In my last job, I had two interesting encounters, first with a secular Jewish leftist man and second with a New Age prosperity gospel feminist Christian woman.
So let’s talk about the two people.
The man who thinks that conservative Christians are stupid
The first kind of person who tried to shame me for being a Christian is the person who thinks that Christianity is stupid. This kind of person invokes things that he hears in secular leftist pop culture as if it is common knowledge that theism generally, and Christianity in particular, is false. He’s watched a documentary on the Discovery channel which said that the eternally oscillating cosmology was true. Or maybe he watched a documentary on the History Channel that said that Jesus never presented himself as God stepping into history. He presents these things that he reads in the New York Times, or sees on MSNBC, or hears on NPR with the authority tone that Ben Carson might take when explaining modern medicine to a witch doctor.
Here is how things usually go with him:
Me: here are two arguments against naturalistic evolution, the origin of life and the Cambrian explosion.
Him: but you don’t believe in a young-Earth do you? I mean, you believe in evolution, don’t you?
Me: let’s talk about how proteins and DNA is sequenced, and the sudden origin of Cambrian body plans
Him: (shouting) Do you believe in evolution? Do you believe in evolution?
And this:
Me: there hasn’t been any global warming for 18 years, and temperatures were warmer in the Medieval Warming Period
Him: but you don’t deny climate change, do you? everyone on NPR agrees that climate change is real
Me: let’s talk about the last 18 years of no warming, and the temperatures during the Medieval Warming Period
Him: (shouting) Do you believe in climate change? Do you believe in climate change?
He asks these questions so he can either label me as a nut, without having to weigh the evidence I’m presenting, or have me agree with him, without having to weigh the evidence I’m presenting. It’s all about ignoring the evidence, so he can get back to his busy, busy practical life – and get back to feeling smug about being smarter than others. I think a lot of men are like this – they don’t want to waste their valuable time studying, they just want to jump to the right conclusion, then get back to doing whatever they want – like running marathons, or driving their kids to hockey practice, etc.
So how do you respond to a man who gets his entire worldview from the culture, but never deals with peer-reviewed evidence? Well, I think you just defeat his arguments with evidence and then present your own (peer-reviewed) evidence, and then leave it at that. If the person just wants to jump to the conclusion that all the “smart” people hold to, without doing any of the work, then you can’t win. There are atheists out there who believe in the eternal oscillating universe they saw Carl Sagan talking about in their elementary school. You might try to argue for an origin of the universe by citing new evidence like the CMB and light element abundances. But sometimes, they won’t care. Carl Sagan said it 50 years ago, and that settles it. It doesn’t matter that the new evidence overturns the old theories, they don’t care.
Do you think that Christianity will make non-Christians like you?
1 I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom:
2 preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching.
3 For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions,
4 and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths.
5 As for you, always be sober-minded, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.
15 but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect,
16 having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame.
If you have orthodox theological beliefs in this day and age then you are going to be shamed, humiliated, and reviled by people. And it’s not just having an orthodox view of who Jesus is that annoys them (e.g. – deity, the exclusivity of salvation, morality, etc.). No, their disapproval spreads on into politics, especially abortion, and gay marriage – basically any kind of rules around sexuality. That’s what’s really bugging these people, I think.
The woman who thinks Christianity is life-enhancement
This one is especially difficult when you are a young man because we naturally look to women for approval and respect. You find yourself sitting in church or youth group, hoping for the approval and respect from the Christian women for your sound theology and effective apologetics. Little do you know that many Christian women understand Christianity as life-enhancement, designed to produce happy feelings. God is their cosmic butler whose main responsibility is to meet their needs and make their plans work out. Although you might be keen on sound theology and good apologetics arguments, she doesn’t think that’s important.
So how to deal with this unmet need for approval and respect from women in the church?
First thing, be careful that you don’t attend a church where the pastor is preaching and picking hymns that give you the idea that God is your cosmic butler. Second, read the Bible very carefully, and understand that with respect to God’s purposes for you in this world, your happiness is expendable. You cannot be looking to attractive Christian women that you happen to meet in church to support you, as many of them have long-since sold out to the culture. They are not interested in learning evidential apologetics to defend God’s reputation, or in defending the unborn, or in defending natural marriage, or in defending the free enterprise system that supports family autonomy from the state, etc. Those things are hard and unpopular, especially for those women who were raised to think that Christianity is about life enhancement and peer-approval.
1 This is how one should regard us, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God.
2 Moreover, it is required of stewards that they be found faithful.
3 But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you or by any human court. In fact, I do not even judge myself.
4 For I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby acquitted. It is the Lord who judges me.
5 Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive his commendation from God.
4 No soldier gets entangled in civilian pursuits since his aim is to please the one who enlisted him.
Or, since I like Ronald Speirs from Band of Brothers so much:
This is the situation in which we find ourselves, so get used to it. And believe me, I have to deal with this, too. So I have all the sympathy in the world for you. Resign yourself to the fact that no one is going to approve of you for being faithful to the gospel of Jesus Christ; not secular men, not Christian women. There is no cavalry coming to rescue you.
Recommended resources related to the topic:
I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist (Paperback), and (Sermon) by Norman Geisler and Frank Turek
Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions by Greg Koukl(Book)
https://crossexamined.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Blog-3-cover-2.jpg12562400Guesthttps://crossexamined.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/ce_logo.pngGuest2021-03-24 12:00:502024-11-11 09:54:16Two Kinds Of People Who Have Tried To Shame Me Away From Christianity
Whenever I’m asked what I’m reading, my answer is always the same: TLC on repeat. At any given time, I will be reading something by J.R.R. Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, or G.K. Chesterton. Or, I’m reading something about them or their works. Recently, I completed The Good News of the Return of the King: The Gospel in Middle-earth by Michael Jahosky, which, as the title states, reflects on the gospel message within Tolkien’s created world. But more importantly, it also illustrates why imaginative works are so important to share the good news.
While J.R.R. Tolkien was a devout Catholic, there seems to be nothing overtly Christian about The Lord of the Rings. The characters have no religion and there is no mention of God. Tolkien’s work seems even less Christian when compared to Lewis’s Chronicles of Narnia, which is intentionally a Christian allegory. The main thesis of Jahosky’s book, however, is that LotR is not a Christian allegory but a parable, meaning it is about the same thing that Jesus’ parables are about: the good news about the return of the king.
The obvious question at this point is Why? Why would a Christian author create a gospel-eque work when we can just read the actual gospel in the Bible? I think Christians, especially apologists, have grossly undervalued the importance of the imagination in the life of the believer. Now, this statement may conjure an image of an online atheist troll proclaiming, “Hahaha u admit ur god is imaginary!!!” But by imagination, I don’t mean imaginary, as in fake or make-believe. I simply mean the mental faculty that allows us to “see” beyond this world. And it is this act of “seeing” which can be a powerful tool to introduce someone to the gospel.
Throughout his life and ministry, Jesus could have just lectured about theology or given collections of rules to follow. But he often taught in parables, fictional stories used to convey truth about the Kingdom of God. Instead of simply saying that God is loving and merciful, he provided stories that illustrated what God’s love and mercy are like. Jesus’ parables enable us to see truth in action, which is much more impactful than straightforward propositional statements.
This is why the imagination is so important, not just to Christians, but also to unbelievers. Our culture has become increasingly post-Christian, and many people simply do not understand concepts such as sin and salvation. The gospel is like a foreign language. Thus, we need a way to translate the good news into something our culture can understand. If you’ve followed FreeThinking Ministries for a while, you know we often do this with TV and movies. We use Star Wars and superheroes to illustrate truths about the Christian worldview. Every good story can provide some point of connection to the one True Story, the gospel. We use our imaginations to “see” the gospel, which prepares people to hear the gospel.
But more than just showing people the truth of Christianity, we must also convey its goodness and beauty. This is why we need more tools than just syllogisms in our apologetics—we need good stories. Tolkien does not preach to us in Lord of the Rings; he presents a world bathed in goodness and beauty. This awakens a desire within us to find the source of all that is good and beautiful: God. And while we may not be master storytellers like J.R.R. Tolkien, we can still find imaginative ways of illustrating the good news. We must show people how Christianity answers our mind’s deepest questions and satisfies our heart’s greatest desires.
God created our rational minds and he created our imaginations. Apologists tend to focus on the first while neglecting the second. Arguments and syllogisms will take us only so far, targeting just one aspect of the soul. We need to find creative ways to engage the whole person, to show not just the truth of Christianity, but also its goodness and beauty. Perhaps a stroll through Middle-earth can be the first step towards an encounter with the one true King.
Recommended resources related to the topic:
Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions by Greg Koukl(Book)
Timothy Fox has a passion to equip the church to engage the culture. He is a part-time math teacher, full-time husband, and father. He has an M.A. in Christian Apologetics from Biola University as well as an M.A. in Adolescent Education of Mathematics and a B.S. in Computer Science, both from Stony Brook University. He lives on Long Island, NY with his wife and two young children.
https://crossexamined.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Blog-2-cover-2.jpg12562400Guesthttps://crossexamined.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/ce_logo.pngGuest2021-03-22 18:30:262024-11-11 09:55:18Apologetics and Imagination
“Let me see if I understand,” I said to my daughter’s high school biology teacher. “The human eye is the evolutionary product of a light-sensitive spot on the skin. Is that right?”
“Right,” she said.
“And by evolution, you mean a mindless, random process that didn’t really have an end in mind. In other words, there was no “designer” for the eye or the body for that matter. Am I getting that right?”
“Right again,” she replied.
But how could an undirected process produce such highly functional complexity, I wondered aloud. She gave me a look that said, “you really don’t have the time or, probably, the background to understand, so do we really have to go there?”
We did, and I persisted, trying another tack that I had been wondering about for a while.
“Okay, well let me ask you just a few questions” I countered. “Would you agree that evolution as you understand it is a gradual process of adaptation over time, where changes that are advantageous accumulate?”
“Yes,” came her quick reply.
“Would you agree that over time these gradual adaptations would lead to the development of complex systems, such as organ systems?”
“Yes, that makes sense,” she said.
“Would you also agree,” I pressed, “that, generally speaking, the more complex the system, the longer it would take for these gradual adaptations to evolve so that a complex system would take longer to evolve than a less complex system?”
