Truth Unites Plans for Spring 2023


Thanks to everyone who supports Truth Unites and who has been praying for my ministry over the fall and winter. It’s been a busy stretch, and I truly appreciate your prayers. I have felt sustained by the Lord each step along the way.

In August and September I refrained from travel as we welcomed little Abigail into the world. In October and early November I had a busy season of travel and ministry (which I shared about in my last post). Then over the holidays I was able to get a bit more done of my book, Why Protestantism Makes Sense: The Case for an Always Reforming Church (Zondervan Reflective, 2024). In January I released a video on icon veneration that has generated lots of response videos, which I have been trying to engage as I have time. This month (February) I spoke at Grace Baptist Church’s Men’s Conference on cultural apologetics, and then at the Evangelical Free Church Theology Conference on how the doctrine of God helps us in evangelism and apologetics.

In two weeks I have my debate with Trent Horn in Ohio, which I am very much looking forward to. In late April I travel to New York City for the first gathering of the fellows of the Keller Center for Cultural Apologetics, which I am honored to be a part of. Other than that, I have decided to decline all travel for the spring and summer. It’s just been too busy, and with five kids at home I need to mindful that my family needs me. My basic plan is simply to serve my church and finish my book by the end of May, and then I am going to take some time off from social media over the summer (I will share more about that later in the spring).

Here are the videos you can expect in the future:

  1. Interview with Chris Watkin on his book Biblical Critical Theory
  2. Interview with Parker Settecase on the simulation hypothesis
  3. Law and Grace in Les Mis
  4. Theological Interpretation of Scripture: An Assessment
  5. How Not to Help a Sufferer (What Not to Say)
  6. Complementarianism and Egalitarianism in Theological Triage
  7. Five Ways Beauty Points to God
  8. The Pastoral Wisdom of Gregory the Great
  9. Response to Alex O’Connor on Divine Hiddenness
  10. Response to Stephen Woodford Response: “Defending Every Argument For God in 15 Minutes”

If you’d like to become a patron, you can do so here. I do patron only updates + patron only zooms now and again (next one is Feb 25), so it’s a great way to stay in touch and get to know each other and be a part of the ministry.

Thank you all again for your support!

Share this post


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. I’m really glad to see you’re cutting back some for more family focus time. I am certain God will bless that decision. Praying for you, your family, and your ministry…God’s blessings brother!

  2. Greetings Rev. Dr. Ortlund, I had hoped to contact you via another means, but could not find an e-mail address. I posted the following on your Sola Scriptura Debate Review YouTube video. I would sincerely appreciate your response. I am a sincere seeker. The following is sincere, not argumentative. Of what use is an infallible Book without an infallible interpretation? If God went through the trouble of giving humanity an infallible Book through fallible men, why wouldn’t He give us an infallible Interpretation through fallible men so that we can know what the Book means? Presumably, from the Book, God’s desire has been to form a new, united humanity (Ephesians 2). Why would He give us an infallible Book without an infallible Interpretation, which would result in His new, united humanity disagreeing with one another and dividing as soon as it began. Paul wrote, “I urge you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree in what you say, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and in the same purpose.” (1 Cor. 1:10) Why wouldn’t God give humanity an infallible Interpretation of the Book, so that we wouldn’t have divisions and so that we would agree with one another in mind and purpose?

    1. Hi Charles, could I just clarify what you’re asking Gavin?

      It seems more reasonable to you that God would have given us an infallible interpreter because (a) we can’t understand the Bible without one; (b) we can’t be sure of our interpretation without one; (c) we have divisions without one, whereas God wants us to be unified and of one mind.

      Have I captured the gist of what you’re saying correctly?

      I use to have similar thoughts to you, and I’d love to respond if you’re open to it.

  3. Hi Gavin. I just wanted to say that I really appreciate your ministry. My boss is a devoted Catholic while I’m a protestant Christian. It’s wonderful to have another believer to talk to at work, but there are times where she makes comments about me converting to Catholicism. I’m not anti-Catholic, but I certainly don’t see myself ever converting for the simple fact that I’ve already found Jesus. I’m already saved!

