it.

@williamtolbert5011 2 ай бұрын

I myself is at a crossroads with the Bible. I say that because I wanted and believed in a constitutional Bible and lawyer the Book greatly. Taken scripture out of context just to make a point about a pet doctrine I believed in. Not so much anymore. Now at the top old age of Seventy I find myself agreeing more with LIBERAL side of the belief system. Example will the wicked burn forever in a lake of fire 🔥. The God of Heaven has no need to torture people for ever. I have looked at Christian teaching through western eyes. The Bible is not interpreted for the Gentle the same as for the Semitic people in the Middle East.

@williamtolbert5011 2 ай бұрын

After listening to the arguments you guys have about Christianity and the written word of God. Question what does the God of heaven have to do for you to secure your Salvation. Because it don't sound like you believe the Bible way. I hope i am wrong. Because i to have a lot of questions concerning the Bible as well.

@roberthaskins2220 3 ай бұрын

12:51 - "The text itself has some ambiguity, and if that's the case, how can it be this absolute objective standard that obviously entails or deduces all of these truths about life and reality." It seems that the claim is a principle such as "if a source of information is at times ambiguous, that source is unreliable for identifying objective truth and reality." That seems obviously false. Or, at least, if you understand truth in the correspondence sense, "truth is that which corresponds to reality" then it is obviously false. Reality is, definitionally , the standard of truth. But reality is ambiguous. Reality is non-obvious. Reality appears a particular way until you gain additional information or change your starting assumptions. Then reality appears a different way. Someone can take the route of total skepticism and just deny the possibility of knowing objective truth because of the nature of reality. But the two speakers do not do that. So why does the ambiguous nature of reality not undermine the existence of, or our access to, objective truth when we come to reality, but ambiguity in a text does? Are they asserting that the ambiguity in the text is NOT due to the limitation of the reader but instead due to the text itself, and even a hypothetical perfect reader would not understand the text clearly and consistently? If so, on what basis?

@GarthDomokos 4 ай бұрын

If one reads Jonah and the Whale, one can believe that an actual whale swallowed Jonah. However, if one actually studies the story, it is not a real fish or aquatic animal at all, and if you read other parts of the bible, the prayer seems to be be an obvious insert. So who's right and who's wrong? Someone's lying but who then is telling the truth?

@lkhai6243 3 ай бұрын

Can you explain what parts of the story you studied? I mean, that led to the conclusion about it not being an actual animal, and the inserted prayer? Really curious

@GarthDomokos 3 ай бұрын

@@lkhai6243 Thanks for responding. The way you write tells me that your a great person to chat with. I'll give you a little hint. There is no indication that King David was ever thrown into the sea, or was on the cusp of drowning. Yet in psalm 69 David or the "lilies" of David it is written "Save me god for the waters have reached my neck, I have sunk into the mire of the deep, where there is no foothold. I have gone down to the watery depths: the flood overwhelms me". There are bits and pieces in other psalms, but psalm 69 is the doozy. Now read the prayer of Jonah (now remember there's nobody with Jonah to authenticate his prayer). You'll notice remarkable similarities. And in fact, if you study the psalms (at least for myself), you will see how the agents of chaos and despair are closely related to being pulled into the depths of the sea. I would write more, but I would rather have you read the 2 yourself, as we can engage a great dialogue. My findings may shock you, or make you chuckle, but it makes great food for thought. Thanks ever so much for responding. Have a great day.

@anthonybarber3872 4 ай бұрын

But the Resurrection did happen, how do we know? The Bible. What do find wrong with "false choices" either\or? While it is true that we all have biases, it does not follow that there are no objective truths. Our ability to grasp them is and can be cloudy...we are through a glass darkly. All have sinned and fall short... I'm glad that the speakers believe in objective truth. May I ask.. "What is in the book that's good?"

@zach2980 4 ай бұрын

Why is deconstruction bad? If a person comes to find that Christianity isn’t good and/or true, what’s wrong with that? I suspect you guys don’t believe all kinds of indemonstrable stuff.

@anthonybarber3872 4 ай бұрын

What wrong with using Scripture to make your point? Jesus did it all the time, as did the Apostles. As long As the Scriptures you use make the point.

@stormy8110 4 ай бұрын

Tom... it's cris-tin co-bays du-may...

@colleennewell3264 22 күн бұрын

Summation of this KZfaq: "Oh they're (Alicia and Tim) are so silly and stupid and we are so smart. Smug mockers of God. or as Jesus would say: You whitewashed tombs.

@kevinlott5228 4 ай бұрын

Dude says, “I doubt they have the intelligence to connect the dots”. You two have criticized their position yet offered zero scholarship or data to support your criticism. Y’all are just too cute

@westleybenson1188 4 ай бұрын

Well to be fair he said they lack the intellect, not the intelligence. If he said they weren't smart enough I would disagree with him. But I do think they lack intellectual curiosity.

@kevinlott5228 4 ай бұрын

@@westleybenson1188 considering Tim focuses on apologetics, I’d imagine he reads more opposing views than you think. Personally, I generally read as much material from those I disagree with than those I agree with. I already know what I believe, I don’t need it affirmed over and over in order to keep me believing it. What I do need (as does anyone in apologetics) is to know the views of those I oppose

@marysanchez90 3 ай бұрын

And why do we need apologetics to explain religion or Christianity! Wasn't Jesus's teaching enough! He never made it hard to understand! But people just have to make it to be so elaborate so as we could not understand His teachings!!! Why Why Why? Trying to decipher God's Word piece piece is not relevant to me! All I know is that I try to live by what He has told me to do as a follower of Him!