“Yes.” The response was a bit slower, more thoughtful.
Shifting gears a bit, I asked, “In the field of human biology, would you agree that generally speaking, the human female reproductive system is considerably more complex than its male counterpart?”
“I’m not sure what you mean,” she queried.
“Well,” I started, “the male half of the equation involves dividing cells to get to 23 chromosomes and providing a, uh, delivery mechanism. The female system involves the production of eggs, the delivery of the eggs to a specific location, the means for implantation, and if that occurs, the creation of a placenta that is fine-tuned to support the development of the life that is growing. The whole system must work in conjunction with the woman’s body, provide for correction of any mistakes occurring to minimize miscarriages, screen the fetus from harmful substances in the woman’s blood, connect the fetus to the mother by means of a two-way umbilical cord, and provide a method for the baby to be safely delivered into the world. More amazingly, the two systems must somehow recognize each other and work together, so that the 23 chromosomes from each half form a single cell that has the complete instructions for a new human life to begin. This seems like a pretty complex, interconnected, and interdependent system requiring multiple components to work just right. And yet it does work right millions and millions of times.”
“I suppose there’s something to that, but” she hesitated, “what’s your point?” Her tone matched her more serious expression. “Just this,” I responded. “What exactly were all those men doing generation after generation waiting for the first fully functional female to evolve?”
She stared at me, no doubt wondering whether I was trying to mock her. But, though my question was of course facetious, I wanted to know where my logic was flawed. After all, the premises seem valid. If designed, it makes perfect sense that God could create a system in which some parts are more complex than others, and still have them work together for a purpose. But how could mammalian sexual reproduction – involving separate male and female individuals -ever evolve simultaneously? I wanted to know where that very first human male and very first human female came from. She took a deep breath and began her answer…. and it didn’t have anything to do with God.
“Well, it didn’t work that way,” she said. “Evolution occurred gradually, over time, as the predecessors to humans slowly began to change.”
“Fair enough,” I responded. “So, tell me about that first pair of monkeys, the very first male and female monkey from which you say we evolved.”
“Well,” she began, formulating her thoughts, “it didn’t work that way.” I gave her a quizzical look and she continued. “Those predecessors also evolved slowly, over time, from still more primitive forms of life.”
I was patient. “Like what?” I asked. I don’t think anyone had pressed her for answers like this, but after all I wasn’t worried about getting a grade. My daughter, on the other hand, probably wouldn’t be too thrilled about dad’s efforts at higher learning. Luckily, she wasn’t nearby.
In answer, the teacher started to explain that monkeys had evolved from still lower forms of life. It was a long process with smaller animals making adaptations, adding features, becoming larger. It all sounded quite vague and fuzzy, as she painted the picture of a planet teeming with life of various kinds, widely dispersed, and being driven by this engine of evolution. I tried to stay on track with her. Then she made the jump that I was expecting – she started talking about life emerging from the primitive seas. Single-celled life forms that began to replicate and pass their DNA on to the next generation. She paused when she saw me starting to shake my head.
“Wait a sec,” I said. “You’re getting ahead of me, or perhaps more precisely, you’re moving back too far. I’ll grant you that life first began in the seas, but even if I grant you the ‘primordial soup’ theory, you’re still making quite a jump. What I want to focus on are the first male and female land mammals. If we wind the clock back, there must be a point on the early Earth in which there are no mammals walking the land. None whatsoever. Whatever life exists, it hasn’t yet evolved to sexually reproducing, warm-blooded mammals. Before that point, maybe there’s life in the sea, but the land is barren; after that point, the land begins to get populated. You with me?”
She nodded.
“I’d like to know what model science has to explain how that first began. That first couple.”
She was still formulating an answer, so I pressed on. “I can understand that once you have thousands of fully functioning mammals that over time they may begin to change, especially if subjected to some environmental challenge. That makes perfect sense, whether it is directed by the genes, as I believe was designed into them, or whether it’s a random process. But tell me how the first pair appeared on the land.”
I was hoping to get an answer, because I had been wondering for a while how Darwinists made sense of that rather large step, from single-celled asexually reproducing life to complex, sexually producing mammals. But it was not to be. “Coach.” We both looked in the direction of the voice. The bio teacher was also a coach, and someone was trying to get her attention. She smiled and said, “Let’s continue this later.” Was that a look of relief that crossed her features? Probably, I eventually decided. We never did finish the conversation.
Perhaps Darwinists have a plausible model for this transition, but I have yet to hear it. Instead, what I have heard is always along the lines of what’s recounted above – vague and fuzzy references to a planet teeming with evolving life, and then a jump to the oceans, where DNA first appears. But this jump appears to be a “just so” story, with a vague promise that someday science will make it all clear, will discover these missing links that just “must be there.” But common sense, and reason, tell me that when those original sexually reproducing mammals first appeared on Earth, they were able to reproduce in that fashion immediately, making use of an incredibly complex and interdependent system, a system that has all the hallmarks of design. And a system that couldn’t take long periods of time to evolve because, unless it’s working properly and completely on day one, there won’t be a next-generation upon which evolution could act.
Perhaps, like Frank Turek puts it, I just don’t have enough faith to be an atheist. Until I do, then, I guess I’ll just keep believing that the incredible complexity of life is what it appears to be – the telltale sign of an intelligent designer that set it all in motion for a purpose. After all, every time I see a complex, highly organized, interdependent system – like a watch or a plane or a car – I don’t struggle trying to figure out how it assembled itself. So, why do people struggle so hard when it comes to something even more complex – like life?
Why indeed.
Recommended resources related to the topic:
Science Doesn’t Say Anything, Scientists Do by Dr. Frank Turek (DVD, Mp3, and Mp4)
Oh, Why Didn’t I Say That? Does Science Disprove God? by Dr. Frank Turek (DVD and Mp4)
Al Serrato earned his law degree from the University of California at Berkeley in 1985. He began his career as an FBI special agent before becoming a prosecutor in California, where he continues to work. An introduction to CS Lewis’ works sparked his interest in Apologetics, which he has pursued for the past three decades. He got his start writing Apologetics with J. Warner Wallace and Pleaseconvinceme.com.
Think about the phrase “New Age.” What comes to mind? Old documentaries of hippies at Woodstock experimenting with LSD and yoga? Shirley MacLaine holding a cluster of crystals on the cover of Time Magazine back in the ‘80s? Deepak Chopra teaching Oprah how to move things with her mind in the ‘90s? As old or out of touch as these images may seem, New Age beliefs are hotter than ever and have permeated our culture—but with a slick new image. The psychic hotline of the ‘80s has been replaced by winsome hipster gurus who have traded robes for skinny jeans—often translating Eastern religious ideas into Christianese.
Many Christians aren’t even aware of how New Age beliefs have infiltrated Christendom through the Progressive Church. I’ve written about Progressive Christianity here, and talked about it here, here, and here. It wasn’t until I recently did a study of New Age Spirituality that I realized how much Progressive Christianity has in common with it.
Here are 5 ways Progressive Christianity and the New Age Spirituality are kind of the same thing:
1. The redefinition or abandonment of the concept of sin
New Agers believe all people are inherently divine….that there is no such thing called “sin,” but only the failure to remember our divinity. In her master class on the Oprah and Friends network in 2008, New Age leader Marianne Williamson led countless Americans through the book, A Course in Miracles. Participants were encouraged to affirm “There is no sin,”[1] and were taught, “The Atonement is the final lesson [a person] need learn, for it teaches him that, never having sinned, he has no need of salvation.”[2] And all of this information supposedly came from Jesus Himself.[3]
Several years ago I heard a Progressive pastor teach on Genesis 3, the famous passage in which Eve was tricked by the serpent into eating the forbidden fruit. Rather than reading the account as historical fact, he was unpacking the moral “truth” we could all learn from this creation story. He made the point that when this first couple took that fateful bite, it was their shame, not their sin, that separated them from God. In other words, they failed to recognize their belovedness…their inherent goodness and worth. If they were “separated” from God, it was they who were distant….not God. Progressive writer Brian McLaren describes it this way: “They lose their fearlessness in relation to God.”[4]
Notice the similarity of language. Without original sin we are all good, and we are only distant from God in our own minds when we forget that.
2. The denial of absolute truth
New Age thought is marked by its relativism: a rejection of objective morality and absolute truth. If something feels true to you, it’s true. If it feels right to you, it’s right. If something feels real to you, it’s reality. In other words, your own thoughts and feelings are your authority for what is true and real.
One distinctive feature of Progressive Christianity is its denial of biblical authority. But of course, no one operates without an authority—if you remove one authority, you will replace it with another. Typically, Progressive Christians shift the authority for what they believe is true from the Bible to themselves—by becoming their own moral compass which will inevitably ebb and flow with culture.
3. An acceptance of Jesus, but a denial of His blood atonement
New Age thought leaders almost always couch their teachings in Christian language. Jesus is an example of someone who attained enlightenment by connecting with the divine—an example any of us can follow. His death wasn’t a saving act…the “saving” comes from within ourselves when we realize we have the same capabilities as Jesus already within us. This is often referred to as “Christ consciousness.” This is why many New Agers see no contradiction in reciting the Lord’s prayer while believing in karma and the healing power of crystals. Of course, this is an outright denial of His atoning death and resurrection.
Many (not all) Progressive Christians also deny the blood atonement of Jesus. Last year, popular Christian musician Michael Gungor took to Twitter to rant about the idea of God requiring a blood sacrifice for sin, calling it “horrific.” In his controversial book, Love Wins, Rob Bell refers to this idea as something Christians simply picked up from surrounding cultures and used to explain the death of Jesus. In a 2016 lecture explaining the Eucharist (Communion for us Protestants), Bell joked about the ridiculousness of atonement theory, summing it up as: “God is less grumpy because of Jesus.” This gave the audience a good laugh, as Bell went on to explain that the real reason we pass the bread and wine is to “heighten our senses to our bonds with our brothers and sisters in our shared humanity.”
Many Progressive Christian leaders have popularized the phrase “cosmic child abuse,” a term first coined by Steve Chalke to protest the idea that a loving God would require a blood sacrifice for the sin of mankind.
