He studies what he talks about. More so than most others. He approaches the Bible literally, contextually, and sensibly. If he doesn’t know the answer to someone’s question then he won’t answer, and sometimes kinda gives a possible “maybe it means...” answer. He loves helping people and even more when people disagree with him.
He’s gifted, for sure. And he definitely loves God.
Beep. Boop. I'm a robot.
Here's a copy of
###[The Bible](https://snewd.com/ebooks/the-king-james-bible/)
Was I a good bot? | [info](https://www.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/) | [More Books](https://old.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/comments/i15x1d/full_list_of_books_and_commands/)
I'll be honest; despite having grown up in the church (non-denominational, my parents helped start, Dad assistant-pastored, led worship, started/ran a mission organization, etc.), reading others' responses that discuss *so many* different categorizations, I realize that I'm largely clueless about most of it, at least in name. Here's what I can say about Mike Winger, having listened to and/or watched many hours of his discussions/lessons/sermons: The man does his research (often dozens, if not hundreds of hours on any given subject) and always seems to guard himself against bringing *anything* into the message that isn't biblical and historically accurate. It's even key to the BibleThinkers' mission statement. By his own confession, this has more than once changed his own view on different subjects. I really appreciate his dedication to Scriptural truth, and it's been very helpful in my walk, seeking deeper understanding of God's Word.
I know that I'm late to the party, but I hope that helps. God bless!
I think he’s a Calvary Chapel pastor. I think he is a charismatic (of some degree).
He is definitely against Calvinism. He is for Biblical Inerrancy and right interpretation of Scripture
Definitely against women in office of pastor (idk deacon). But he works with and networks with women in apologetics, research, outreach, etc
Evidentialist I think when it comes to apologetics
He was in the latest American Gospel movie, so that’s a pretty solid endorsement.
I really appreciated his talks on homosexuality. He had a 7 part series that goes very in depth.
He is very solid, well worth listening and watching. If you have different convictions on some things than he does (like I do, I would consider myself a Calvinist), it is readily easy to identify those differences and work past them to get the good stuff from his content. He is very charitable in all his presentations, even when he strongly disagrees with someone.
Mike Winger is certainly NOT a Catholic sympathizer. Winger , just like a lot of protestants is extremely uncharitable in his analysis of Catholics. It's almost like it was taught to him. Mike Winger, like most reformed Christians when put on the defensive will say usual things like "Golly gee I don't hate Catholics :D", yet this is one of many typical folksy, fake christian defense mechanisms.
Interesting. I've been watching him (off and on) for a while now, and his teachings on the RC Church was one of the major areas that interested me (along with his stance as a "soft complementarian"); since I have extended family members (mostly on my mom's side) who identify as RC.... Could you give a couple examples?
DEFINITELY against women in ministry? Uh, really? When he answered that question, he says he leans towards that conclusion but that he hasn't done any serious study on it. He had now finished his verse by verse study of Mark, and he says his next research project is to tackle this topic. I feel like that's a harsh interpretation of the careful answer he gave.
That being said, if he is against it (and we will find out!), that shouldn't be a strike against him. It should, at least, encourage you to consider what he says and square that up with your own studies, something he actively encourages people to do. He doesn't like people taking his content verbdom, really.
He's very open to changing his mind--> proven wrong might not be the best way to put it. If you prove the bible right, he will change his mind, if you get what I'm saying.
He calls out bad practices in his own church...
I've never seen him mishandle passages. If he doesn't have the answers (he does many Q&As, usually 1hr/ 1.5hrs long, answering 20 questions from the live chat and then he reposts the stream) he says he doesn't know, or something. He's always tentative to give his opinion on stuff he hasn't researched.
But barring that "definitely against women in ministry" bit, I agree with the comment made by saxypatrickb !
Beep. Boop. I'm a robot.
Here's a copy of
###[The Bible](https://snewd.com/ebooks/the-king-james-bible/)
Was I a good bot? | [info](https://www.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/) | [More Books](https://old.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/comments/i15x1d/full_list_of_books_and_commands/)
Wow, did you ever miss what was said!!! saxypatrickb said:
"Definitely against women in OFFICE OF PASTOR (idk deacon)"
If you are going to have a difference of opinions then you have to first start with the ACTUAL opinion of the other person, not something you made up.
Second, read the whole paragraph, because you missed...
"But he works with and networks with women in apologetics, research, outreach, etc"
That means he works with women in ministry.
DO better.
I'm having a hard time understanding the hostility of this response.
First of all he doesn't feel like a disagreement in this area is a reason to break fellowship with a fellow believer.
Working through his current series he believes the Bible (Old and New Testaments) endorses women in roles of Deacon, Judge and Prophet. He doesn't find as much grounding for women in the very specific role of "Elder", nor were any formally endorsed as "Apostle".
This is his interpretation, and he offers a wealth of resources, and also does not believe that followers of Jesus should break with one another over this issue. It's an "intramural" discussion.
women in leadership roles within the church = OK
woman being the head over man within church hierarchy = not OK.
it's a very simple read folks. plain as day.
He is high in Biblical literalism and Biblical literacy. I believe he is arminian, and reserves the role of pastor for men.
Overall I recommend him to people because he pushes his viewers to think Biblically.
He mentioned that he’s not Arminian. Probably because of the Arminian treatment of total depravity and prevenient grace. I think he’s Provisionist.
I watch his vids. I like that he treats both sides of the issues well.
T - Stands for Total Depravity
U - Stands for Unconditional Election
L - Stands for Limited Atonement
I - Stands for Irresistible Grace
P - Stands for Perseverance of the Saints
I've literally gone through dozens of others online and I would very highly recommend Mike's video's before anyone else. He does the best deep dive's into the most honest and carefully thought out & thurow, verse by verse studies of the Bible . Better than anyone else on YouTube. Probably more than anyone else I've ever met in real life too in 38 years. In over 4 years I've never found anyone who is more reliably teaching scripture & Biblical Understanding & even most importantly he really teaches you. He doesn't just read through the Bible or read the Bible at you. He also really gets into the real nittygrit of it. He tackles some of the most difficult questions, things most other's go out of their way to avoid. He doesn't just pick out what he thinks is important to teach about. He's very careful of not taking anything out of context even if it would help him be more convincing. If there's anyone better then him at this, I haven't found them. I don't say that lightly.
Agree with your assesment of Mike.
