By Luke Nix

Introduction

If you consume a large portion of your material through audio, it is hard to get past a good deal on an excellent audiobook. Twice every year ChristianAudio.com runs a sale on most of their collection, and you can usually pick up these great audio resources for $7.49. The time has come for the first sale of 2021 (and beyond), so I will be highlighting some of my favorite audiobooks. I’ll include a few of my favorite quotes from the books, my recommendation from my chapter-by-chapter reviews, links to posts that were inspired by the books, and, of course, I will include links to the audiobook deal throughout the article. Today, I am highlighting Improbable Planet: How Earth Became Humanity’s Home by Dr. Hugh Ross.

Improbable Planet by Hugh Ross– My Recommendation

Improbable Planet: How Earth Became Humanity’s Home is the highly anticipated “sequel” to Dr. Hugh Ross’ book Why The Universe Is The Way It Is. In the first work, Dr. Ross examined several biblical purposes God has for this creation and how these purposes are evidenced in the history of the universe. In this new book, Dr. Ross zooms in from the perspective of the entire universe and multiple purposes to the earth and God’s purpose of redemption. Dr. Ross’ goal in this volume is to demonstrate how the history of our planet is not merely some naturalistic “just-so story” but rather a complex, multi-stage project with an explicit purpose as its end-goal. He intends to marshal the latest scientific discoveries from numerous scientific disciplines to make his case for the design of our planet.

It is an amazing listen. I work with several project managers at my job, and they have shown me representations of the schedules of their various projects. These include the necessary order of numerous steps, deadlines for the steps, the goals of each step, and the final purpose. Many of the steps must be done together and within certain time periods; otherwise, the project will fail. If you have ever mapped out a project or have seen one mapped out, you may be familiar with Gantt charts and how complex they can be. As I was only a couple chapters into this book, I could not help but imagine the incredible complexity behind the project that God planned and executed perfectly to accomplish His purposes. The projects that I have seen at work do not compare to the project that was our planet. If it is reasonable to think that the smaller and less complex projects at work were the product of designers, then it is even more reasonable to understand the project that was our planet is the product of a Designer.

Dr. Ross skillfully brings numerous discoveries of numerous disciplines of science together to give the big picture of the project of our planet. He then shows from the Bible what the end purpose was, and how it all comes together into a cohesive worldview that ends with Christian evangelism. He shows how God did not merely start the process at the big bang and wait for natural processes to eventually and accidentally complete each step. Rather God initiated each step at the earliest moment possible after the previous step was completed, and while certain steps were being completed, God was working on other necessary steps. Dr. Ross shows how it was necessary that each step be completed within precise boundaries and deadlines that, if crossed or missed, we would not exist.

Dr. Ross masterfully demonstrates God’s patient yet highly active execution of His cosmic project. The argument from design in this book is awe-inspiring scientifically and theologically. The way the argument is presented makes it nearly impossible to be intellectually dismissed, especially by those even remotely involved in engineering or project management. I highly recommend that all Christians pick up a copy of this book. It will give you a new appreciation for the creation and the power, care, patience, and love of our Creator and Savior. It will also give you a tremendous tool to discuss and defend the truth of the Christian worldview from the latest discoveries in the hard sciences.

I especially recommend this audiobook to Christian apologists interested in arguments from design. This book takes the teleological argument to the next level. It goes beyond just identifying the finely-tuned constants of the universe to show how, even within a finely-tuned universe, in order for the arrival of advanced life such as humans, the processes that formed the final site of advanced life had to be meticulously planned and actively guided. The argument in the book appeals directly to what is known about the necessity of a designer behind projects, and implied throughout the book is the exponentially decreasing probabilistic resources available to the naturalist to explain our existence. Scientists, every day, are discovering new features of the history of our planet that cry out for a purposeful explanation. Improbable Planet needs to be in your personal library and part of your collection of tools to defend the truth that God created this universe and us for a purpose: to redeem us through the death and bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ.

You can read the complete chapter-by-chapter summary review by clicking or tapping here.