4. It’s all about “me”
New Age thought revolves around the “Self.” Self-empowerment and realization of our innate divinity are central to its teachings and practices. According to New Age blogger Kalee Brown, when Jesus said, “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life” in John 14:6, “The ‘me’ Jesus referred to isn’t himself, but rather the Self within you” (emphasis mine). A Course in Miracles also asks the participant to affirm: “My salvation comes from me.”[5] And hey….if we are all divine, why shouldn’t it be about us?
The typical Progressive Christian will probably not agree that it’s all about them—in fact, they tend to be very focused on social justice. But that’s not what I’m talking about here. I’m talking about a theological shift. Progressive favorite Richard Rohr even goes so far as to write that each of us and sometimes “creation” is the “fourth member of the blessed Trinity,” implying that the fullness of God isn’t complete until we become a part of it.[6]
Generally speaking, the concept of sin is abandoned or redefined, truth becomes relativized, and a mere martyr’s cross gives us a more palatable Jesus who is a great teacher, moral example, and doting BFF—but not the all-powerful warrior King who will one day return in a blood-dipped robe to judge the living and the dead. (Revelation 19:13; 2 Timothy 4:1)
5. Universalism
Former New Ager and now Christian believer Steven Bancarz noted that New Age proponents affirm the idea that all roads lead to God. He wrote:
The New Age movement holds tightly to religious pluralism and universalism, which isthe view thatall religions are inspired by a common Source and they all point to the same truth that we will one day reach, regardless of what path we choose to get there.
Many Progressive Christian authors affirm some form of universalism—implicitly, by denying the concept of a literal hell, or explicitly, by declaring that all people will be reconciled to God, regardless of their beliefs or religious practices.
The concept of universal reconciliation (that Jesus will reconcile all sinners to Himself,) was smuggled into the mainstream consciousness of the Evangelical church through the wildly popular 2007 book, The Shack. Years later, its author, William Paul Young, confirmed his intention in his book, Lies We Believe About God. He wrote, “Are you suggesting that everyone is saved? That you believe in universal salvation? That is exactly what I am saying!”[7]
None of this is new. Throughout church history these ideas have emerged again and again. They are old pagan dogmas recycled as new and edgy ideas, dressed up in modern garb and given a Christian make-over. Trevin Wax put it perfectly on Twitter:
One of the insufferable aspects of heretics and heresies is how boring, predictable, and recycled they are. Orthodoxy is thrilling in its holding together of paradox and mystery. Heresies are narrow because they’re tailored to their times.
Progressive Christians may think they are being cutting-edge and relevant by stepping outside the bounds of orthodoxy, but in reality, they are simply falling for the ideology that has kick-started every false religion since the fall of man: “They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator” (Romans 1:25).
It is no less damning if the “creature” is….yourself.
References:
[1] Schucman, Dr. Helen (2007-12-25). A Course in Miracles Foundation for Inner Peace. Kindle Edition. Lesson #259
[3]A Course in Miracles is a collection of spiritual revelations recorded by Columbia University Professor Helen Schucman. She dictated messages from an entity she called “the Voice,” that she later identified as “Jesus Christ.”
[4] McLaren, Brian (2011-2-1) A New Kind of Christianity, Harper One; Reprint edition p. 50
[5] Schucman, Dr. Helen (2007-12-25). A Course in Miracles Foundation for Inner Peace. Kindle Edition. Lesson 70
[6] Rohr, Richard. The Divine Dance: The Trinity and Your Transformation (Kindle Location 1255). Whitaker House. Kindle Edition.
[7] Young, William Paul (2017) Lies We Believe About God, Atria Books p. 118
Alisa Childers is an American singer and songwriter, best known for being in the all-female Christian music group ZOEgirl. She has had a string of top ten radio singles, four studio releases, and received the Dove Award during her time with ZOEgirl. In later years, Alisa found her life-long faith deeply challenged when she started attending what would later identify as a Progressive Christian church. This challenge pushed Alisa toward Christian Apologetics. Today you can read, listen and watch Alisa’s work online as well as purchase her recently published a book on Progressive Christianity titled Another Gospel.
https://crossexamined.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Blog-2-cover-1.jpg12562400Guesthttps://crossexamined.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/ce_logo.pngGuest2021-03-17 12:00:162024-11-11 09:56:585 Ways Progressive Christianity and New Age Spirituality Are Kind of the Same Thing
Many may be surprised to find that knowledge is actually the foundation for faith in God.
A Blind Faith And God’s Hiddenness
Two common challenges to the truth of the Christian worldview are the seeming hiddenness of God and the accusation that Christianity requires a blind faith. Many people see the great amount of suffering in the world and in their own lives and wonder where God is and why He doesn’t seem to care to alleviate the suffering. Many skeptics also see Christians making claims about reality that are demonstrably false, and those people conclude that Christians’ faith is a belief despite evidence to the contrary- a blind faith.
The skeptic knows that there must be continuity between the present and the past (and the future) for us to reasonably believe that what happens in the present can be used to infer what has happened in the past (or make predictions about what will happen in the future). Armed with knowledge of the past, there is a solid, logical foundation to conclude something about the future. This also means that without knowledge of the past, there is no solid foundation to trust something with the present or the future.
This is how the skeptic believes they are being logical as they conclude that the Christian God is hidden (if not non-existent) and unfaithful, and how they also conclude that Christians’ faith is blind. Today, I want to take some time to show an understanding of the physical world will demonstrate that the skeptic has made a mistake in their reasoning to both conclusions about God’s supposed hiddenness and the supposed blind faith of Christianity.
Is Faith In God Really Blind?
Let us start with the very book that claims to accurately describe the Christian God: the Bible, and with the actions of this God: creation. If the Bible accurately describes the Christian God, then we have this series of arguments regarding faith in God for present and future experiences:
If the laws of physics are constant, then God’s character is constant (Jeremiah 33:25-26).
The laws of physics are constant.
If God’s character is constant, then His character can be trusted to be the same across all time.
God’s character is constant.
If God’s character has been faithful in the past, then His character will be faithful in the present and the future
God’s character has been faithful in the past.
Therefore, God’s character will be faithful in the present and the future.
This faith is a reasonable faith that is grounded in what we already know and have experienced. For the skeptic who wishes to claim that Christianity is an illogical and unreasonable faith, they must face in inconvenient reality: If they believe that Bible describes the Christian God, then it necessarily follows from Jeremiah 33:25-26 that the Christian God is faithful to His promises, and our trust in Him (faith) for present and future difficulties and sufferings is logically grounded in God’s past faithfulness through difficulties and sufferings. This means that our faith in God is a most logical faith.
What If The Laws of Physics Are Not Constant?
However, the soundness of the argument and our trust in the constancy of God’s character is dependent upon the reality of the constancy of the laws that govern the heavens and the earth (this universe). If these laws are not constant and have changed and if God is just as constant (the first premise in the argument), then God’s character can change. This means that if the laws of physics change, then God’s character changes, which necessarily implies that God’s promises can be rescinded, His faithfulness is laughable, and He is certainly not to be trusted.
If the skeptic were to deny constant laws of physics to avoid the conclusion that the Christian faith is a reasonable and logical faith, then they would suffer the logical consequence of the collapse of the entire scientific enterprise. While some (non-scientific) skeptics may be willing to live with this logical implication, many would be unwilling to do so. But they would be unwilling to do so at the cost of logical consistency. Because consistency is a necessary feature of logic and because reality is consistent, both logic and reality are abandoned with such a philosophical move.
When logic and reality are abandoned, though, all we have is a delusion guided by blind faith. Ironically, it is the skeptic who would refuse to surrender knowledge of the natural world (the goal of the scientific enterprise), in order to avoid the logical conclusion of God’s faithfulness (or even His existence), who is the one committed to a delusion and blind faith. (See the post “6 Ways Atheism Is A Science-Stopper” for more details on this line of reasoning.)
Now, if the Christians were to deny constant laws of physics for whatever reason (see “Is Genesis History” for an example), they then would suffer the logical consequence of the collapse of God’s faithful character. For a Christian who denies the constancy of the laws of physics, yet affirms God’s faithfulness, they, like the skeptic, do so at the cost of logical consistency- an abandonment of reason. Again, when logic and reason are abandoned, all that is left is a blind faith. And in a second move of irony, the skeptic who complains about a Christian’s blind faith does so only while affirming their own blind faith. (See the post “How Naturalism Defeats Science As A Knowledge Discipline“).
Interestingly, when the skeptic looks at the beliefs of Christians who deny the constancy of the laws of physics, they have an excuse for believing that the Christian faith is a blind faith; however, if the skeptic examines nature, they have no such excuse (Romans 1). So, if we bring together the idea that the Bible accurately describes the Christian God and the idea that the laws of physics are constant, then we have the conclusion that trust in the Christian God is necessarily a reasonable faith.
God’s Hiddenness
But how does this address the idea of God’s apparent hiddenness? If God has been faithful in the past, then it necessarily follows that He will be faithful in the future. As we read through the Bible, we see time after time that God has been faithful despite the sufferings. As Christians get older they often look through their lives and see how God has carried them through their sufferings and has remained faithful to them through the process. We have testimonies of God’s past faithfulness despite suffering from people of the ancient past (the Bible), the recent past (writings of past Christians in history), the present (friends, family, and the rest of the current Church), and even in our own personal lives. It is through his knowledge—this strong body of evidence of God’s past faithfulness and the constancy of God’s character evidenced by the scientific study of the natural realm—that we know that God is being faithful now and will be faithful in the future. Even if we cannot “see” how God is working right now, we can be assured that He is at work and our trust in Him is properly and reasonably placed.
Recommended resources related to the topic:
Why Science Needs God by Dr. Frank Turek (DVD andMp4)
Science Doesn’t Say Anything, Scientists Do by Dr. Frank Turek (DVD,Mp3, andMp4)
Oh, Why Didn’t I Say That? Does Science Disprove God? by Dr. Frank Turek (DVD andMp4)
https://crossexamined.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Blog-1-cover.jpg12562400Guesthttps://crossexamined.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/ce_logo.pngGuest2021-03-15 18:30:482024-11-11 09:58:11From Laws of Physics to Reasonable Faith
Only in the twisted ethos of today’s Christian Left is a maskless man considered a cold-hearted murderer, while an abortionist is celebrated as a heroic social justice warrior. With seemingly no regard for the scales of justice, the spiritually ‘woke’ Democratic Party is willfully bending the rules of right and wrong to favor their own ethically bankrupt agenda and to ensure it triumphs in the state — no matter the cost. Although they claim to be religiously devout, the Left ignores natural law and has abandoned the Judeo-Christian foundations on which our nation is built.