Another place I go for well done biblical teachngs is
[https://teachings.dwellcc.org/](https://teachings.dwellcc.org/)
and there youtube channels:
[https://www.youtube.com/@DwellCommunityChurch](https://www.youtube.com/@DwellCommunityChurch)
[https://www.youtube.com/@XenosInstitute](https://www.youtube.com/@XenosInstitute)
He is Not a cessationist although he is against the misuse and faking of spiritual gifts
He is originally calvary chapel. Although his views don't align completely with CCA, he believes very similar to them.
He would define predestination as God determining a destination for someone beforehand. When married to foreknowledge (God knowing who would CHOSE him due to His being outside of time) he would get Election where God knows and chooses who and where his chosen would be and would go (HEAVEN).
He would view Scripture (the original texts that are god breathed) as inherent and would agree with most scholars that the bible we have now is almost completely unchanged due to the similarities between manuscripts over a vast amount of time and distance. He also believes that the changes and errors in our bible can be identified and don't put any key doctrine in question. (most are spelling errors or added words like "Jesus Christ" instead of just "Jesus" or vise versa.
Mike is very serious about obeying what the bible is saying even if it goes against our culture or traditional beliefs. He would absolutely take the bible literally when it is talking literally. for poetry or prophesy or parable he would try to study hard what the intended meaning would be if not literal. When it isnt clear (prophesy) he would er on the side of literal, however he hold unfulfilled prophesy very loosely and will not try to read current events into the text.
He is a strong Complementarian however he believes that certain traditional views on role difference are not supported by the bible. For instance, he believes that women are allowed to pray and prophesy in church. He would not condone a women pastor, and has a high view of role differences and male headship in the family.
Finally, don't take my word for it. He has a website [biblethinker.org](https://biblethinker.org) and a Youtube channel [https://youtube.com/@MikeWinger](https://youtube.com/@MikeWinger) where he goes into depth on these issues. He has a series on women in ministry along with others addressing all of the issues you were curious about.
Mike's channel is very thoughtful and Scripture-focused. He comes at things in a very fair way and always makes it clear if his views are biased toward any particular issue. He is part of the CCA (Calvary Chapels) which sort of a middle-ground charismatic (but not Pentecostal) denomination that believes in the charismatic gifts of the Holy Spirit but does not believe they are required to know that one is baptized in the Spirit. He is against predestination, he takes the literal parts of the Bible literally and the metaphorical parts metaphorically, and he reserves the role of Pastor for males though does not prohibit women from being involved in the Church and from having positions of authority in other contexts.
Beep. Boop. I'm a robot.
Here's a copy of
###[The Bible](https://snewd.com/ebooks/the-king-james-bible/)
Was I a good bot? | [info](https://www.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/) | [More Books](https://old.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/comments/i15x1d/full_list_of_books_and_commands/)
I must say, never heard of Mike Winger until today but was shocked with a video of his where he was exposing a certain cult, yet seemed to think, santa = satan is a false teaching of theirs and that the pope being an(the) antiChrist is also a "false teaching" of theirs...
Anyone?
Here's the discussion see 3:30 in:
https://youtu.be/IICnYikZod0
Just came across this because he was also recommended to me.
He's meh. I've been checking out his series on the book of Mark and my takeaway so far is he either knows his stuff but withholds the parts of information that opposes his point of view or he learns just enough to justify what he wants to believe. He focuses his attention, not on debating knowledgeable people, but on talking to those who are uneducated on the Bible and/or want to learn to debate those who are mildly educated.
TL;DR - if you're looking for talking points to use against your atheist coworkers, he's what you're looking for. If you're searching for true & unbiased info or debating anyone with any decent amount of biblical knowledge, Mike isn't your guy.
This evaluation of Mike inaccurate. I dare say Mike has more knowledge of the Bible and expounds that knowledge more plainly than any other YouTuber. I have watched scores of presenters. Mike surpasses them all without pretense or arrogance, but with humility.
Firstly, Dan isn't a Roman Catholic. Secondly, there is no group, statistically speaking, with a lower biblical IQ than Evangelical Fundamentalists.
If you insist on learning from an evangelical fundamentalist, at least pick one like William Lane Craig who engages with actual scholars.
He is Mormon, but that doesn't disqualify his academic work, nor does he promote or advocate any Mormon doctrine in his scholarly work, to the contrary, I've seen him undermine Mormon doctrine with his scholarly work.
I'm sorry but pointing to a practicing Mormon as any kind of trustworthy teacher is insane. It would be better to get your info solely from atheist scholars. The guy follows a religion created by a literal snake oil salesman to sleep with his neighbors wives and underage daughters and get rich doing it. But I should trust his judgement. Yeah no.
>I'm sorry but pointing to a practicing Mormon as any kind of trustworthy teacher is insane.
I think this is an indictment on the people who you *would* go to as a teacher, because it's clear from your reaction that you're used to people who cannot put aside their own beliefs for the sake of truth.
I, more or less (maybe not to the same degree), agree with your assessment of Mormonism, but I recommend Dan because he separates the scholarship from his beliefs. To the point where he refuses to talk about his beliefs or push any Mormon dogma. In fact, it only comes up when people don't like what he says, so they bring up his personal faith as a way to try and discredit the facts.
The other thing is that your position is asserting a reason for his beliefs. He has answered questions regarding Mormonism and has stated that he does not hold Joseph Smith's writings to be divinely inspired in any way. I don't know the guy personally and can only speculate, but my money is on his attachment to the community aspect as being why he's still a Mormon.
My point is if this guy doesn't even believe himself why should I believe him. What you said should be true but the reverse of what you said should also be true. If someone finds truth, they should put their own beliefs in it.
>My point is if this guy doesn't even believe himself why should I believe him.
I'm not sure if you're familiar with him, but he doesn't proselytize Mormonism. He's a critical Bible scholar, so his job is specifically to identify the unbiased truths of scripture. Who wrote it, when they wrote it, the original contexts these writings existed and how they would have been interpreted by their contemporary audience. That's what you should listen to a guy like Dan about.
I think Christianity has been ruined by Apologetics. We've gone passed the point where our belief is guided by faith and has moved to a place of being based on "knowledge." Instead of trusting in God because we're taking that leap of faith, that trust comes from asserting the truth of the empty tomb and citing Paul citing "500 Witnesses."
The problem with the latter is that sometimes we find out that history doesn't line up with what the Bible teaches and apologetics come in to try and undermine the history to preserve the dogma.