Improbable Planet by Hugh Ross Favorite Quotes

“Only in a spiral galaxy is a long history of life possible. A spiral galaxy of the just-right size and the just-right structure can yield adequate heavy elements for life as well as a possible location where a planetary system can reside for billions of years without being exposed to deadly radiation and without gravitational disruptions from adjacent stars and molecular clouds.”

“The Local Group represents a rarity. As far as astronomers are able to see, the Local Group is the only grouping of galaxies wherein a host galaxy can sustain a planet on which a long history of diverse, complex, and abundant life is possible.”

“The list of rarities, all of which serve the eventual needs of long-enduring life, up to and including advanced civilization, starts with the [solar] system’s origin cluster and goes on to include its ejection from that cluster, the Grand Tack sequence, the Moon-forming event, the late veneer, the late heavy bombardment, the fifth planet’s timing, and jumping Jupiter. The existence and locations of our planetary system’s five asteroid and comet belts simply add to the already long list of features that must be in place before life can originate on Earth and possess any possibility of survival for a few billion years. The ‘coincidences’ compound with each new discovery.”

“Destructive mean motion resonances are nearly ubiquitous. As it is, Uranus is close to a 7:1 resonance with Jupiter, a 2:1 resonance with Neptune, and a 3:1 resonance with Saturn. Meanwhile, Jupiter and Saturn are very close to a 5:2 resonance. If any of these gas giant planets’ orbital positions were to shift even slightly, that shift would generate instabilities in the orbit of one or more of the solar system’s eight planets. Such instabilities would shatter the possibility of a long history of life on Earth, a history leading to human life and civilization.”

“The conditions under which the Moon formed seem so unlikely, from a naturalistic worldview, as to defy credibility.”

“The ideal place for any kind of life as we know it turns out to be the solar system like ours, within a galaxy like the Milky Way, within a supercluster system like ours, within a galaxy like the Milky Way, within a supercluster of galaxies like the Virgo supercluster, within a super-supercluster like the Laniakea super-supercluster. In other words, we happen to live in the best, perhaps the one and only, neighborhood that allows not only for physical life’s existence but also for its enduring survival.”

“Ongoing research tells us that Earth has been shaped not only by an intricately orchestrated interplay of physical forces and conditions but also by its vast abundance and diversity of life-forms. By means that no depth and breadth of scientific research can explain, life arose early in Earth’s history under anything but the benign conditions it would seem to require and somehow persisted through multiple mass extinction events, always appearing or reappearing at just-right times and in just-right forms to meet the needs and demands of the revised environment.”

“Both plate tectonics and life must remain at certain levels at different times throughout the past 3.8 billion years so that the history of life and of plate tectonics will produce all the resources for humanity’s eventual existence and launch of global, technologically advanced civilization.”

“The great diversity and abundance established early in life’s history drove the carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, and sulfur cycles to levels eventually sufficient for the entry of advanced life. The sulfate-reducing bacteria played an especially critical role. Their metabolic reactions transformed much of the soluble metal resources in the oceans and crust into insoluble concentrated metal ore deposits. Thus, a potentially poisonous environment for advanced life became an optimal resource repository, one that would later allow humanity to quickly transition from Stone Age machinery and tools to metallurgy-based technologies.”

“Without abundant photosynthetic life, plate tectonic activity on Earth would have shut down relatively quickly, making the crust a stationary lid over anything and everything beneath it. Without plate tectonics, the removal of greenhouse gases from Earth’s atmosphere would have shut down. Without removal of greenhouse gases, the Sun’s increasing luminosity would have raised Earth’s surface temperature beyond what life can tolerate. Earth would have become permanently sterile.”

“Unless plate tectonics had become established as a sustained, aggressive, globally manifested phenomenon as early as 3.0 billion years ago, Earth’s surface might never have attained the necessary conditions for advanced life in the time window between the Late Heavy Bombardment and the Sun’s brightening to catastrophic levels.”