Arguments from Silence
Responding on TikTok to the question of “Isn’t the Bible against abortion,” a self-identifying “queer lady pastor” answers, “No, not really. The Bible doesn’t say much. Jesus definitely doesn’t say anything [about abortion].” Using what is referred to in philosophical and historical analysis as an argument from silence, this female TikTok pastor attempts to reject the notion that Christianity necessitates a pro-life position due to her claims that the Bible fails to mention abortion. Arguments from silence offer notoriously poor reasoning and little logical proof for her cause.
Although they claim to be religiously devout, the Left ignores natural law and has abandoned the Judeo-Christian foundations on which our nation is built.
For instance, suppose in the next Super Bowl a receiver gets behind the coverage and Tom Brady hits him in stride. As the receiver sprints toward the end zone, the beaten defender pulls out a gun and shoots him in the back five yards short of the goal line. Imagine the uproar if after the referees confer among themselves regarding a flag on the play for pass interference, the final call were presented as, “Upon further review, since nowhere in the rule book does it explicitly say that you can’t shoot a player at the five-yard line, we’re going to assume the commissioner approves of the defender’s freedom to choose. The play stands as called.”
While the rulebook might not explicitly mention that the murder of another player is against the rules, everyone in the stands possesses an innate knowledge that such behavior is not only against the rules — it’s a crime against humanity!
Obvious Sophistry
The Christian Left might claim to be very “devout,” but such reasoning demonstrates, much like the referees in the example on the field above, that they aren’t fit to determine right from wrong. It is as if they pretend not to know what the rule book says about the most important matter of the law — the protection of life — and then assume, contrary to the evidence, that God supports their egregious behavior.
This kind of reasoning is obvious sophistry.
While it’s true that the Bible doesn’t explicitly mention abortion, this doesn’t at all mean that it’s permitted. Even a brief glance at the scriptures reveals that it was unthinkable to the God-fearing Hebrews to kill a child (children were a blessing from the Lord) and abortion was already prohibited by the 10 Commandments (i.e. “You shall not murder.”) Likewise, the Bible doesn’t explicitly mention felony home invasion either, but it is already prohibited by “You shall not steal.” You have to be willfully blind to think otherwise.
Self-appointed Referees
Religious conservatives understand that the primary role of government is to protect its citizens from evil. Government is not commanded to insert itself in every aspect of life or provide services that individuals normally do (the government may do those things, but that’s not its primary charge). Paul writes, government “rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.”
Ironically, the Left, as the self-appointed referee of morality, eagerly embraces this role to punish the wrongdoer by assuming they themselves — and not scripture, natural law, or the Constitution — are able to define what is wrong and what is right. Take for instance calls from the Left recently to pressure cable providers to “punish” conservative media outlets by removing them from their platforms. Rather than protecting the unborn or defending First Amendment rights, the Left is busy silencing and fighting free speech!
Promoting Evil
With their support for government-paid abortion, the Left is actually promoting evil. After all, what could be a greater evil than murder? Rulers who don’t want to prevent a murder — and actually want to pay for it — are failing in their primary mission. That’s why being pro-life is a necessary, but not the only, condition for our vote. Being pro-life doesn’t necessarily qualify someone as a ruler, but being pro-abortion necessarily disqualifies them.
Likewise, religious progressives who elevate debatable and less critical issues to supreme importance, while simultaneously offering support of abortion, stand as co-conspirators in the deaths of the unborn. To the Christian Left, climate change trumps abortion, as if allowing the possibility of the river next to the stadium rising two inches a hundred years from now is a graver sin than allowing 800,000 babies to be murdered this year. Jesus would charge them, like he did the politicians of his day, with “neglecting the more important matters of the law.”
The Christian Left is Unleashing Chaos
The job of a good referee is not to affect the outcome of the game one way or the other, but to ensure the game is played fairly by the established rules. The rules are in place to allow fair competition among the players while protecting the players from unnecessary harm. One could imagine what would happen to the game of football if out-of-bounds were overlooked so that fans could walk on and off the field as pleased; if there were quotas on players based on sex and race; and if the players were fined based upon the penalties of their predecessors. It would be chaos. Yet, this is exactly what the left is doing to this country.
All of this is being sold by the Christian Left as some kind of biblical social justice. There is nothing just or biblical about abortion (the same could be said about illegal immigration and the redistribution of wealth). While we cannot question their good intentions, there is no doubt about their inevitable bad results.
If our nation hopes to recapture even a semblance of true justice, as well as our founding freedoms, we must reject the empty ethics of the Left, and revisit the spiritual and ethical guidelines found within our Judeo-Christian roots and the Constitution.
Editor’s note: Watch Frank Turek discuss these issues with Randy Robison on LIFE Today Live.
https://crossexamined.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Blog-1-cover-2.jpg12562400Frank Turekhttps://crossexamined.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/ce_logo.pngFrank Turek2021-03-14 18:00:432024-11-11 09:58:36The Christian Left: The New Referee of Morality?
As only the second Catholic to hold the office, President Joe Biden continued a nearly 70-year-old tradition by addressing America during the National Prayer Breakfast earlier this month. While Biden is far from the first Democrat to address the crowd, in the new era of the ascendant Christian left, much more is at stake. In years past, Democrats almost seemed comfortable being viewed as a faithless party. But since mid-terms are usually catastrophic for the party in power, Democrats must soon find a way to convince voting Christians that Jesus would look more like a liberal than a conservative.
In order for progressive ideology to gain a stronger foothold among the masses, Biden and the woke democratic party must do two things: One, they must create animosity toward conservatives and traditionalists who hold to biblical ideas regarding social issues, and two, they must create a sense of moral superiority by growing an elite group of people — namely the Christian left.
A ‘Woke’ Socialistic Agenda as a Christian Alternative
The left, unable to demonstrate moral superiority based upon traditional Judeo-Christian values, must attempt to pass a “woke” socialistic agenda as a more Christian alternative. That’s where progressivist priorities — such as government-run universal healthcare, climate change, and open borders — are ostensibly a nod to Christian charity (as long as you only pay attention to the intent and not the results).
Animosity is fostered by tarring half the electorate with the political extremism that carried out the Capitol riot. The left insists that anyone associated with Trump, including evangelicals, must be immoral and evil (important note: this judgment does not apply to anyone associated with the hundreds of riots in 2020). By never letting a good crisis go to waste, the Christian left is using the Capitol crisis to sow doctrinal confusion and temporarily defend their position — as the keepers of true morality and righteousness — thus distracting from the truly anti-biblical agenda of the democratic party, namely abortion rights and the destruction of the biological two-parent family.
Distraction and Deception
Distraction is the key to accomplishing leftist goals — to hijack anything, you need to distract (and deceive). Progressive Christians distract by using moralistic-sounding language while redefining the words with leftist definitions. For example, the very word “progressive” sounds good, yet it assumes some kind of moral progress. Progress toward what? An ultimate standard of good? Such a standard can only exist if God exists. Without being “endowed by our Creator,” all talk of rights (and wrongs) are reduced to mere human opinion.
But if progressive Christians are truly progressing toward God’s standard, then why do they continually support policy positions that are clearly contrary to His standard — a standard known clearly through natural law (“we hold these truths to be self-evident”) and Scripture?
They do what many with a bad case do. They distract and deceive by not only redefining the standard but redefining the moralistic sounding words they use to sell the new standard. We might say that they come as an “angel of light.” Here are a few examples.
Freedom to Choose
Who can be against freedom and choice? No one, unless you ask them to complete the sentence. Freedom to choose what, murder? Should we have the freedom to rape and choose slaves too? And why does a woman have the freedom to choose to kill her children, but not the freedom to choose where she sends them to school?
Inclusion, Tolerance, and Diversity
This sounds good as well. But it really means that every diverse viewpoint and behavior is to be heard and celebrated except those that do not agree with the left. God-honoring viewpoints — like those held by Jesus and his apostles — will not be tolerated. Ironically, in the name of “inclusion tolerance and diversity,” the Christian left will exclude anyone agreeing with Jesus! (Forget the church — it’s the left that convicts people of heresy, and always without a trial.) And why do people call themselves Christians when they disagree with Jesus? Progressive Christian is an oxymoron.
Equality
Again, who can be against that? No one if it means the biblical and American ideals that we are all created as equal images of God, and that the law should not show favoritism but treat everyone equally. However, that’s not what the Christian (or secular) left means by equality. To the left, “equality” now means two things:
1) All sexual behaviors and gender identities must be embraced as normative (again contrary to the Bible and common sense), and anyone who disagrees will not be treated as an equal but cancelled; and
2) Everyone is entitled to the same outcome. (Equality of opportunity has become “equity” meaning equality of outcome.) Biden’s recent equity executive order flips the Bible and Martin Luther King on their heads. Instead of judging people on the content of their character, we are being ordered to judge people based on the color of their skin. Quotas and reverse discrimination are likely looming as agencies in the executive branch are pressured to find and correct inequities of outcome (not just opportunity). This despite the fact that the Bible does not command or predict equal outcomes (not even in Heaven!).
While we should strive for equal opportunity under the law, no society in history has ever produced equal outcomes among all groups. That’s because such outcomes are usually determined by several factors that can’t be equalized by the government, including talents, motivation, and personal behavior. In fact, Jesus contradicted the democrat insistence on equity when he said that talents (resources) would be taken from those that failed to use and grow them and given to those that did — even those who had more!
In our next column, we’ll cite a few more ways Christian leftists are attempting to hijack the Christian faith and expand their political influence.
https://crossexamined.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Blog-3-cover.jpg12562400Frank Turekhttps://crossexamined.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/ce_logo.pngFrank Turek2021-03-10 12:00:532024-11-11 09:59:41Progressive Ideology and the Hijacking of the Christian Faith
Christians can get so worked up over politics that they can sometimes blow their witness.