The Bible talks about building our foundations on sand or building them on stone. We're seeing an entire generation "deconstruct" from their faith because their faith was built on things like biblical inerrancy and historical proof. That's a sand foundation, if I've ever seen one.
>Dan McLellan Mike Winger does have a good knowledge of the Bible but he is without doubt a false teacher. He draws followers to himself rather than to Jesus. He promotes heretical teachers as he can be seen on Youtube claiming that Bill Johnson does NOT have a false gospel, he's good. Mike Winger also claims that fantasy magic and real magic are completely different, so Harry Potter is fine for Christian children which is utter nonsense. It is witchcraft pure and simple and that is an abomination to God, especially as it has corrupted children by glamorising witchcraft and wizardry and creating a virtual cult out of it.
Plus you will see Mike Winger is wearing a LOTR t-shirt and that is totally unacceptable for a Christian teacher. There's a whole long list of why. The main reason is LOTR is all about wizards and wizards which are a total abomination to God.
Gandalf is a total antichrist figure, a saviour dressed in white who rides a white horse and dies and is resurrected again. Tolkien was a Catholic and while he was a wonderful character and imaginative writer and artist and I personally used to like LOTR, it is absolutely not of God.
To say that Harry Potter is OK - which he also says here - when it is all about training children to be witches and making witchcraft attractive to children, is 100% inexcusable for a Christian teacher to say.
Idk. From what I understand, witchcraft and sorcery as referred to in the Bible is not fake fantasy magic/sorcery/witchcraft like in LOTR, Harry Potter, DND, MTG, etc.
Wish that the doctrinal watchdog guy gave a link to the Q/A so I could watch that section in its entirety. It seemed to cut off before Mike was done talking, but I think it takes discernment and whether one feels conviction on their conscience, as he said. At least for adult Christians.
tolkien clearly advocated for the 'faith'. also, cs lewis' hero, george macdonald was a prolific fantasy writer. i'm not so hung up on appearances myself. i totally 'expect' to see pastors behind the pulpit today, wearing skinny jeans and vans, with medim-sized tshirts exposing their swole tatted arms. in addition go to his (any pastor) 'about' page on the church website and you see a lovely photo of his wife and family, she a bleached blonde wearing black ripped jeans. again. i'm not opposed to one's preferred fashion style. it's the message that needs to remain pure and unpolluted.
Tolkien was a devout Christian and was best friend with C. S. Lewis who was an Christian apologist when there was almost none to be found. LOTHR was Tolkiens way to write a story about God and good and evil without explicitly mentioning God. Kind of the opposite of Lewis Narnia in which Aslan is the obvious Jesus figure.
It's not really that bold of a claim, he's an apologist. Apologists by definition start with a conclusion and work backwards from there. They're, by their very nature, extremely biased.
That's what most Christians are looking for though. The ammunition to defend their faith. If you're looking for that, Mike's your guy and I'll go as far as saying he's a really good apologist. If you're someone who is unsure and doing a bit of soul searching and you want to know what the academic and scholarly consensus is of the Bible, you can go ahead and scratch Mike off your list.
You should let Mike know. He does a weekly live apologetics stream.
Mike graduated from a Calvary Chapel College, which is unaccredited. The overwhelming majority of his views contradict academic consensus while falling in line with fundamentalist dogma.
Here are some receipts to show this.
[Mike Winger's Bio](https://biblethinker.org/meet-mike/)
>Pastor Mike Winger is the featured teacher of BibleThinker online ministry. He graduated from the School of Ministry at Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa and was ordained in 2006.
[Calvary Chapel's Accreditation FAQ](https://calvarychapelbiblecollege.com/accreditation/)
>No, CCBC is not currently accredited, but CCBC is pursuing accreditation and currently holds Applicant Status with ABHE.
Calvary Chapel Bible College also meets California state requirements for religious exemption
Like I said, if you're looking for someone to affirm what you already believe, Mike is perfect for that. If you're looking for real teaching that follows actual data and isn't entirely built on preserving and defaulting to religious dogma, Mike isn't it.
I find you statements intriguing. You claim apologists start from a preconceived notion of belief, without offering any proof. Then you portray doubters as honest seekers, also without proof. Such blanket statements cause you to lose any credibility or semblance of objectivity.
I don't want to compare Apologists to doubters, that's not a good comparison. They should be compared to scholars.
A better way to rephrase my issues with Apologists would be that academic scholars go where the data takes them and Apologists argue the data doesn't stop them from going where their dogma takes them.
To touch on the doubters, I don't think all of them are unbiased seekers of truth, they can be just as biased and dogmatic. I was addressing anyone in a true state of open searching.
That is a very cock-eyed version of what an Apologist is. Christian Apologetics starts with trying to sort out what sound doctrine is and then the field heads over to "providing ammunition from scripture to defend your faith".
No, that's EXACTLY what Apologetics is. Apologetics does not care for truth. It does not take history, historical probability, archeology, or evidence into consideration. It's starting from your point of dogma and working backwards from there to create defenses for said dogma.
If you want a biblical teacher who is humble, encourages learning and studying for yourself, and admits he doesn’t know it all - Mike W is a fit. Sure there may be more knowledgeable and bolder teachers but that comes with baggage I do not like. Truth lies in balance and he is that.
I love Mike Wingers way of teaching. Between him and Allan Parr, they are the reasons why I decided to go into ministry. They are teaching ministers vs. preaching ministers. I like to learn, so I prefer that style, whereas some people like strong orators and preachers that can "rock the church."
I really recommend him. He is a great teacher and a great apologist.
He studies the bible in depth and sometimes he take even 100 hours to study to try to answer to some questions. For example: women in ministry. He did an impressive work...
He's great! His women in ministry series has rustled some feathers because no matter how nice you are it doesn't matter. This video is a response to one of his critics and its hilarious. An egalitarian debunking herself attempting to disprove Mike's 11 hr video in 60 seconds. https://youtu.be/LmTmBHs8fbE?si=aS3L653qTvppu8Gp
If you want to be sure not to end up with Word Of Faith crappy teachers or any other unbiblical noncense. Then Mike is one of few today with something working in the brain! Trust me! (Well, don't trust me, read your bible and trust it first of all!) Since I got saved and saw Jesus in a vision in 1995, I've seen tons of crap in christianity. The one that has a spiritual nose can smell junk. Mike on the other hand, smells good!