“Thanks to the long history of progressively more advanced life-forms, the mineral inventory in Earth’s crust grew from 250 minerals up to its present stock of 4,300 distinct minerals. Many of these minerals have made possible the technology and standard of living humanity enjoy today. Billions of years of life appearing in progressively more advanced forms also provided humanity with an enormous treasure chest of biodeposits. This treasure includes several feet of rich topsoil and humus (amorphous organic matter) on sedimentary plains all over Earth’s landmasses–essential for extensive, intensive cultivation. Earth’s long history of life and tectonic activity also laid down vast stores of fossil fuels and building materials. That history speaks of a rich endowment that built up over billions of years of speciation events, deaths, and extinctions, new speciation events, more deaths and extinctions, and more life.”

“When research runs head-on into nature’s limits only scientism, not science, would rule out consideration of any cause other than nature. At such places, to invoke the possibility of a power and intelligence beyond nature may be the most rational response.”

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Why Science Needs God by Dr. Frank Turek (DVD and Mp4)

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)

Stealing From God by Dr. Frank Turek (Book, 10-Part DVD Set, STUDENT Study Guide, TEACHER Study Guide)

 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Luke Nix holds a bachelor’s degree in Computer Science and works as a Desktop Support Manager for a local precious metal exchange company in Oklahoma.

Original Blog Source: https://cutt.ly/YnP2QRU

 

Pastor and author Lucas Miles joins Frank to discuss his new book, The Christian Left: How Liberal Thought Has Hijacked the Church.   Why has the church gone left?  Is the culture influencing the church rather than the church influencing the culture?  How should Christians respond to the following claims?

Jesus accepts everyone.

  • Jesus would never get in the way of the love between two people.
  • Jesus was a refugee.
  • Jesus accepts foreigners and strangers.
  • God doesn’t create walls that prevent us from coming to him.
  • People need to live their truth.
  • Some people are just born gay (or bi or transgender).
  • A real Christian accepts everyone.

Frank and Lucas also discuss where the right has gone wrong, and how Christians can get back to advocating the Truth.

If you want to send us a question for the show, please email us at Hello@CrossExamined.org.

Subscribe on iTunes: http://bit.ly/CrossExamined_Podcast Rate and review! Thanks!!!
Subscribe on Google Play: http://bit.ly/CE_Podcast_Google
Subscribe on Spotify: http://bit.ly/CrossExaminedOfficial_Podcast
Subscribe on Stitcher: http://bit.ly/CE_Podcast_Stitcher

 

By Alisa Childers

It’s happened to many of us. We post an encouraging Bible verse like Psalm 145:9 on Facebook: ” The Lord is good to all, and his compassion is over all his works .” At noon an atheist somewhere on social media finds the post and leaves a lovely comment:

Seriously? Your god is good? He’s so good and compassionate that he decided to literally drown the entire world in a flood? So good that he’s okay with slavery? That god? Yeah, that sounds amazing.

The person leaving comments like these probably isn’t looking for a real conversation, but they are a great example of the abundance of bad logic waiting to be discovered in the dark corners of cyberspace. Here are the 5 most illogical people you’ll find on the Internet, and how to spot their fallacies:

1. The Straw Man

How easy do you think it would be to take down a fake man made entirely of straw? It would be a lot easier than taking down a real man, that’s for sure. This happens in the world of social media disagreements – All-The-Time. The “Straw Man” is a fallacy where someone simplifies or misrepresents their opponent’s view (builds a straw man), and then argues against that false view (takes down the straw man). Straw men can often be found in discussions about abortion:

  • You : “I think there is good scientific evidence that life begins at conception.”
  • Straw Man : “You mean women should lose their rights and this country should be sent back to the 1950s? That’s ridiculous.”

You made a claim about scientific evidence, not about women’s rights. The strawman has twisted your argument and created one that is much easier to refute.

2. The Red Herring or the Red Lure

The “Red Decoy” fallacy is committed when someone brings up an irrelevant point that diverts attention from the original point that was made. Changing the subject doesn’t actually win an argument, but it can make people forget what they were disagreeing about in the first place.