Sadly, this is something we see more frequently on social media. It seems like no matter what your political views are, someone will be offendedor will publicly attack you over your support of a candidate they feel is dangerous to the American way of life.
A big reason for Americans’ aggressive behavior is because their views run deep into what is referred to as “identity politics.” Politics is no longer about aligning with a specific political party. Nowadays, people’s political views are intertwined with their religion, race, ethnicity, sexuality, gender, and social or economic status.
If left to its own devices, identity politics can bring out the worst in people. That’s why Christians shouldn’t rush to placate political labels at church. It can send the wrong message and cause a rift with other church members.
Without question, the American church is at a crossroads between faith and politics, which is very disturbing.
So then, what can you do to overcome this contention and bring some clarity and unity back into the Christian community?
Well, for one thing, when you’re knee-deep in a discussion about politics, don’t let secondary issues impede your progress in finding common ground. It’s possible for Christians to have thoughtful debates over politics without biting each other’s heads off.
To avoid letting a conversation surrounding politics from getting too heated, follow these three steps:
Step number one, be cordial. Peter wisely states, “Show proper respect to everyone” (1 Pet. 2:17). It’s okay to critique the other person’s political views as long as you don’t turn into a disrespectful critic of their political party. Avoid getting defensive and cutting the other person off. Your ultimate objective is not to prove the other person wrong but to improve the relationship. No progress can occur if you’re not willing to show respect and listen to the other person.
Step number two, be biblical. Much of the time, political conversations consist of citing a political pundit to back up an opinion. You might be right positionally, but make sure your argument is based primarily on biblical truths rather than from sources that feed your ideological position. As a follower of Jesus Christ, make sure politics do not overshadow the gospel and doctrinal truths. In so doing, you will keep the main thing the main thing and find more important areas of agreement.
Step number three, be reasonable. If you love people and good ideas, you will spend adequate time sharpening your arguments and learning from others. As you debate with someone who holds to a dramatically different political opinion, you will want to be clear and logical when presenting your positions; while, at the same time, remaining teachable (see Phil. 4:5; Js. 3:7).
No matter how intense a political debate may get within the four walls of the church, make it your goal never to let politics ruin your relationships with your fellow brothers and sisters in Christ.
By applying these three steps, you are sure to have friendly interactions with those who don’t share your political views.
Jason Jimenez is the founder of STAND STRONG Ministries and faculty member at Summit Ministries. He is a pastor, apologist, and national speaker who has ministered to families for over twenty years. In his extensive ministry career, Jason has been a Children’s, Student, and College Pastor, and he has authored close to 10 books on topics related to apologetics, theology, and parenting.
https://crossexamined.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Blog-2-cover.jpg12562400Guesthttps://crossexamined.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/ce_logo.pngGuest2021-03-08 18:30:502024-11-11 10:00:05How To Be Friendly To People Who Oppose You Politically
After four years of accusing conservatives of violating the First Amendment by attempting to establish an American theocracy, the conclave of the Christian Left sent the ceremonial white smoke of affirmation through the metaphorical chimneys of our nation’s capital as The Times announced a more “religiously observant” neo-papacy, headed by none other than President Joe Biden, himself.
The Christian Left’s Theocracy and Hypocrisy
No longer identifying as simply Catholic or Christian, Biden’s deeply praised spirituality has adopted qualifiers, such as Liberal Christianity and Progressive Christianity, proving that the left takes no issue with an American theocracy, as long as democrats are able to exchange the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit, for the holy Marxist trinity of diversity, acceptance and social justice. In this America, President Biden’s pro-abortion beliefs are lauded as “steeped in Christian rituals and practices,” while simultaneously Leftists derogatorily refer to Amy Coney Barrett’s pro-life agreement with the Church as “dogmatic.” Contrary to what The Times says, Biden is not only, not “religiously observant” of the Church’s most important moral teachings, he denies them through his policies. In the new theocracy of the Christian Left, such Biblical defiance is not only desired, it is the very definition of devotion.
Biblical Defiance Required
Forget forgiveness of sins, repentance, and the cross. The new religion of the left initiates its members through forced acceptance of global warming, racism, and pro-abortive child sacrifice. Fueled by a nearly state-run liberal media, the Christian Left holds their new pope’s doctrines, ratified by cowardly executive orders, as infallible and the ultimate expression of not only faith but science, as they “solve” every problem from poverty to pollution. To deny their logic — that allows grown men in girl’s restrooms and invents more than 100 genders — is heretical and will land one in certain “ex-communication” from the church of the state through total political and financial cancellation. Severe offenders even risk being refused access to the left’s most divine sacraments, Twitter and Facebook. This new progressive theocracy considers it perfectly legitimate to be a card-carrying member of the Christian Left and still supports anti-biblical ideals, such as same-sex marriage and abortion, despite mountains of biblical evidence to the contrary. For the church of Biden, there are no contradictions here — after all, the archaic mumblings of biblical orthodoxy are no match in their minds for the religiously enlightened dogma of its past saints, like Darwin, Marx, and Obama, as well as the theocracy’s holy mother herself, Margaret Sanger.
Straining a Gnat, Swallowing a Camel
They assert that liberal Christians can not only overlook abortion, but they can celebrate it, because of the plethora of other pro-life issues that the Democrat party addresses, like universal healthcare, the dangers of global warming, and open borders. So it’s perfectly legitimate, they say, to be a progressive Christian and support politicians who are pro-abortion — after all, for the left, Biden’s Christianity is “less focused on sexual politics and more on combating poverty, climate change and racial inequality.”
Forget forgiveness of sins, repentance, and the cross. The new religion of the left initiates its members through forced acceptance of global warming, racism, and pro-abortive child sacrifice.
Except, of course, this isn’t true. Politics under Biden and the Christian Left have never been more sexualized, with an outright obsession with genders, a women’s right to choose, transgenderism, and introducing America’s children to drag queens. Apropos of Jesus’ rebuke of the religious and political leaders of his day, the Christian Left is nothing more than “blind guides,” who “strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.” Much like the Pharisees of scripture, today’s progressive Christians are majoring in the minors. For instance, we have “religiously observant” politicians telling us what light bulbs we can and can’t use, all while neglecting to shed light on the worst injustice imaginable — the senseless slaughter of the unborn — and even worse, all in the name of women’s reproductive rights! Christ-centric Christians know that this logic runs afoul of Jesus and common sense.
One Issue Disqualifiers
Now, none of this means that Christians should be one-issue voters. Being pro-life on the abortion issue doesn’t necessarily qualify someone as a good candidate. Christians and conservatives should also want their candidates to be strong on other issues as well (i.e. religious freedom, national defense, the economy, etc.). Understanding Jesus’s teaching means that we are not one-issue voters but we are one issue disqualifiers, that is when that issue shows complete disregard for human life. In other words, while being pro-life doesn’t necessarily qualify someone as a good candidate, being pro-abortion necessarily disqualifies someone as a good candidate.
In light of an “ascendant liberal Christianity,” true followers of Christ must learn to discern the difference between men who declare themselves gods, and a God who made himself man.
For this reason, a candidate’s position on abortion may very well be the best metric to determine if someone remains true to Christianity, as defined by scripture and natural law, or if they’ve joined the new theocracy of the Christian Left.
Support for Pro-Abortion Politicians and the True Christian
For those who still think it’s appropriate to support pro-abortion politicians, I have a few questions: Would you take the same position if the issue was not abortion but slavery? Would you reason, “There are other freedom issues that are important too, so it’s perfectly fine to support pro-slavery candidates”? Would you deny the moral importance of voting for Abraham Lincoln over Stephen Douglas? Would you gloss over the fact that Douglas not only wants to keep slavery legal, but he wants you, the taxpayer, to subsidize it? I doubt you would. Like Jesus, you would charge anyone making such a terrible case with “neglecting the more important matters of the law,” and as such, true Christians, whether Republican or Democrat, should do the same in Biden’s America. In light of an “ascendant liberal Christianity,” true followers of Christ must learn to discern the difference between men who declare themselves gods, and a God who made himself man.
Dr. Frank Turek is a faculty member with Summit Ministries, the president of CrossExamined.org and the co-author of I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist. He’s on Twitter at @DrFrankTurek.
https://crossexamined.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Blog-1-cover.jpg12562400Frank Turekhttps://crossexamined.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/ce_logo.pngFrank Turek2021-03-06 18:30:372024-11-11 10:00:28Pope Biden and the New Theocracy of the Christian Left
Essential doctrines of the Christian faith play a significant role in Christianity. Many people have lost their faith when they are asked about some core doctrine of Christianity by the people who oppose Christianity. Because our church has not thoroughly taught about essential doctrines of Christian faith they fail to encounter heresies and come to a conclusion thinking that they are believing in something that is not true. Many people in social media directly criticize the Christian faith and churches are not ready to answer their confusion as churches themselves are not sure about these doctrines. Here in this paper, I have elaborated on the essential doctrines of the Christian faith. I have addressed human depravity and sinlessness of Jesus, about humanity and divinity of Jesus, and lastly about his death and resurrection. I have also try to deal with some current issues faced by Christians when they are opposed by other religious people in the context of Nepal. Everything in this paper is written from the view of apologetics or evangelistic manner and every scripture is taken from the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) and if not they are cited.