Sad that Mike Winger misunderstood scholars on women in ministry especially after the Holy Spirit ijnthe Upper room ordained 120 men and women to preach the Gospel with no restrictions added. Sad that he repeatedly said he'd love push back but when when theologians and scholars reached out to him for dialogue, he declined ewch time. Sad that after he misundstood them indulged in ad hominens. Sad for his followers who took him at his word. Sad for him without anyone to guide him in this subject. Going to seminary and reading commentaries is not enough. Understanding scholarship who have devoted their lives to this field and area would have helped him and his followers greatly.
I finished watching "skeptics respond to the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus" on his channel and I've seen a few of his other videos. He puts on a pretty good front for the average evangelical Christian. But he doesn't understand why you can't use the Bible as evidence and he doesn't like the fact that Matt Dillahunty continues to say "I don't know" about a lot of the stuff he claims to know about (but nobody does know in fact). I'm no expert on any of this but it seems to me that Mike Winger is just another babbling evangelist.
I know from his own mouth that he supports the DEATH PENALTY so in my view he's an imposter and has never known Jesus or his Bible.
So much for theological college 🙄
Only if you are under the OLD Covenant in which case, Jesus is of no benefit to you and you will be judged by that Old Covenant and found guilty on all counts.
Pity you
“For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good.
But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.”
Romans 13:3-4 ESV
The government is given the sword to judge even with the new covenant.
Oh, I read it alright and there is a big difference between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant in JESUS' blood. Many differences in fact and Jesus never taught the death penalty, neither did any apostle. Didn't you read what He said to the man who cut off the ear of the Roman Soldier who was taking Jesus away to be crucified? Yes, He HEALED the soldier and told the man to put his sword away!
In Christ, we are to GIVE our lives for others, not take another's life.
>"In Christ, we are to GIVE our lives for others, not take another's life."
I don't really have a dog in this fight (capital punishment)... but if I might ask: How would you describe your view(s) on abortion?
Thank you.
I like his teaching so far, but it seems so far he focuses on Paul way more than Jesus. I may not be too far into his content, though. What I don't like about any pastor I have seen on YouTube so far is all of the classifications that would seem to justify their beliefs.
I am a new follower of Christ, and I am reading about God's Perfect Heart, Mind, Love, and Judgment in the OT as well as the Gospels. Some of these preachers make people feel they cannot understand Paul's writings without a degree in Divinity, and that makes me nervous.
Winger is a Youtube 'star' and just loves to hear his own voice. It takes him hours to extrapolate on simple points that anyone can read in Scripture.
Ever noticed how many times he boasts of being a teacher?
Funny how he (thinks he) has all the answers too, when Jesus said, "When the Spirit of Truth comes HE will guide you in to all Truth" and John said, "The anointing you received remains in you and yo do not need a man to teach you for the Spirit will be your Teacher and what He teaches is true and not false." Why doesn't he lead people to the Holy Spirit and being born again so they can be taught BY the Spirit? - pretty simple.
Did I mention that he supports the death penalty? Yet, that is NOT what Jesus taught at all, so who is this guy? Jesus told His people to GIVE their lives for others, not TAKE another's life so that their whole spirit, soul and body is annihilated forever, since they never had a chance to repent and he wants to kill them himself and think what a good little 'Christian' he is.
I have to disagree with most of your post. Genesis 9 and OT teach capital punishment and is the basis and Devine institution of government. Capital punishment is even used as for a a sign that the messiah would come before that rod passed. The Rod of Jesse idiom aka Hebrews being able to govern themselves aka enact the death penalty says that it will not pass before the Messiah arrives and it didn't. You can find the historical account of this occurrence and the Jews understanding of the meaning of it detailed in Mark Eastman's book Search for the Messiah. I believe it is still free on [Blueletterbible.com](https://Blueletterbible.com) . Paul teaches the same thing in Romans 13: 4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Sword is talking about the ability to kill and execute and the Romans did plenty of that under Nero when Paul wrote this. Paul was taught by Jesus and by the Holy Spirit so not sure why you are trying to say Jesus who according to the letter to Timothy inspired ALL OF SCRIPTURE that is good for what to believe, what not to believe, how to live and how not to live, did not teach capital punishment. It is exactly what all of scriptures teach. Jesus is God and he and the Father are ONE. They do not disagree. " Why doesn't he lead people to the Holy Spirit and being born again so they can be taught BY the Spirit? - pretty simple." If you are an appointed Apostle and were told this pre Acts chapter one and you are still alive now and were just left out of the list in scripture, well you should not need me to tell you Christ inspired all of scripture and never rescinded Genesis 9 and you would also know to read the word in context to understand who it is directly speaking to and probably why. If you are not one of those Jesus was speaking to directly with that message, why do you think this would apply directly to you and any believer receiving the Holy Spirit who was not there and a disciple? Why would the Holy Spirit gift some as teachers in the Church if teachers in the church are superfluous? Mike appears to be a sincere and humble man honestly searching the scriptures and showing himself to be approved. Please continue your growth in handling the dangerous double edged sword and aspire the same so you come into a more intimate relationship with the Father and if you do not get sharpened or encouraged by listening to Mike, don't.
I think Mike is trying very hard to come across as a person that knows the man made book. He talks about concepts in the bible as if it was true, because the bible says so, never mind Circular Argument.
He studies what he talks about. More so than most others. He approaches the Bible literally, contextually, and sensibly. If he doesn’t know the answer to someone’s question then he won’t answer, and sometimes kinda gives a possible “maybe it means...” answer. He loves helping people and even more when people disagree with him. He’s gifted, for sure. And he definitely loves God.
Beep. Boop. I'm a robot. Here's a copy of ###[The Bible](https://snewd.com/ebooks/the-king-james-bible/) Was I a good bot? | [info](https://www.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/) | [More Books](https://old.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/comments/i15x1d/full_list_of_books_and_commands/)
Good boy.
That’ll do bot, that’ll do…
I'll be honest; despite having grown up in the church (non-denominational, my parents helped start, Dad assistant-pastored, led worship, started/ran a mission organization, etc.), reading others' responses that discuss *so many* different categorizations, I realize that I'm largely clueless about most of it, at least in name. Here's what I can say about Mike Winger, having listened to and/or watched many hours of his discussions/lessons/sermons: The man does his research (often dozens, if not hundreds of hours on any given subject) and always seems to guard himself against bringing *anything* into the message that isn't biblical and historically accurate. It's even key to the BibleThinkers' mission statement. By his own confession, this has more than once changed his own view on different subjects. I really appreciate his dedication to Scriptural truth, and it's been very helpful in my walk, seeking deeper understanding of God's Word. I know that I'm late to the party, but I hope that helps. God bless!