  • You : “I believe the Bible teaches that Jesus claimed to be God.”
  • The Red Decoy : “The Bible is just a book written by humans; it is no different from any other book.”

Red bait has shifted attention from what the Bible teaches to the credibility of the Bible as a book. It is a worthy discussion, but it is a different discussion, don’t take the bait.

3. The Slanderer

This fallacy is called “Ad-Hominem,” and it attacks the character of the person making the claim, rather than addressing the person’s actual argument.

  • You : “I think it’s best for children for marriage to be between a man and a woman.”
  • The Slanderer : “You only believe this because you’re a fanatic.”

The slanderer has shifted the focus from your claim to his perception of the motive behind it, thereby avoiding the real argument. The strawman, the red herring, and the slanderer can be handled in a similar way, gently bringing them back to their original point.

4. The Self-Destructor

A self-defeator is a person who makes a statement that refutes themselves. You can spot a self-defeating statement by taking the statement being made and applying it to the statement itself.

  • You : “I believe Christianity is true.”
  • The Self-Destructor : “the truth does not exist.”

If you can spot this self-defeating statement, a simple question will bring the fallacy to the surface: “Is that true?”

5. The Gish or Machine Gun Gallop

The “Gish Gallop” (or machine gun fallacy) is a fallacy where someone introduces so many (often individually weak) arguments into a space that it is never possible to respond to them all. This happens most often in live debates, but there are “machine gun fallacies” on the internet too!

  • You : “I believe that Jesus rose from the dead.”
  • The Fallacy Machine Gun: We can’t trust anything the Bible says because the Gospels were written hundreds of years after the apostles were alive, and they all tell different stories. In fact, the Old Testament stories of the Flood and Creation were simply copies of myths from the surrounding culture, and frankly, the resurrection can’t happen because science has proven that miracles aren’t possible. The story of Jesus is nothing more than a compilation of other myths about gods dying and rising in Mediterranean agrarian societies. Paul wasn’t really an apostle so we can’t trust what he said, and Jesus probably never existed anyway.

Note that the fallacy gunner has introduced several possibly related but unsubstantiated claims that no person with a real life or job would be able to sit down and answer in one sitting—it would take all day! There are several ways to deal with a fallacy gunner, but the simplest would be to stay within the scope of your original claim. You didn’t make any claims about the Bible, the Flood and Creation accounts, or Paul’s status as an apostle. You made a claim about a miracle, so that’s a good place to start.

Conclusion :

It’s easy for any of us to fall into some of these traps, so look out for these 5 illogical people while interacting on social media, and be careful not to be one yourself!

Recommended resources in Spanish:

Stealing from God ( Paperback ), ( Teacher Study Guide ), and ( Student Study Guide ) by Dr. Frank Turek

Why I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist ( Complete DVD Series ), ( Teacher’s Workbook ), and ( Student’s Handbook ) by Dr. Frank Turek  

 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Alisa Childers is an American singer and songwriter, best known for being part of the all-female Christian music group ZOEgirl. She has had one top ten radio single, four studio releases, and received a Dove Award during her time with ZOEgirl. Years later, Alisa experienced a profound challenge to her lifelong faith when she began attending what would later be identified as a progressive Christian church. This challenge pushed Alisa towards Christian Apologetics. You can currently read, listen to, and watch Alisa’s work online, as well as purchase her recently released book on progressive Christianity, titled Another Gospel.

Original source of the blog: https://cutt.ly/3nSwf67

Translated by Elias Castro

Edited by Cynthia Araya 

 

By Dr. Doug Potter

I have taught Christian apologetics to a wide variety of students, from 11-year-olds to seminary students. I have done so in a variety of settings; in Christian school, at church, in homes, and at graduate schools; in person and online. I have even helped bring publications to light. Teaching apologetics continues to be a challenge for me. Sometimes I think I have forgotten more apologetics than my students will ever know.