1. Human Depravity
If one thinks that Jesus Christ is the only Saviour of humanity then we must be able to defend why we think it so. Biblical Christianity fully agrees that all human beings are born with sinful nature (Rom. 3:23, c.f. Ps.51:5). Though some people do good in some way in others they fail. But one must understand God didn’t create humans in this way. Adam and Eve who were the first human being created by God were perfect without sin (Gen.1:27-31). Chafer has put it in this way, “It fulfilled not only His purpose completely, but was a supreme satisfaction to HIM. Wherein moral issues were involved-as in the case of man-there could be no exception. Perfect holiness found no fault with that which He had wrought.”[1] They were created by God in His image and likeness (Gen.1:27). So, as God is perfect and the first humans were created in His image and likeness they were perfect. But when they disobeyed God they fall short of His glory and were prohibited to be in the Garden of Eden (Gen.3:23). While explaining about Rom.5:12 Grudem writes, “The context shows that Paul is not talking about actual sins that people commit every day of their lives, for the entire paragraph (Rom.5:12-21) is taken up with the comparison between Adam and Christ. And when Paul says ‘so [Gk. hutos, ‘thus, in this way’-that is, through Adam’s sin] death spread to all men because all men sinned,’ he is saying that through the sin of Adam ‘all men sinned’.”[2] This theory of original sin was coined up by Augustine of Hippo. “When Pelagius, whoever, pushed further the logic of free will and all but denied any effects of Adam’s fall (for him, men and women were born in the state of Adam prior to his fall, were free from his guilt and the pollution of his sin, only exposed to bad influence of his examples), Augustine took up the cudgels against him and for the first strong doctrine of sin.”[3] HippoHAs human being all came through Adam and Eve we inherited the sin of our ancestor.
But this view of creation and sin in Hinduism differs. According to book “Death an inside Story” by Sadhguru from the New York Times bestselling author conveys:[4]
Body is a composition of five sheaths which are Annamaya Kosha, Manomaya Kosha, Pranamaya Kosha, Vignanamaya Kosha, and Anandamaya Kosha. Here Annamaya Kosha means food body, Manomaya Kosha here comprises your thoughts, emotions and all the mental processes, both conscious and unconscious. Pranamaya Kosha refers to life energy which powers and drives th Annamaya and Manomaya Kosha. Fourth layer of the self Vignanamaya Kosha means extraordinary knowledge. Last is Anandamaya Kosha means bliss body which is beyond physical nature.
These are just components that human beings are made up of. About the concept of origin of human, “It was not a story of creation but an emanation from Brahma. In the Puranas, we have this story, “Brahma’s first human creations were saints, who, immediately upon being created fell into deep meditation, finding no interest in the things of the world. Thus, through them, Brahma saw no possibility of propagation of their species. While he was meditating upon what course he should pursue, his own form divided itself, one half became man and the other half became woman.”[5] Again if we look into the Law of Manu, Brahma is a creator but also a created being by self-existence Lord. Patrick Olivelle writes, “As he focused his thought with the desire of bringing forth diverse creatures from his own body, it was the waters[6] that he first brought forth; and into them he poured his semen. That became a golden egg, as bright as the sun; and in it he himself took birth as Brahma, the grandfather of all the worlds.”[7] And again we look deep in other religious book of Hindus Puranas gives us different explanation about creation. In this account, “when the time for creation comes a lotus sprouts from Vishnu’s navel and opens to reveal the god Brahma, who begins the process of creation.”[8] There is actual no clear vision and trustable account of creation. It differs from person to person. And mostly, it is unknown to majority of Hindu. People follow their inherited culture, and religion without any question.
Another most arguable matter is caste system in Hinduism and judgement of sin is determined by one’s social place and rank. “A Brahmin committing a crime, for instance will not be punished in any way as strictly as a Sudra (person of the servant class) would be for the same crime.”[9] They are punished by their act. Why people sin is answered in the Law of Manu. “As they are brought forth again and again, each creature follows on its own the very activity assigned to it in the beginning by the Lord. Violence or non-violence, gentleness or cruelty, righteousness (dharma) or unrighteousness (adharma), truthfulness or untruthfulness- whichever he assigned to each at the time of creation, it stuck automatically to that creature.”[10] So there is no proper account for sin coming in humanity or about its source but humans were created in that way. Again there is a concept of rebirth according to their deeds and punishment too. Even gods are not in unity in Hinduism and lust is seen clearly. “According to an ancient Saivite myth, he (Brahma) was born with five heads, when he became interested in Parvati[11] (wife of Siva), Siva consort, the latter chopped one of the Brahma’s heads off.”[12] There is no truth in the gods of Hinduism. Many are found lying, lusting cheating, and many more.[13] So, one must understand that there is no proper doctrine and sources that can be trusted. It has many sources that paradox each other in core value. Whereas Christianity is clear in their doctrine about creation and sin entering humanity and there is truth in God and is perfect in unity.
2. Sinlessness of Jesus
Another significant essence of Christianity is the sinlessness of Jesus Christ. Many people in Nepal take Jesus as another god among many gods. As I was Hindu too I knew about the concept of incarnation in Hinduism which differs vastly from Christianity. People in Nepal accept Jesus as god-like other gods of Hindu but as only God or only way to the Father is resisted strictly. Incarnation (Avatara) is mostly done by Visnu. As Lochtefeld explained it this way, “Hindu draws a distinction between full avatars, which have the complete have the complete power of the deity, and partial incarnations, or anshavatras.”[14] Full deity in Hinduism doesn’t come to earth but his/her part that comes having his/their attributes in it. The Bhagavadgita explains that the Supreme One comes down to earth whenever dharma is in danger, to save the good and to destroy the wicked.[15] This core teaching differs in Christianity where Jesus came to save the lost because sick needs doctor not healthy people (Lk.19:10 c.f. Mk.2:17). We must understand this sin in Hinduism and Christianity though differs in some extent but are same. Lying, pride, ignorance, lusting, murder and so on are considered by both as sin and violation to God. So if that the case then we must understand we need saviour who came to save not to destroy the wicked because we all some who have one of these sin in us. Jesus is a perfect saviour of humanity as His character and essence fits perfectly to save the one who are lost.
2.1 Virgin Birth of Jesus
As predicted in Old Testament about virgin birth of Jesus (Isa.7:14), New Testament Christian paid with their life as they preferred to die then to forsake their faith in Jesus. This is very strong and one must critically evaluate that a people doesn’t give their lives if everything told by Jesus as written New Testament were false. Virgin birth which sounds awkward to the listener to this age was the same in New Testament time also. He was blamed to be an illegitimate child. Two gospel affirms us clearly about the account of the virgin birth (Matt.1:18-25; Lk.1:34-35; cf.3:23). According to Grudem, there three critical doctrinal implication of the virgin birth:[16]
It shows that salvation ultimately must come from the Lord.
The virgin birth made possible the uniting of full deity and full humanity in one person.
The virgin birth also makes possible Christ’s true humanity without inherited sin.
These characteristics made Jesus perfect for the sacrificial lamb who lived a life that was worthy of praise. Though the concept of virgin birth sounds awkward, still the writer of the gospels dared to write it because it is true.
2.2 Jesus Lived a Life without Sin
Jesus was born without the inherited sin as he was born from Virgin Mary but he also lived a life that no contemporary authorities were able to find any fault in Him (Lk.23:4; cf. Matt.27:1-2,11-26). Though he was tempted by Devil he didn’t commit any kind of sin in His lifetime (1Pet.2:22; 1Jn.3:5; 2Cor.5:21). Krishna as compared many times with Jesus had 16,108 wives with him in his palace and used to visit them taking 16,108 forms once at a time.[17] About the comparison between the two one can’t randomly claim Jesus to be an incarnation Krishna as claimed by Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, founder of Rama Krishna Mission. He said, “Wherever I look I see men quarreling in the name of religion…but they never reflect that he who is Krishna is also called Siva, and bears the name of Primitive Energy, Jesus and Allah as well- the same Rama with a thousand names.”[18] This is claim is alleging because of Jesus’ statement to be the only way, the truth, and the life (Jn16:6). His claims are outstanding that no one before and after claimed to be so. Jesus lived a life that one can read and scripture doesn’t contradict each other like in other religions. He lived a blameless life while he was on this earth.
3. Humanity and Divinity of Jesus
The combo of humanity and the divinity of Jesus makes him a unique savior. He was and is 100% man and 100%God. Humanity and divinity of Christ are seen in the account of the gospels and even in other NT books or epistles. Disciples witness his humanity as they lived with him while he was on this earth.
3.1 Humanity of Jesus
Jesus was born of a woman (Gal.4:4). He grew like any other human being (Lk.2:16; Matt.2:11; Lk.2:42-50). He had brothers and sisters and even relatives (Mk.6:3; Jn7:5; Lk.1:36). He had human emotions (Jn.11:35; cf.Heb.5:7). He felt hungry, thirsty, and everything that a simple man faces. Apostle John writes in his epistle, “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched–this we proclaim concerning the Word of life”(1 Jn.1:1). There is no doubt that Christ was human fully and his divinity is claimed by him and also by his followers prominently.
3.2 Divinity of Jesus
The divinity of Jesus is claimed by Him in the gospels account and proclaimed fearlessly by his followers. Personally, for me, two verses are very crucial and significantly portray Jesus to be God. First is in the gospel according to John where He asserted, “Before Abraham was, I AM” which is the first revelation of God’s personal name to Moses in Exodus 3:14 as YHWH. YHWH is only with constant and later Jewish added and made Yahweh. Jesus was killed as He claimed to be the Son of God for which Jewish crucified Him. Jewish knew what He was claiming and Jesus was not making a statement as we make as children of God. His claim was equal to God or God himself as the second person in Godhead. Second is the confession of Thomas the doubter in John20:28 where he says, “oh my Lord, oh my God.” In the original text, it’s “ho Kurios mou, kai ho theos mou”.[19] It is peculiar because he doubted the very deity of Christ. He knew Jesus is dead. When he touched the wound that Jesus had, he now knew He is the same Jesus who died on the cross and gave this profound statement. Again in many other accounts, Jesus accepted worship which only was given to God (Matt.8:2), He forgave the sin of paralytic man and rigid His claim by healing him (Mk.2:1-12). Lastly, as we see the martyrdom of Disciples of Christ, they paid with their life as they knew He is God. Justin Martyr said, “You can kill us, but cannot do us any real harm.”[20] They knew that they will be killed but still they didn’t forsake Christ and didn’t accept Caesar to be their Lord. Apostle Peter and Paul were killed during the reign of Nero.[21] They died as they knew that Jesus is God. It is well said by Foster while writing about Confessors and Martyrs, “Behind the use of these two words is the idea that the most convincing way of saying, ‘I believe in Jesus Christ’, is by being ready to die for Him.”[22] They gave up their life for the sake of Gospel and they were not lunatics to do so.
As Jesus is God-man He is perfect saviour who died for us as sinless human paying propitiation to God the Father. He being man is able to reach man and being God is able to reach God. And his attributes and claims are not seen or claimed by any other religious leaders’ world views.