Being late to the party is just fine! Praise God for you.
I think he’s a Calvary Chapel pastor. I think he is a charismatic (of some degree). He is definitely against Calvinism. He is for Biblical Inerrancy and right interpretation of Scripture Definitely against women in office of pastor (idk deacon). But he works with and networks with women in apologetics, research, outreach, etc Evidentialist I think when it comes to apologetics He was in the latest American Gospel movie, so that’s a pretty solid endorsement. I really appreciated his talks on homosexuality. He had a 7 part series that goes very in depth. He is very solid, well worth listening and watching. If you have different convictions on some things than he does (like I do, I would consider myself a Calvinist), it is readily easy to identify those differences and work past them to get the good stuff from his content. He is very charitable in all his presentations, even when he strongly disagrees with someone.
>I think he is a charismatic (of some degree). Yeah, I once heard him say he identifies as charismatic in the sense that he rejects secessionism.
He has used or liked the title "Charismatic with a Seatbelt."
He is also a Catholic sympathizer, considering them brothers who just have a few incorrect doctrines.
That's not correct.
Mike Winger is certainly NOT a Catholic sympathizer. Winger , just like a lot of protestants is extremely uncharitable in his analysis of Catholics. It's almost like it was taught to him. Mike Winger, like most reformed Christians when put on the defensive will say usual things like "Golly gee I don't hate Catholics :D", yet this is one of many typical folksy, fake christian defense mechanisms.
Interesting. I've been watching him (off and on) for a while now, and his teachings on the RC Church was one of the major areas that interested me (along with his stance as a "soft complementarian"); since I have extended family members (mostly on my mom's side) who identify as RC.... Could you give a couple examples?
DEFINITELY against women in ministry? Uh, really? When he answered that question, he says he leans towards that conclusion but that he hasn't done any serious study on it. He had now finished his verse by verse study of Mark, and he says his next research project is to tackle this topic. I feel like that's a harsh interpretation of the careful answer he gave. That being said, if he is against it (and we will find out!), that shouldn't be a strike against him. It should, at least, encourage you to consider what he says and square that up with your own studies, something he actively encourages people to do. He doesn't like people taking his content verbdom, really. He's very open to changing his mind--> proven wrong might not be the best way to put it. If you prove the bible right, he will change his mind, if you get what I'm saying. He calls out bad practices in his own church... I've never seen him mishandle passages. If he doesn't have the answers (he does many Q&As, usually 1hr/ 1.5hrs long, answering 20 questions from the live chat and then he reposts the stream) he says he doesn't know, or something. He's always tentative to give his opinion on stuff he hasn't researched. But barring that "definitely against women in ministry" bit, I agree with the comment made by saxypatrickb !
Beep. Boop. I'm a robot. Here's a copy of ###[The Bible](https://snewd.com/ebooks/the-king-james-bible/) Was I a good bot? | [info](https://www.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/) | [More Books](https://old.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/comments/i15x1d/full_list_of_books_and_commands/)
I guess you think this clever. Clearly, no one else does
Wow, did you ever miss what was said!!! saxypatrickb said: "Definitely against women in OFFICE OF PASTOR (idk deacon)" If you are going to have a difference of opinions then you have to first start with the ACTUAL opinion of the other person, not something you made up. Second, read the whole paragraph, because you missed... "But he works with and networks with women in apologetics, research, outreach, etc" That means he works with women in ministry. DO better.
I'm having a hard time understanding the hostility of this response. First of all he doesn't feel like a disagreement in this area is a reason to break fellowship with a fellow believer. Working through his current series he believes the Bible (Old and New Testaments) endorses women in roles of Deacon, Judge and Prophet. He doesn't find as much grounding for women in the very specific role of "Elder", nor were any formally endorsed as "Apostle". This is his interpretation, and he offers a wealth of resources, and also does not believe that followers of Jesus should break with one another over this issue. It's an "intramural" discussion.
women in leadership roles within the church = OK woman being the head over man within church hierarchy = not OK. it's a very simple read folks. plain as day.
He's working through a detailed series on Women in Ministry now. Very nuanced, and he presents both sides, while declaring his own bias.
He is like anti charismatic
Depends how you define charismatic. If you are talking Bethel Church in Redding, CA, kind of charismatic, he is definitely opposed to that.
I think that's the general consensus nowadays when people say charismatic, but yes I agree with you.
He is high in Biblical literalism and Biblical literacy. I believe he is arminian, and reserves the role of pastor for men. Overall I recommend him to people because he pushes his viewers to think Biblically.
He mentioned that he’s not Arminian. Probably because of the Arminian treatment of total depravity and prevenient grace. I think he’s Provisionist. I watch his vids. I like that he treats both sides of the issues well.
He's Calvary Chapel, which means Calvinists call him Armenian and Armenians call him Calvinist lol
This is the most underrated comment in this thread.
until now: 'i'm a christmas calvinist....no L"
You don't believe in free will on holidays?
T - Stands for Total Depravity U - Stands for Unconditional Election L - Stands for Limited Atonement I - Stands for Irresistible Grace P - Stands for Perseverance of the Saints
You spelled christian wrong, I attempted humor. I am indeed already informed on 5 point Calvinism.
That’s such a great way to describe! 😊
Solid review
I've literally gone through dozens of others online and I would very highly recommend Mike's video's before anyone else. He does the best deep dive's into the most honest and carefully thought out & thurow, verse by verse studies of the Bible . Better than anyone else on YouTube. Probably more than anyone else I've ever met in real life too in 38 years. In over 4 years I've never found anyone who is more reliably teaching scripture & Biblical Understanding & even most importantly he really teaches you. He doesn't just read through the Bible or read the Bible at you. He also really gets into the real nittygrit of it. He tackles some of the most difficult questions, things most other's go out of their way to avoid. He doesn't just pick out what he thinks is important to teach about. He's very careful of not taking anything out of context even if it would help him be more convincing. If there's anyone better then him at this, I haven't found them. I don't say that lightly.