Over the years I have found that apologetics, in the realm of Christian education, is often misunderstood. For example, apologetics, while related to the following topics, is not a study of creationism, worldviews, Christian doctrine, ethics, evangelism, or the Bible. Don’t get me wrong, I am not opposed to the student learning these foundational topics. What I am opposed to is the study of all or any of these topics being called apologetics education. So what does Christian apologetics education encompass ? It is a specialized subject whose focus is the ” use of knowledge to demonstrate that the teachings of Christianity are true .”

Because of this, it applies knowledge from three distinct but interconnected subjects: philosophy and its concern for truth, natural theology and its concern for the existence of God, and history and its concern for Christianity. The foundation of philosophy establishes the absolute nature of truth. On it is built a theistic worldview that is based on the existence of God and miracles. And in these is the historical claim that Christ is God incarnate, His resurrection from the dead, and the teaching that the Bible is the Word of God.

Reasons to teach apologetics

If I am asked for a justification for teaching this, I offer three reasons why every Christian school, church, and Christian home should begin teaching a structured course in Christian apologetics. First, the Bible says that every believer needs to be prepared to give reasoned answers.

“But sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that is in you, but do this with gentleness and respect.”

( 1 Peter 3:15 ) NASB ; emphasis added .

The justification for Christian education to incorporate the study of apologetics is in what it offers, as it helps the student to have a more effective and efficient preparation compared to any other form.

Second, history demonstrates its success. In the first century, the apostle Paul used apologetics to respond to attacks from Judaism, Hellenism, and early Gnosticism. In the third century, Origen used it to defend the resurrection. Augustine (335-430) used it against paganism, and Thomas Aquinas (1224/5-1274) argued against the intellectual expansion of Islam. There is every reason to believe that apologists today can experience the same level of success using it.

Third, there is a present need. Today’s critics will not allow their objections to Christianity to be ignored. Therefore, the thoughtful person must take them seriously. Apologists must strive to provide good answers. Many young Christians go out into the world not knowing why they believe what they believe. It is not long before they question a faith that has never offered well-reasoned answers. If they go to college, they will be schooled in so-called “academic” views that are contrary to the Christian faith. If they are outside the classroom, their non-Christian friends and the media will speak of these “academic” views as undeniable facts.

In view of these circumstances, I offer five helpful tips that can pave the way toward the educational goal of demonstrating the truth of Christianity .

1. Apologetic education must be directed toward the believer

This may seem obvious, but I have seen professors who claim to have all the answers speak things that are incomprehensible to their students and to the intellectual atheist who is not even in the classroom. My apologetics professor was a master at taking the complex and making it understandable. He did not simplify it or ignore the difficulties, but made it understandable. He instilled in me a desire to develop and practice those skills. Teaching apologetics is not intended to create a professional apologist, any more than teaching physics is our goal to create a professional in physics. Teaching apologetics should defend the faith, but it should also strengthen those who have faith. The Gospel according to Luke shows us the careful planning that goes into preparing and transmitting knowledge for the benefit of the believer:

Many have undertaken to compile an account of the things that have been fulfilled  among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore I, most excellent Theophilus, have carefully investigated all these things from the very beginning and have decided to write them down to you in an orderly manner, so that you may be fully assured of what you were taught .”

(Luke 1:1-4 NIV)

2. Apologetic education must be appropriate to the age of the student.

I take seriously the words and warning of Jesus in Matthew 18:5-6,

And whoever welcomes one such child in My name welcomes Me. But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a great millstone were hung around his neck and he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

(Matthew 18:5-6 NASB)

As a professional apologetics teacher, I do not believe it is fruitful to teach apologetic arguments to children who have not yet developed abstract reasoning. Let us leave them to normal Christian education. Let us not allow the child’s structure of faith and authority in his parents, his teachers, and the Bible to be damaged, even by apologetics. This does not mean that at their young age they are incapable of learning some apologetics topics. But even when they are a little older, apologetics should not be simplified, nor should reason be allowed to replace their faith. When they are old enough, move on to tip #3.