4. Death and Resurrection of Jesus
Death and resurrection of Jesus are very significant in Christendom. If he didn’t die or stayed dead then the faith of Christian is futile. The death of Jesus was not man-made as we have enough pieces of evidence that are the primary source to prove the authenticity of this matter. And not only Christians claim this but this event was also recorded by other secular historians.
4.1 Prove of the Death of Jesus
The crucifixion of Jesus is central to Christian doctrine or theology. There is evidence of eyewitnesses that testify about the event of the crucifixion. Lockyer writes, “One-third of Matthew, one-third of Mark, and one-fourth of Luke are devoted to the account of His death, and one-half of John’s gospel to the last twenty-four hours of Christ’s life. One-third of the material in the four gospels has to do with the events of the last weeks of His life.”[23] All the Gospels and all the Epistles either state or assume the fact of Jesus’ death (cf. Matt.27:32-66; Mk.15:21-47; Lk.23:25-55; Jn.19:16-42; Rom.5:6; I Cor.15:3; II Cor.5:15; Rev.5:9). There are some extra-Biblical sources also that prove that Jesus was crucified. “Christus…suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilate,” says Cornelius Tacitus.[24] The Jewish historian Josephus of the time of Christ, Julius Africanus (ca.22), Greek writer Lucian, The Letter of Mara Bar-Serapion (ca. AD 73), Roman writer Philegon and many more also wrote about it.[25] He was the Roman Historian not even a Christian but writes about the fact that Christ died. The death that Jesus died was very torturous. Brown writes about it saying, “Death came slowly after extraordinary agony, probably through exhaustion or suffocation. The body could be left on the scaffold to rot or provide food for predatory animals and carrion-crows. There is evidence that the body was occasionally given to relatives or acquaintances.”[26] So Jesus did die on the cross and it was with great agony.
4.2 Reasons for the Death of Jesus Christ
One must understand that the death of Jesus is not mythology created by His disciples but a fact that is supported by solid data written by both Christian and secular historians and writers of the New Testament. So if he died on the altar of the cross then we must raise a question, why he did so? To understand this clearly, we must know about the depraved condition of humanity which I have already dealt with, and about the attributes of God. Grudem while writing about the cause of the Atonement writes, “And here Scripture points to two things: the love and justice of God. The love of God as a cause of the atonement is seen as God gave His one and only Son (Jn. 3:16). But the justice of God also required that God find a way that penalty due to us for our sins would be paid. Paul explains that this way why God sent Christ to be ‘propitiation’ (Rom.3:25 NASB): it was to show God’s righteousness because in His divine forbearance He had passed over former sins.”[27] Death of Jesus completes or fills the need of both sides.
As we have seen in Human depravity that all human beings are sinful and this brings consequences of both physical and spiritual death. God being perfect in holiness and a person with sin is not able to reach to God. Again God didn’t forgive the sin of Adam and Eve because it would have defiled His justice. So God in perfect time sends His Son who was without sin to die for sinful people like us which in vice allow us to come to God again and His justice is also not defiled.
4.3 The resurrection of Jesus Christ
The resurrection of Jesus Christ is very prominent because if He was not raised from the dead then Christianity could not have been unique in its account because there were and are many who claim to be God or came from God. There were and are many peopling who deny the resurrection of Christ. But there are many evidences that prove the physical resurrection of Jesus. They are as follows:
4.3.1 Eye Witness Account about the Resurrection of Christ
The Gospel contains abundant testimony to the resurrection of Christ (cf. Matt.28:1-20; Mk.16:1-8; Lk.24:1-53; Jn.20:1-21:25). Apostle Paul in his letter to Corinthians writes about the resurrection of Christ whom He died, raised, and appeared to many people (1 Cor.15:3-6). Paul was a person who tried to erase the very existence of Christianity who claimed that Jesus was raised from the dead. But when He encountered the glorified Christ on the way to Damascus (Acts 9:1-9) he started to preach it (Acts 9:1-9) and died for it. There were many people back then too who rejected the resurrection of Christ, like Apostle Thomas who doubted until he saw Him with wounds that were given to Him on the cross then accept Him as my Lord and my God (Jn.20:24-28). The resurrection of Christ has unambiguous evidence as we have the testimony of eye witness account as they doubted, examined, and they believed the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
4.3.2 Empty Tomb Tradition
All four gospel gives us an account of the tomb that was found empty (Matt.28:1-10; Mk.16:1-8; Lk.24:1-12; Jn.20:1-10). Quoting to Anderson, McDowell and Sterrett write:[28]
The empty tomb stands, a veritable rock, as an essential element in the evidence for the resurrection. To suggest that it was not in fact empty at all, as some have done, seems to me ridiculous. It is a matter of history that the apostles from the very beginning made many converts in Jerusalem, hostile as it was, by proclaiming the glad news that Christ had risen from the grave—and they did it within a short walk from the sepulchre. Anyone of their hearers could have visited the tomb and come back again between lunch and whatever may have been the equivalent of afternoon tea. Is it conceivable, then, that the apostles would have had this success if the body of the one they proclaimed as risen Lord was all the time decomposing in Joseph’s tomb? Would a great company of the priests and many hard-headed Pharisees have been impressed with the proclamation of a resurrection which was in fact no resurrection at all, but a mere message of spiritual survival couched in the misleading terms of a literal rising from the grave?
As Anderson said anyone could have visited the tomb of Jesus to counter-check the statement preached about the risen Christ. But many skeptics claim that body of Jesus was stolen by His disciples which are surely ridiculous because of the following reasons:
In all four Gospels, we read that Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb cut into a sock, and a large stone was rolled against the entrance.
Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea prepared Christ’s body for burial which if not dead they would have known (Jn.19:38-42).
In process of burial, the corpse was clothed in grave vestments made of white linen. This might weigh between 117 and 120 pounds. Josh and Sean McDowell quote John Chrysostom of fourth century AD, “myrrh used was a drug which adheres so closely to the body that the grave clothes could not easily be removed.”[29]
The tomb was guarded as Jewish Chief priests and Pharisees were panicked because Jesus claimed that He will rise again. They thought that disciples might steal Jesus’ body and claim that. So they requested Pilate and secured the tomb of Jesus (Matt.27:62-66).
The tomb was sealed (Matt.27:66). Josh and Sean quote A. T. Robertson, “the stone could be sealed only in the presence of the Roman guards who were left in charge. The purpose of this procedure was to prevent anyone from tampering with the grave’s contents”. After the guard inspected the tomb and rolled the stone in place, a cord was stretched across the rock and fastened at either end with sealing clay. Finally, the clay packs were stamped with the official signet of the Roman governor.[30]
There was no attempt or chance to do so because of the reason mentioned above. The tomb was indeed empty. Philosopher Stephen Davis observes, “Early Christian proclamation of the resurrection of Jesus in Jerusalem would have been psychologically and apologetically impossible without safe evidence of an empty tomb . . . in other words, without safe and agreed-upon evidence of an empty tomb, the apostles’ claims would have been subject to massive falsification by the simple presentation of the body.”[31] Disciples preached about the resurrected Christ without fear as they knew it to be true. And even there were many letters written to oppose the heretical teaching that Christ didn’t rise. Paul writes if Christ has not risen then our faith is futile (1 Cor.15:17).
Christianity claims about the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ have very solid evidence. He died for us as we by ourselves are unable to reach to God as He is holy (Lev.19:2). God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son so that nobody will perish but have everlasting life (Jn.3:16). Christianity is peculiar as in all other religions, we have to work for salvation and there is Karmic Tendency which we can’t overlap. Humans have to reach to gods. Jesus is the only one who is God but came to earth to human beings. He can save the sinner but others who claimed to be gods came to destroy the wicked. Jesus’ claims are proven by His acts. He said when He was on the earth it is fulfilled which were supposed to be fulfilled till now. His claim to be the only Way is true because of all the above-mentioned reasons.
5. Dealing with some question raised to Christian in Nepal
Is not Jesus the same as other gods?
As Nepalese people believe in polytheism, Jesus is just another god for them. People are influenced by movements like Ramakrishna who convey that every way leads to heaven. But this claim is not true because every religion in their fundamental teaching differs from each other. From an Islamic point of view, Allah is the only true God and all others are false. In Buddhism, there is no God. Even in Hinduism, though they say that every religion is the same, still they are against Islam and other religion strongly. And even Jesus claims to be the only way to Father. So one can’t say that Jesus is the same as other gods as they differ in core value to each other. Jesus’ claim to only way to Father is valid because His words match His life. He was born of virgin Mary, lived a sinless life, died on the cross for the sinner, got resurrected on the third day which was witnessed by five hundred plus people, and had ascension to heaven. And all these were prophesized before He was born. No one else in religion history has these peculiarities, so Jesus’ claim to be God is unique and true and He is not like other so-called gods.
Isn’t the Bible written by human beings?
Many people in Nepal tells Christian that the Bible is also like other religious books which are written by human beings. Yes, the Bible is also written by human beings but it was inspired by God which is the significant claim that only Christianity makes. There are 66 books, 40 authors, overs 1500 years of period, and 3 continents where it was written but still, it has only one follow and theme. No other religious books are so interrelated to reach others though they are just a single book. About the reliability of the Bible historically, there are nearly 5,700 known partial and complete Greek Manuscript copies of the New Testament and are very ancient. If one adds into the mix over 10,000 Latin Vulgate manuscripts and at least 9,300 other early version-including Syriac, Ethiopic, Slavic, Gothic, Armenian, and other versions-the total approximate 25,000 manuscripts that cite portions of the New Testament. This far exceeds the number of manuscripts available of other ancient documents, which, in most cases number less than ten copies. Bible is reliable and fully trustworthy, human written but inspired by God.
Some Christians or pastors do wrong and the whole of Christianity is blamed.