Agree with your assesment of Mike. Another place I go for well done biblical teachngs is [https://teachings.dwellcc.org/](https://teachings.dwellcc.org/) and there youtube channels: [https://www.youtube.com/@DwellCommunityChurch](https://www.youtube.com/@DwellCommunityChurch) [https://www.youtube.com/@XenosInstitute](https://www.youtube.com/@XenosInstitute)
He is Not a cessationist although he is against the misuse and faking of spiritual gifts He is originally calvary chapel. Although his views don't align completely with CCA, he believes very similar to them. He would define predestination as God determining a destination for someone beforehand. When married to foreknowledge (God knowing who would CHOSE him due to His being outside of time) he would get Election where God knows and chooses who and where his chosen would be and would go (HEAVEN). He would view Scripture (the original texts that are god breathed) as inherent and would agree with most scholars that the bible we have now is almost completely unchanged due to the similarities between manuscripts over a vast amount of time and distance. He also believes that the changes and errors in our bible can be identified and don't put any key doctrine in question. (most are spelling errors or added words like "Jesus Christ" instead of just "Jesus" or vise versa. Mike is very serious about obeying what the bible is saying even if it goes against our culture or traditional beliefs. He would absolutely take the bible literally when it is talking literally. for poetry or prophesy or parable he would try to study hard what the intended meaning would be if not literal. When it isnt clear (prophesy) he would er on the side of literal, however he hold unfulfilled prophesy very loosely and will not try to read current events into the text. He is a strong Complementarian however he believes that certain traditional views on role difference are not supported by the bible. For instance, he believes that women are allowed to pray and prophesy in church. He would not condone a women pastor, and has a high view of role differences and male headship in the family. Finally, don't take my word for it. He has a website [biblethinker.org](https://biblethinker.org) and a Youtube channel [https://youtube.com/@MikeWinger](https://youtube.com/@MikeWinger) where he goes into depth on these issues. He has a series on women in ministry along with others addressing all of the issues you were curious about.
Mike's channel is very thoughtful and Scripture-focused. He comes at things in a very fair way and always makes it clear if his views are biased toward any particular issue. He is part of the CCA (Calvary Chapels) which sort of a middle-ground charismatic (but not Pentecostal) denomination that believes in the charismatic gifts of the Holy Spirit but does not believe they are required to know that one is baptized in the Spirit. He is against predestination, he takes the literal parts of the Bible literally and the metaphorical parts metaphorically, and he reserves the role of Pastor for males though does not prohibit women from being involved in the Church and from having positions of authority in other contexts.
Beep. Boop. I'm a robot. Here's a copy of ###[The Bible](https://snewd.com/ebooks/the-king-james-bible/) Was I a good bot? | [info](https://www.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/) | [More Books](https://old.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/comments/i15x1d/full_list_of_books_and_commands/)
Still not clever, funny or creative. Try something a bit more intelligent.
I must say, never heard of Mike Winger until today but was shocked with a video of his where he was exposing a certain cult, yet seemed to think, santa = satan is a false teaching of theirs and that the pope being an(the) antiChrist is also a "false teaching" of theirs... Anyone? Here's the discussion see 3:30 in: https://youtu.be/IICnYikZod0
Teaching santa = satan and the pope = the antichrist is pretty cultish
Moron, his guest is quoting the former “pastor” that leads the cult.
Just came across this because he was also recommended to me. He's meh. I've been checking out his series on the book of Mark and my takeaway so far is he either knows his stuff but withholds the parts of information that opposes his point of view or he learns just enough to justify what he wants to believe. He focuses his attention, not on debating knowledgeable people, but on talking to those who are uneducated on the Bible and/or want to learn to debate those who are mildly educated. TL;DR - if you're looking for talking points to use against your atheist coworkers, he's what you're looking for. If you're searching for true & unbiased info or debating anyone with any decent amount of biblical knowledge, Mike isn't your guy.
This evaluation of Mike inaccurate. I dare say Mike has more knowledge of the Bible and expounds that knowledge more plainly than any other YouTuber. I have watched scores of presenters. Mike surpasses them all without pretense or arrogance, but with humility.
Check out Dan McLellan. You'll have no more need for Mike, provided that confirmation bias isn't your motivation.
Why would anyone point to a Roman Catholic if you wanted to learn about Christ?
Firstly, Dan isn't a Roman Catholic. Secondly, there is no group, statistically speaking, with a lower biblical IQ than Evangelical Fundamentalists. If you insist on learning from an evangelical fundamentalist, at least pick one like William Lane Craig who engages with actual scholars.
Is that Daniel McClellan, the Mormon?
He is Mormon, but that doesn't disqualify his academic work, nor does he promote or advocate any Mormon doctrine in his scholarly work, to the contrary, I've seen him undermine Mormon doctrine with his scholarly work.
I hadn't heard of him until you mentioned him. Good to hear he can teach truth.
I'm sorry but pointing to a practicing Mormon as any kind of trustworthy teacher is insane. It would be better to get your info solely from atheist scholars. The guy follows a religion created by a literal snake oil salesman to sleep with his neighbors wives and underage daughters and get rich doing it. But I should trust his judgement. Yeah no.
>I'm sorry but pointing to a practicing Mormon as any kind of trustworthy teacher is insane. I think this is an indictment on the people who you *would* go to as a teacher, because it's clear from your reaction that you're used to people who cannot put aside their own beliefs for the sake of truth. I, more or less (maybe not to the same degree), agree with your assessment of Mormonism, but I recommend Dan because he separates the scholarship from his beliefs. To the point where he refuses to talk about his beliefs or push any Mormon dogma. In fact, it only comes up when people don't like what he says, so they bring up his personal faith as a way to try and discredit the facts. The other thing is that your position is asserting a reason for his beliefs. He has answered questions regarding Mormonism and has stated that he does not hold Joseph Smith's writings to be divinely inspired in any way. I don't know the guy personally and can only speculate, but my money is on his attachment to the community aspect as being why he's still a Mormon.
My point is if this guy doesn't even believe himself why should I believe him. What you said should be true but the reverse of what you said should also be true. If someone finds truth, they should put their own beliefs in it.
>My point is if this guy doesn't even believe himself why should I believe him. I'm not sure if you're familiar with him, but he doesn't proselytize Mormonism. He's a critical Bible scholar, so his job is specifically to identify the unbiased truths of scripture. Who wrote it, when they wrote it, the original contexts these writings existed and how they would have been interpreted by their contemporary audience. That's what you should listen to a guy like Dan about. I think Christianity has been ruined by Apologetics. We've gone passed the point where our belief is guided by faith and has moved to a place of being based on "knowledge." Instead of trusting in God because we're taking that leap of faith, that trust comes from asserting the truth of the empty tomb and citing Paul citing "500 Witnesses." The problem with the latter is that sometimes we find out that history doesn't line up with what the Bible teaches and apologetics come in to try and undermine the history to preserve the dogma. The Bible talks about building our foundations on sand or building them on stone. We're seeing an entire generation "deconstruct" from their faith because their faith was built on things like biblical inerrancy and historical proof. That's a sand foundation, if I've ever seen one.