3. Apologetic education must follow a systematic plan

Not all approaches to apologetics are created equal. Given the situations and reasons above, an educational approach must use a method that demonstrates that solid and valid consecutive arguments can be formulated from scratch to the absolute truth of Christianity. As seen in the verses above, this educational approach must build cases for Christianity (Luke 1:1-4) that are useful to the believer and effective in answering the questions or objections of the unbeliever (1 Peter 3:15).

Any other interest in learning a biblical subject should be part of learning apologetics. It is a branch of knowledge that must be mastered. The responsibility of the teacher includes developing objectives, structuring syllabi, using creative teaching techniques, and making assessments. The responsibility of the student includes reading the materials provided by the teacher, taking notes, listening carefully, working on projects – individual and group – and also taking exams.

4. Apologetic education must be composed of activities

We learn best when we put into practice what a respected and knowledgeable teacher teaches us. The teacher must provide students with the opportunity to succeed and the safety to fail with apologetics, all with a view to developing a lifelong learner of apologetics. One thing I have realized is that I don’t really “learn” something until I use it, and repeatedly. The more I use it, the more it becomes a part of me. My students often tell me that the most meaningful thing I did for them was “force” them to use apologetics and then reflect on and report on it. This can be accomplished in a number of ways. For younger students, I set up role-playing games. For older students, I use internal discussions, mock radio or television programs, or have them talk to someone with a non-Christian worldview. Learning apologetics is also a great opportunity to integrate knowledge from many other subjects.

5. Apologetic education must recognize its limitations

Apologetics can only show that Christianity is true in its core claims like “truth is absolute,” “God exists,” “God raised Jesus from the dead,” and “the Bible is the Word of God.” It cannot make someone believe in Christ. That has to do with their will and the work of the Holy Spirit. Doctrine discovered and based solely on Scripture must be accepted as the command of God and His word. But as my apologetics professor always reminded us, “God never bypasses the mind when He addresses the heart.”

I am sometimes asked whether apologetics will keep a son or daughter from leaving the faith. People can walk away from the faith for all sorts of reasons. All I can say is that if they have received apologetic education, especially as indicated above, at least it will not have been for lack of good reasons showing that Christianity is true.

Keep in mind that young people tend to be what their parents are. The most important person to help young people stay in the faith is you. Don’t forget to ask yourself, what am I doing to improve my knowledge and skills in Christian apologetics?

Recommended resources in Spanish:

Stealing from God ( Paperback ), ( Teacher Study Guide ), and ( Student Study Guide ) by Dr. Frank Turek

Why I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist ( Complete DVD Series ), ( Teacher’s Workbook ), and ( Student’s Handbook ) by Dr. Frank Turek  

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Original Blog Source: https://cutt.ly/lnZQr1y 

Translated by Rolando Vega

Edited by Gustavo Camarillo 

 

By Brian Chilton

Historians use various methodologies to determine the credibility of a historical story. One criterion is called the “criterion of multiple attestation.”[1] Reginald Fuller calls the criterion the “cross-section method.”[2] The criterion states that a story is authenticated if it is repeated in more than one source. As noted in a previous article, historian Paul Meier indicates that two or three sources render a historical fact “unimpeachable.”[3] Thus, it must be asked, how many early sources mention the resurrection of Jesus? Amazingly, nine early sources speak of the resurrection of Jesus.

Source 1: The Gospel of Matthew

The Gospel of Matthew serves as a source for the resurrection. Critical scholars date the material of the Gospel to AD 70. However, good reasons suggest that the Gospel may have been penned in the 50s. Nonetheless, even if the Gospel was late in its composition, the material undergirding the Gospel was much earlier. According to tradition, the First Gospel was composed by Matthew, the tax collector and disciple of Jesus, in Antioch of Syria. Matthew 28 describes the resurrection appearance to Mary Magdalene and her encounter with the angels of God (Matt. 28:1-10), Jesus’s instruction for the disciples to head to Galilee (28:7), the report of the guards to the elders, and their attempt to quiet the soldier’s reports (28:11-15), and the resurrection appearance of Jesus to the disciples in Galilee where he commissioned the disciples to the gospel ministry (28:16-28).