Many times people blame whole Christianity when they see some Christians or pastors doing wrong. They point to those people and say look if Christianity was true then they shouldn’t have done this. This is very sad of people that they blame the whole Christianity of some peoples act. One can’t say that family is bad if a son or father or a member of the family does wrong. We can’t judge anything from outside. When I confront these kinds of people I simply ask for forgiveness because it is true that many Christian and even pastor are wicked but still Christianity is true. Christians do agree that some Christians have defiled themselves but Jesus is perfect in every way. Bible never claims that Christians will be perfect. It writes to forgive each other when some sins and help them to come near to God again. There is the concept of forgiveness in Christianity which is significant. Yes, we do find some Christian who have lost their characteristics that Jesus demands but that doesn’t apply Christianity to be false. We don’t preach about Christians or pastor but about Jesus Christ. He was born with sin and lived a life without sin who was crucified for our sin and was raised from dead witnessed by many. He is the only savior of humanity and no one before Him or after Him is like Him.
Jesus was crucified because he was rebellious.
Abhishek Joshi is one of the lead opponents of Christian in Nepal. He posts many videos on YouTube[32] that opposes Christianity. He says that Jesus was crucified because He was a rebel. Joshi also says that Jesus misinterpreted OT saying that He is Savoir and God of OT and even His disciples did the same. And the Bible is written in the 4th Century AD. Finally, close it up by criticizing Christian misinterpret Bhagavad Gita[33] claiming that Jesus is found there also.
Joshi doesn’t deny the crucifixion of Jesus. He right when he says crucifixion was meant for wrongdoers. Criticize Jesus for misinterpreting OT scripture is wrong. As Joshi quotes from Mark14:16 onwards where it seems like Jesus rebelled against Jews but we must not forget that Jesus also knew that they will kill Him for that sake. We won’t die for what we are not. Jewish priests of that time thought that Jesus is a hypocrite. Many disciples like Thomas thought that Jesus was just a prophet or man from God until he saw resurrected Jesus. Apostle Thomas was the person who came to India and preached about a Savior who died for our sin and got resurrected and there is no one like Him and died for that sake. All the disciples we tortured and were killed as they preached about resurrected Christ who is the only way to the Father. So, what about those disciples who died for the sake of the Gospel. They were not lunatic to do so. And about the reliability of NT, sources are very near to Jesus’ time. There is no doubt that He was crucified and the reason was that Jews Priest thought He was misinterpreting Scripture but the truth is that He died for our sin and He was raised which was witnessed by 500 plus people. Finally about misinterpreting Bhagavad Gita Christian should do that because we say it’s human written and again we try to prove Hindu scripture also show Jesus which contradicts our views.
Conclusion
Humans are depraved which is seen even in kids as they are jealous, lie, etc though Hinduism denial it. According to Hinduism, we are created in that way. Some chose to do wrong and some do right. Salvation or Nirvana for them and Buddhism is by doing good works and it’s not sure whether we will achieve it or not. Gods of Hinduism came to wipe wicked from the earth (only their part comes to earth) and save righteous people. But it is the opposite in Christianity. In Christianity, we are sinful people who are not able to work out for our salvation and can’t reach to God who is Holy. We needed a savior who is sinless and lived a life without sin. Savior who is 100% man so that He can reach to man and 100% God who can reach to God. Old Testament prophesied about His birth, the life He lived and death He encountered. God. Though many before Jesus and still claim to be God or came from God they are no equal to Jesus. He was crucified for our sin as written and was resurrected which was witnessed by many and we have evidence like empty tomb tradition. His claims are all true. Though people criticize Christianity about the validity or reliability of the Bible we have sources that are valid and reliable that support that the Bible is trustworthy. We have many ancient manuscripts that dated to the 1st century. We have the historical evidence that supports the life and crucifixion of Jesus Christ as written in the Bible and by other non-christian writers. All these things supports the claim of Jesus and He alone claimed these things and He is who He claims to be.
Bibliography
Brown, Colin. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (v. 1). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan Pub. House, 1975.
Brown, David A. A Guide to Religion. Delhi: ISPCK, 2018.
Bruce, F. F. Paul, Apostle of the Free Spirit. U.K.: Paternoster Digital Library, 2005.
Chafer, Lewis Sperry. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1993.
Curtis, Kenneth A., Stephen J. Lang, and Randy Petersen. The 100 Most Important Events in Christian History. Hyderabad: Authentic, 2012.
Davie, Martin. New Dictionary of Theology: Historical and Systematic. Illinois: Inter-Varsity Press, 2016.
Foster, John. The First Advance Church History AD 29-500. Delhi: ISPCK, 2018.
Geisler, Norman L. The Big Book of Christian Apologetics: An A to Z Guide. Grand Rapids, MI: Bakers Book, 2015.
Grudem, Wayne A. Bible Doctrine: Essential Teachings of the Christian Faith. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 2014. Accessed October 18, 2020. http://rbdigital.rbdigital.com.
Grudem, Wayne A. Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine. Leicester, England : Grand Rapids, Mich: Inter-Varsity Press ; Zondervan Pub. House, 1994.
Jones, Constance, and James D. Ryan. Encyclopedia of Hinduism. Encyclopedia of world religions. New York: Facts On File, 2007.
Joshi, Abishek. Reasons of Jesus Christ Crucified, 2019. Accessed November 2, 2020. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-mCC3BWvL4&ab_channel=GohiraTV.
Klostermaier, Klaus K. A Survey of Hinduism. 3rd ed. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2007.
Lochtefeld, James G. The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Hinduism. 1st ed. New York: Rosen, 2002.
Lockyer, Herbert. All the Doctrines of the Bible. Hyderabad: Authentic, 2012.
Manu, Patrick Olivelle, and Suman Olivelle. Manu’s Code of Law: A Critical Edition and Translation of the Manava-Dharmasastra. South Asia research. Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.
McDowell, Josh, and Sean McDowell. Evidence for the Resurrection: What It Means for Your Relationship with God. Ventura, Calif: Regal Books, 2009.
McDowell, Josh, and Dave Sterrett. Did the Resurrection Happen– Really? A Dialogue on Life, Death, and Hope. Coffee house chronicles 3. Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2011.
Pardillo, Urbano L. “Christianity and Hinduism on Human Existence.” Accessed October 18, 2020. https://www.academia.edu/9022229/CHRISTIANITY_AND_HINDUISM_ON_HUMAN_EXISTENCE.
Vasudev, Jaggi. Death: An inside Story : A Book for All Those Who Shall Die. Haryana: Penguin Random House, 2020.
Witherington, Ben. New Testament History: A Narrative Account. Grand Rapids, Mich: Baker Academic [u.a.], 2001.
Zacharias, Ravi. New Birth or Rebirth? Jesus Talks with Krishna. 1st ed. Colorado Springs, Colo: Multnomah Books, 2008.
“John 20:28 Interlinear: And Thomas Answered and Said to Him, ‘My Lord and My God;’” Accessed October 21, 2020. https://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/20-28.htm.
[2] Wayne A Grudem, Bible Doctrine: Essential Teachings of the Christian Faith (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 2014), 307, accessed October 18, 2020, http://rbdigital.rbdigital.com.
[3] Martin Davie, New Dictionary of Theology: Historical and Systematic (Illinois: Inter-Varsity Press, 2016), 328.
[4] Jaggi Vasudev, Death: An inside Story : A Book for All Those Who Shall Die (Haryana: Penguin Random House, 2020), 49–51.
[5] Urbano L Pardillo, “Christianity and Hinduism on Human Existence,” accessed October 18, 2020, https://www.academia.edu/9022229/CHRISTIANITY_AND_HINDUISM_ON_HUMAN_EXISTENCE.
[6] Water is Nara here who is god Narayana in Hinduism.
[7] Manu, Patrick Olivelle, and Suman Olivelle, Manu’s Code of Law: A Critical Edition and Translation of the Manava-Dharmasastra, South Asia research (Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press, 2005), 87.
[8] James G. Lochtefeld, The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Hinduism, 1st ed. (New York: Rosen, 2002), 157.
[9] Constance Jones and James D. Ryan, Encyclopedia of Hinduism, Encyclopedia of world religions (New York: Facts On File, 2007), 323.
[10] Manu, Olivelle, and Olivelle, Manu’s Code of Law, 88.
[17] Ravi Zacharias, New Birth or Rebirth? Jesus Talks with Krishna, 1st ed. (Colorado Springs, Colo: Multnomah Books, 2008), 49.
[18] David A. Brown, A Guide to Religion (Delhi: ISPCK, 2018), 74–75.
[19] “John 20:28 Interlinear: And Thomas Answered and Said to Him, ‘My Lord and My God;,’” accessed October 21, 2020, https://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/20-28.htm.
[20] Kenneth A. Curtis, Stephen J. Lang, and Randy Petersen, The 100 Most Important Events in Christian History (Hyderabad: Authentic, 2012), 19.
[21] F. F Bruce, Paul, Apostle of the Free Spirit (U.K.: Paternoster Digital Library, 2005), 435.
[22] John Foster, The First Advance Church History AD 29-500 (Delhi: ISPCK, 2018), 49.
[23] Herbert Lockyer, All the Doctrines of the Bible (Hyderabad: Authentic, 2012), 50.
[24] Ben Witherington, New Testament History: A Narrative Account (Grand Rapids, Mich: Baker Academic [u.a.], 2001), 156.
[25] Norman L Geisler, The Big Book of Christian Apologetics: An A to Z Guide (Grand Rapids, MI: Bakers Book, 2015), 109.
[26] Colin Brown, The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (v. 1) (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan Pub. House, 1975), I–393.
[27] Wayne A. Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Leicester, England : Grand Rapids, Mich: Inter-Varsity Press ; Zondervan Pub. House, 1994), 492.
[28] Josh McDowell and Dave Sterrett, Did the Resurrection Happen– Really? A Dialogue on Life, Death, and Hope, Coffee house chronicles 3 (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2011), 66.
[29] Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, Evidence for the Resurrection: What It Means for Your Relationship with God (Ventura, Calif: Regal Books, 2009), 167.
[32] Abishek Joshi, Reasons of Jesus Christ Crucified, 2019, accessed November 2, 2020, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-mCC3BWvL4&ab_channel=GohiraTV.
https://crossexamined.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Blog-3-cover-1.jpg12562400Guesthttps://crossexamined.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/ce_logo.pngGuest2021-02-17 23:12:012024-11-11 10:02:52Defense of Essential Christian Doctrine in the Religious Pluralistic Context of Nepal