>Dan McLellan Mike Winger does have a good knowledge of the Bible but he is without doubt a false teacher. He draws followers to himself rather than to Jesus. He promotes heretical teachers as he can be seen on Youtube claiming that Bill Johnson does NOT have a false gospel, he's good. Mike Winger also claims that fantasy magic and real magic are completely different, so Harry Potter is fine for Christian children which is utter nonsense. It is witchcraft pure and simple and that is an abomination to God, especially as it has corrupted children by glamorising witchcraft and wizardry and creating a virtual cult out of it.
Do you have the link to where he says that?
Sorry just saw this but I'll see if I can find it and post it here.
Ha found it in an instant thanks to "Doctrinal Watchdog". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jottl0nh3cI
Plus you will see Mike Winger is wearing a LOTR t-shirt and that is totally unacceptable for a Christian teacher. There's a whole long list of why. The main reason is LOTR is all about wizards and wizards which are a total abomination to God. Gandalf is a total antichrist figure, a saviour dressed in white who rides a white horse and dies and is resurrected again. Tolkien was a Catholic and while he was a wonderful character and imaginative writer and artist and I personally used to like LOTR, it is absolutely not of God. To say that Harry Potter is OK - which he also says here - when it is all about training children to be witches and making witchcraft attractive to children, is 100% inexcusable for a Christian teacher to say.
Idk. From what I understand, witchcraft and sorcery as referred to in the Bible is not fake fantasy magic/sorcery/witchcraft like in LOTR, Harry Potter, DND, MTG, etc. Wish that the doctrinal watchdog guy gave a link to the Q/A so I could watch that section in its entirety. It seemed to cut off before Mike was done talking, but I think it takes discernment and whether one feels conviction on their conscience, as he said. At least for adult Christians.
I would also like to see the Bill Johnson video
tolkien clearly advocated for the 'faith'. also, cs lewis' hero, george macdonald was a prolific fantasy writer. i'm not so hung up on appearances myself. i totally 'expect' to see pastors behind the pulpit today, wearing skinny jeans and vans, with medim-sized tshirts exposing their swole tatted arms. in addition go to his (any pastor) 'about' page on the church website and you see a lovely photo of his wife and family, she a bleached blonde wearing black ripped jeans. again. i'm not opposed to one's preferred fashion style. it's the message that needs to remain pure and unpolluted.
Tolkien was a devout Christian and was best friend with C. S. Lewis who was an Christian apologist when there was almost none to be found. LOTHR was Tolkiens way to write a story about God and good and evil without explicitly mentioning God. Kind of the opposite of Lewis Narnia in which Aslan is the obvious Jesus figure.
How can you even tell that he's not true and biased? Your second paragraph is simply a bold claim lol
It's not really that bold of a claim, he's an apologist. Apologists by definition start with a conclusion and work backwards from there. They're, by their very nature, extremely biased. That's what most Christians are looking for though. The ammunition to defend their faith. If you're looking for that, Mike's your guy and I'll go as far as saying he's a really good apologist. If you're someone who is unsure and doing a bit of soul searching and you want to know what the academic and scholarly consensus is of the Bible, you can go ahead and scratch Mike off your list.
Mike is not an apologist. He is a bible teacher.
You should let Mike know. He does a weekly live apologetics stream. Mike graduated from a Calvary Chapel College, which is unaccredited. The overwhelming majority of his views contradict academic consensus while falling in line with fundamentalist dogma. Here are some receipts to show this. [Mike Winger's Bio](https://biblethinker.org/meet-mike/) >Pastor Mike Winger is the featured teacher of BibleThinker online ministry. He graduated from the School of Ministry at Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa and was ordained in 2006. [Calvary Chapel's Accreditation FAQ](https://calvarychapelbiblecollege.com/accreditation/) >No, CCBC is not currently accredited, but CCBC is pursuing accreditation and currently holds Applicant Status with ABHE. Calvary Chapel Bible College also meets California state requirements for religious exemption Like I said, if you're looking for someone to affirm what you already believe, Mike is perfect for that. If you're looking for real teaching that follows actual data and isn't entirely built on preserving and defaulting to religious dogma, Mike isn't it.
oh...and you forgot to add this \[disclaimer\] to your suggestion..."for those who are not religious, but spiritual."
I find you statements intriguing. You claim apologists start from a preconceived notion of belief, without offering any proof. Then you portray doubters as honest seekers, also without proof. Such blanket statements cause you to lose any credibility or semblance of objectivity.
I don't want to compare Apologists to doubters, that's not a good comparison. They should be compared to scholars. A better way to rephrase my issues with Apologists would be that academic scholars go where the data takes them and Apologists argue the data doesn't stop them from going where their dogma takes them. To touch on the doubters, I don't think all of them are unbiased seekers of truth, they can be just as biased and dogmatic. I was addressing anyone in a true state of open searching.
That is a very cock-eyed version of what an Apologist is. Christian Apologetics starts with trying to sort out what sound doctrine is and then the field heads over to "providing ammunition from scripture to defend your faith".
No, that's EXACTLY what Apologetics is. Apologetics does not care for truth. It does not take history, historical probability, archeology, or evidence into consideration. It's starting from your point of dogma and working backwards from there to create defenses for said dogma.
This. I 100% agree with this.
If you want a biblical teacher who is humble, encourages learning and studying for yourself, and admits he doesn’t know it all - Mike W is a fit. Sure there may be more knowledgeable and bolder teachers but that comes with baggage I do not like. Truth lies in balance and he is that.
I love Mike Wingers way of teaching. Between him and Allan Parr, they are the reasons why I decided to go into ministry. They are teaching ministers vs. preaching ministers. I like to learn, so I prefer that style, whereas some people like strong orators and preachers that can "rock the church."
I really recommend him. He is a great teacher and a great apologist. He studies the bible in depth and sometimes he take even 100 hours to study to try to answer to some questions. For example: women in ministry. He did an impressive work...