Source 2: The Gospel of Mark

The Gospel of Mark serves as another early source. While often assigned to the 60s or 70s AD, critical scholars are beginning to ascribe earlier dates to the Second Gospel, some even claiming AD 40 as a possible date for composition.[4] Regardless of the date granted to the Gospel, the sources behind the Gospel are even earlier than the text. Tradition holds that John Mark, the spiritual son of Simon Peter, collected the teachings of Peter concerning Jesus and compiled them into the Second Gospel. Most likely, he published the Gospel in Rome. The 16th chapter of the Second Gospel has been the center of debate. The earliest manuscripts end the chapter after verse 8. Even still, the first few verses denote Mary Magdalene’s experience, along with a group of female disciples, who approach the tomb of Jesus, find it empty, and are told by the angels of God that Jesus had risen (Mark 16:6). Then, they are told to inform the disciples and Peter that Jesus would meet them in Galilee (16:7). Then, the women are shown fleeing the tomb, astonished and amazed (16:8). Even if the resurrection appearances of Jesus are not described in the first 8 verses, they are certainly assumed. Jesus was proclaimed to have risen and was said to meet the disciples in Galilee. Mark most likely compressed the resurrection story to provide as much information with the limited space available.

Source 3: The Gospel of Luke

The Gospel of Luke serves as a third source. Written most likely in the early 60s, even though some scholars afford it a date in the 70s or even 80s. Despite the date, it must again be remembered that the material behind the Gospel dates earlier than the written text. Tradition states that Luke, an inseparable companion of Paul,[5] wrote the Gospel in Antioch of Syria after carefully examining eyewitness testimonies. Concerning the resurrection of Jesus, Luke describes the women’s encounter with the empty tomb and risen Jesus (Luke 24:1-8), the original disbelief of the disciples (24:9-11), Peter’s run to the tomb, and his amazement with the emptied linen cloths (24:12). Then, Luke reports Jesus’s appearance to Cleopas and another unnamed disciple (perhaps Cleopas’s wife) on the way to Emmaus (24:13-35), Jesus’s appearance to the Twelve (24:36-49), and Jesus’s ascension in the vicinity of Bethany (24:50-53).

Source 4: The Gospel of John

The Gospel of John was the last of the four Gospels to have been written. Conservative scholars argue that the Gospel was written by John the apostle c. AD 85 while he was serving as a pastor to the Church of Ephesus. Ironically, critical scholars are beginning to argue for an earlier date. Regardless of the date, as with the other Gospels, the material behind the Fourth Gospel predates the text itself. The Fourth Gospel is the only Gospel to grant two chapters to the resurrection story. John’s Gospel describes Mary’s trip to the tomb (20:1), her report to Simon Peter and the apostle John (20:2), Peter and John’s trip to the empty tomb and their bewilderment at the emptied linen cloths (20:3-10), Mary’s encounter with the risen Jesus (20:11-18), Jesus’s evening appearance to the Eleven disciples without Thomas (20:19-23), Thomas’s encounter with risen Jesus (20:24-29), John’s report of additional signs that Jesus performed after his resurrection (20:30-31), Jesus’s encounter with the disciples by the Sea of Galilee/Tiberius (21:1-14), the reinstatement of Peter into the ministry (21-15-19), Peter’s question about John’s ministry and Jesus’s rebuke (21:20-23), John’s testimony of authorship (21:24), and John’s testimony of the limitations of the Gospels’ ability to record all the deeds of Jesus (21:25).

Source 5: The Sermon Summaries of Peter

It is agreed by numerous scholars, such as Max Wilcox in his Semitisms of Acts, that the sermon summaries in the book of Acts constitute early material. As the name implies, the messages of the apostles have been summarized and compressed to help with early memorization and transmission. Peter’s summaries are found in Acts 2:14-40; 3:12-26; 4:5-12; 10:28-47; and 11:4-18. In these powerful messages, Peter boldly proclaimed, “Though he was delivered up according to God’s determined plan and foreknowledge, you used lawless people to nail him to a cross and kill him. God raised him up, ending the pains of death, because it was not possible for him to be held by death” (Acts 2:23-23). Additionally, Peter said, “God has raised this Jesus; we are all witnesses of this” (Acts 2:32). These summaries provide a powerful early source for the resurrection.