    Our conversations have led me down the rabbit hole of YouTube Catholic/Protestant discussions, and like yourself, I’m dismayed that there’s so little from the Protestant side. Aside from the theology discussion channels, there’s a number of “protestant explores Catholic beliefs” channels, but virtually no (I’ve looked!) “Catholic explores protestant beliefs” channels. I understand the draw for Protestants to become Catholic – there seems to be a rigor and seriousness to it that many evangelical churches seem to lack. I see the proliferation of theology and Catholic/Protestant discussions as a good thing. Your channel may be one of the first, but hopefully it’s not the last to put up a strong defense of Protestantism.

    My wish is for Protestants on a whole to be somewhat more Catholic – to appreciate beauty, art, liturgy, history, and saints – AND to be able to defend their faith. My wish is for Catholics to drop the “we’re the ONE TRUE church and everyone else is false” thing. Ultimately, my wish is for both sides to better understand and love each other.

  4. Gavin,

    I’m Catholic, I watched your debate with Trent Horn, and it was a pleasure to hear you guys engage one another. I watched it live, and truthfully don’t remember much about it except that you seemed to have major hangups with Pope Francis’ revision of the catechism with respect to the death penalty and the problem this poses for Catholic if he is, in fact, incorrect in his revision.

    Whenever I hear the revision mentioned (more often than you might think! Haha) I remember you. I have no particular expectation that you’ll see this comment or think it worthwhile to humor me, but I was reading this piece from Ed Feser (well regarded Catholic philosopher and theologian) on his blog on the very topic here mentioned. I always find his reasoning irresistibly tangible, and just wanted to try to find some way to send you the link in case you had an interest. Here it is:

    In any case, this is, I’m sure, only one of a wide array of inconsistencies you would identify in the Catholic claims (and my guess is it’s probably not the one you’d point to as the worst). But I think the cumulative case matters, and you seemed like such a great guy that it might be worth following up, even if this comes from a stranger.

    God bless you and your ministry.

  5. Dear Gavin,

    Thank you for your labour of love with respect to maintaining a strong internet presence for Protestantism.

    Who am I?
    My “u” in labour probably gives me away as a Canadian… I surrender! I am a senior citizen and pastor of a small, independent congregation here in London, Ontario. Formerly, I was raised in a relatively conservative mainline church in rural Canada. I fell away from all forms of “church” subsequent to my mother’s tragic death when I was 15 years old. Subsequently, the hippy movement, rock and roll and a desiring license to sin became my “reason d’être”. At age 28 I was radically converted to Christ through a dream where God revealed to me my destiny: hell. Post conversion, I finally responded to the call on my life and received pastoral training in a Pentecostal college here in Canada. To date I have been in Christian ministry for 37 years. I am blessed with an outstanding handful of “thinking” Christians within our very small church. Through these individuals I have been made aware of your YouTube presence (and others) and have enjoyed listening to your commentaries.

    My reason for contacting you today surrounds the topic of “Mary the Mother of God”.
    My lifelong take on the foregoing question, which was more caught than taught, is: Mary contributed to the human nature of Jesus while the divine nature of Jesus was pre-existent. Therefore, within Mary’s womb the hypostatic union took place. (Quite amazing!); when Mary brought forth her son and named him Jesus he was, at birth, all man and all God. Mary’s contribution was toward His humanity while she had nothing to do with the entrance of His divine nature (other than being a willing vessel). From my perspective on Mary it is impossible to cite her as being the Mother of God because she was not, nor could be, the mother of Jesus’ divine nature. Further, be patient here please, since Jesus preexisted as the Son of God Mary could have nothing to do with “birthing” God as we may think that a mother births “new life” when she delivers a baby. In the infant Jesus we do not have “new life” as to the divine nature that came into union with flesh in Mary’s womb. We do have new life in the physical form of Jesus quite apart from His divine nature. Therefore, in my thinking I cannot and feel I should never identify Mary as the “Mother of God”. It is enough to identify her as the Mother of Jesus. To say more is to wade into mud that won’t wash off because in saying more I would commit the sin of idolatry.

    Further on Mary, I note that in the book of Acts she was in the upper chamber in the Day of Pentecost. There, in that magnificent scene Mary personally receiving the Holy Spirit along with the other 119 because she indeed needed the Holy Spirit as did the others.

    Concluding question:
    While I don’t easily find theologians who would similarly agree with my decision re: Mary’s title “Mother of God”, would you find my “take” on Mary acceptable within Protestantism in the main? If not, why not?

    Regards in Christ,
    Allan Roach
    London, Ontario.