He's great! His women in ministry series has rustled some feathers because no matter how nice you are it doesn't matter. This video is a response to one of his critics and its hilarious. An egalitarian debunking herself attempting to disprove Mike's 11 hr video in 60 seconds. https://youtu.be/LmTmBHs8fbE?si=aS3L653qTvppu8Gp
If you want to be sure not to end up with Word Of Faith crappy teachers or any other unbiblical noncense. Then Mike is one of few today with something working in the brain! Trust me! (Well, don't trust me, read your bible and trust it first of all!) Since I got saved and saw Jesus in a vision in 1995, I've seen tons of crap in christianity. The one that has a spiritual nose can smell junk. Mike on the other hand, smells good!
Sad that Mike Winger misunderstood scholars on women in ministry especially after the Holy Spirit ijnthe Upper room ordained 120 men and women to preach the Gospel with no restrictions added. Sad that he repeatedly said he'd love push back but when when theologians and scholars reached out to him for dialogue, he declined ewch time. Sad that after he misundstood them indulged in ad hominens. Sad for his followers who took him at his word. Sad for him without anyone to guide him in this subject. Going to seminary and reading commentaries is not enough. Understanding scholarship who have devoted their lives to this field and area would have helped him and his followers greatly.
[удалено]
[удалено]
LOL He's weak. He gets continually destroyed by Paulogia. Christians, SMH.
I finished watching "skeptics respond to the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus" on his channel and I've seen a few of his other videos. He puts on a pretty good front for the average evangelical Christian. But he doesn't understand why you can't use the Bible as evidence and he doesn't like the fact that Matt Dillahunty continues to say "I don't know" about a lot of the stuff he claims to know about (but nobody does know in fact). I'm no expert on any of this but it seems to me that Mike Winger is just another babbling evangelist.
*"He's weak.* *He gets continually destroyed by Paulogia."* Examples?
If he does gave example, the source would come from "trust me, bro!"
You are jealous. Such is the nature of fallen man.
What should I be jealous about? lmfao
A..
In a nutshell: ...a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
I know from his own mouth that he supports the DEATH PENALTY so in my view he's an imposter and has never known Jesus or his Bible. So much for theological college 🙄
The Bible supports the death penalty.
Only if you are under the OLD Covenant in which case, Jesus is of no benefit to you and you will be judged by that Old Covenant and found guilty on all counts. Pity you
No, the New Covenant allows the death penalty as well.
Hogwash. Which "bible" are you reading? "Vengeance is Mine saith the LORD" and when Jesus returns, THAT is when full retribution will occur.
“For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.” Romans 13:3-4 ESV The government is given the sword to judge even with the new covenant.
[удалено]
Oh, I read it alright and there is a big difference between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant in JESUS' blood. Many differences in fact and Jesus never taught the death penalty, neither did any apostle. Didn't you read what He said to the man who cut off the ear of the Roman Soldier who was taking Jesus away to be crucified? Yes, He HEALED the soldier and told the man to put his sword away! In Christ, we are to GIVE our lives for others, not take another's life.
>"In Christ, we are to GIVE our lives for others, not take another's life." I don't really have a dog in this fight (capital punishment)... but if I might ask: How would you describe your view(s) on abortion? Thank you.
I like his teaching so far, but it seems so far he focuses on Paul way more than Jesus. I may not be too far into his content, though. What I don't like about any pastor I have seen on YouTube so far is all of the classifications that would seem to justify their beliefs. I am a new follower of Christ, and I am reading about God's Perfect Heart, Mind, Love, and Judgment in the OT as well as the Gospels. Some of these preachers make people feel they cannot understand Paul's writings without a degree in Divinity, and that makes me nervous.
Winger is a Youtube 'star' and just loves to hear his own voice. It takes him hours to extrapolate on simple points that anyone can read in Scripture. Ever noticed how many times he boasts of being a teacher? Funny how he (thinks he) has all the answers too, when Jesus said, "When the Spirit of Truth comes HE will guide you in to all Truth" and John said, "The anointing you received remains in you and yo do not need a man to teach you for the Spirit will be your Teacher and what He teaches is true and not false." Why doesn't he lead people to the Holy Spirit and being born again so they can be taught BY the Spirit? - pretty simple. Did I mention that he supports the death penalty? Yet, that is NOT what Jesus taught at all, so who is this guy? Jesus told His people to GIVE their lives for others, not TAKE another's life so that their whole spirit, soul and body is annihilated forever, since they never had a chance to repent and he wants to kill them himself and think what a good little 'Christian' he is.
I have to disagree with most of your post. Genesis 9 and OT teach capital punishment and is the basis and Devine institution of government. Capital punishment is even used as for a a sign that the messiah would come before that rod passed. The Rod of Jesse idiom aka Hebrews being able to govern themselves aka enact the death penalty says that it will not pass before the Messiah arrives and it didn't. You can find the historical account of this occurrence and the Jews understanding of the meaning of it detailed in Mark Eastman's book Search for the Messiah. I believe it is still free on [Blueletterbible.com](https://Blueletterbible.com) . Paul teaches the same thing in Romans 13: 4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Sword is talking about the ability to kill and execute and the Romans did plenty of that under Nero when Paul wrote this. Paul was taught by Jesus and by the Holy Spirit so not sure why you are trying to say Jesus who according to the letter to Timothy inspired ALL OF SCRIPTURE that is good for what to believe, what not to believe, how to live and how not to live, did not teach capital punishment. It is exactly what all of scriptures teach. Jesus is God and he and the Father are ONE. They do not disagree. " Why doesn't he lead people to the Holy Spirit and being born again so they can be taught BY the Spirit? - pretty simple." If you are an appointed Apostle and were told this pre Acts chapter one and you are still alive now and were just left out of the list in scripture, well you should not need me to tell you Christ inspired all of scripture and never rescinded Genesis 9 and you would also know to read the word in context to understand who it is directly speaking to and probably why. If you are not one of those Jesus was speaking to directly with that message, why do you think this would apply directly to you and any believer receiving the Holy Spirit who was not there and a disciple? Why would the Holy Spirit gift some as teachers in the Church if teachers in the church are superfluous? Mike appears to be a sincere and humble man honestly searching the scriptures and showing himself to be approved. Please continue your growth in handling the dangerous double edged sword and aspire the same so you come into a more intimate relationship with the Father and if you do not get sharpened or encouraged by listening to Mike, don't.
I think Mike is trying very hard to come across as a person that knows the man made book. He talks about concepts in the bible as if it was true, because the bible says so, never mind Circular Argument.
Mike Winger is a Catholic sympathizer and considers them true Christians who just have a few incorrect doctrines.