@zach2980 4 ай бұрын

Yahweh creates most people he knows will end up in hell. You call this loving? Even one person who ends up in hell who doesn’t wanna be there is far too much. All his child killing, slavery, and genocide are nothing compared to hell.

@anthonybarber3872 4 ай бұрын

The fact that they are laughing so much is very telling. Jesus is God, not clearly in Scripture? Rubbish!

@michellecrouch6736 3 ай бұрын

A whole lotta nothing here..

@jonathansmiddy7224 4 ай бұрын

That's a terrible analogy bro.

@joshvanduser1838 4 ай бұрын

This video is a complete hack job and totally misunderstands epistemological arguments. I would love to discuss with these two how they are wrong objectively and why their arguments won't stand if they had to defend them.

@marysanchez90 3 ай бұрын

And where exactly were you when you got your tats, you know Jehovah says NO to these! And don't give me some lame excuse like Joyce Meyer did trying to use scripture to excuse herself from getting tats! What part of NO do you not understand?

@kevinlott5228 4 ай бұрын

Tim, you need to gain some biblical understanding if you intend to critique scholars and credible Bible teachers. I get you have your little agenda to rally for but, doing from a place of understanding might give you bit of credibility🤷🏽

@TheNewEvangelicals 4 ай бұрын

Alisa and Tim are not scholars nor credible Bible teachers.

@kevinlott5228 4 ай бұрын

@@TheNewEvangelicals that’s your bias talking, Tim is absolutely a credible teacher. News flash, not everyone who agrees with you and others in the minority lack credibility. You guys are the outliers here

@sethmiller8984 3 ай бұрын

One full hour of critiquing Alisa and Tim, and you still just don’t get it. Maybe if you disagree with the Bible and these biblical scholars, ever think the problem might be you?

@user-gd3uz3lw4w 3 ай бұрын

You never experience deconstruction, you won't understand,they have a point and is appropriate to challenge

@sethmiller8984 3 ай бұрын

@@user-gd3uz3lw4w go ahead and challenge it. But if Scripture isn’t your objective starting point, you won’t get anywhere.

@kevinpinball 3 ай бұрын

I just finished watching this, and reread the title. They never say what Alisa actually gets wrong about Deconstruction. They just don’t like her book. They don’t like orthodox Christianity, and everything that is described in the book is how both these guys responded to it. They deny inerrancy, accept no sexual boundaries, and look for answers outside of the Bible. They deny absolute truth, but then try and explain why Alisa and Tim are wrong. But by what standard? They deny truth.

@slay8741 Ай бұрын

@@sethmiller8984the problem is that Childers et all ‘objective starting point’ appears to be modernity and if you don’t question that default you will fail to see that problem - because it isn’t always obvious to most of us. Modernity is assumed and then we build our theology upon that…

@kevinlott5228 4 ай бұрын

Tim, in what sense of the word would you call yourself a believer? You literally believe none of the gospel! Why not fully shed your sheep suit and be who you truly are?

@Brutuscomedy 4 ай бұрын

Literally believe "none of the gospel"!? 😆🙄🤡

@kevinlott5228 3 ай бұрын

@@Brutuscomedy feel free to point which parts of the gospel he believes….

@MajorPayne175 4 ай бұрын

As an atheist, I was trying to listen to this with objectivity, but my mind could not grasp the mental gymnastics that went on within the first 20 minutes, all to justify stories in a book written 2,000 years ago. Wow, truly sad, grown adults justifying fictitious stories.

@MrSeedi76 4 ай бұрын

What's the really sad thing is that modern atheists don't understand why we need and want stories, myths and legends. Honestly someone who doesn't understand the fascination of the Bible probably simply doesn't do a lot of reading or thinking about the conditio humana. That's what's really sad here.

@joygibbons5482 4 ай бұрын

@@MrSeedi76 I’m a “modern atheist” with a degree in Theology from a conservative school of theology. I agree that humans need myth, story, community etc and can find the Bible fascinating as an ancient human text.

@MajorPayne175 4 ай бұрын

@@MrSeedi76 I was a fundamentalist Christian, and I believed the dogma for many years. Once you start diving into the text, and you take off the "spiritual goggles" you start understanding the heinous, horrific, mysoginistic practices that come along with the practice of religion. Sure, you can bypass all of the gory details and only rely on the "good stuff" but that doesn't deny the truth of the matter of the text. With or without "spiritual insight", when is it ok to ever pay 50 shekels to a rape victim's father and force said victim to become the rapist wife? Explain this to me, As a Christian, you should know what I'm talking about. I am very specifically familiar with the text, the myths, and the stories of the Bible, it is mainly because of this nonsense and many other stories like it, that I consider myself an atheist today.

@Brutuscomedy 4 ай бұрын

"A" book wasn't written 2,000 years ago. At one point a bunch of writings were compiled into one volume, but they weren't all authored by the same person at the same place, nor were they all simply made up.

@MajorPayne175 4 ай бұрын

@@Brutuscomedy Petty quibbles over semantics. If it brings you comfort, go right ahead.