Source 6: The Sermon Summaries of Paul

Paul’s sermon summaries also serve as a source even though they are preserved in the same book. Because they originate with a different person, Paul’s messages serve as an additional source. Paul’s sermon summaries are conserved in Acts 13:16-41; 17:22-31; 20:17-35; 22:1-21; 23:1-6; 24:10-21. One of the most compelling of Paul’s sermon summaries is found in Acts 13. Paul proclaims, “When they had carried out all that had been written about him, they took him down from the tree and put him in a tomb. But God raised him from the dead, and he appeared for many days to those who came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are now his witnesses to the people” (Acts 13:29-31). This summary is particularly interesting because it not only describes the resurrection event but also denotes the existence of an empty tomb.

Source 7: The Sermon Summary of Stephen

Stephen was the very first martyr of the Christian Church. He was a man of great wisdom and Spirit (Acts 6:10). Stephen’s message is preserved in Acts 7:1-53 and 7:56. While he does not necessarily mention the resurrection in the larger portion of his message, he confirms the resurrection of Christ before his death as he cries, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God!” (Acts 7:56). For this reason, Stephen’s message can also be used as an early source for the resurrection.

Source 8: The 1 Corinthians 15:3-9 Creed

Scholars hold that the creed in 1 Corinthians 15:3-9 dates to no later than two years after the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. Some even hold that it dates to within months of the resurrection event. The 1 Corinthians 15 creed describes Jesus’s resurrection appearances to Peter, the Twelve, a group of over 500 individuals, James, and Paul. This early creed serves as a powerful source for the resurrection, even affording additional appearances of Jesus not found in the other source material (e.g., the private appearance to Peter, James, and a group of over 500).

Source 9: The Romans 10:9 Confession

Romans 10:9 is believed to be an early confession of the church. It describes the criteria necessary for one to receive salvation. The confession reads, “If you confess with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved” (Rom. 10:9). The essentials of Christ’s death, deity, and resurrection of preserved in this simple formulation. Romans 10:9 also serves as an additional source for the resurrection event.

Conclusion

Paul Meier holds that two or three sources for an event imply the event is beyond dispute, or unimpeachable. If two or three early sources cause an event to become beyond dispute in antiquity, then what does it say about an event when nine said extant sources denoting the event’s authenticity remain? The sources presented represent early material, in some cases extremely early material, which argues that something mysterious happened to the body of Jesus on the first Easter Sunday. This mysterious resurrection experience transforms every aspect of one’s life when it is accepted as fact. It can bring about a new relationship with God and can provide great comfort when one realizes that death has been defeated. Outside of its miraculous nature—which, quite honestly, is the only reason some people deny its authenticity—there are no good historical reasons for denying the resurrection of the Nazarene. To borrow the phrase from Norman Geisler and Frank Turek, it takes more faith to deny the resurrection of Jesus than to accept its authenticity.

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Early Evidence for the Resurrection by Dr. Gary Habermas (DVD), (Mp3) and (Mp4)

Cold Case Resurrection Set by J. Warner Wallace (books)

Jesus, You and the Essentials of Christianity by Frank Turek (INSTRUCTOR Study Guide), (STUDENT Study Guide), and (DVD)      

The Footsteps of the Apostle Paul (mp4 Download), (DVD) by Dr. Frank Turek 

 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Brian G. Chilton is the founder of BellatorChristi.com, the host of The Bellator Christi Podcast, and the author of the Layman’s Manual on Christian Apologetics. Brian is a Ph.D. Candidate of the Theology and Apologetics program at Liberty University. He received his Master of Divinity in Theology from Liberty University (with high distinction); his Bachelor of Science in Religious Studies and Philosophy from Gardner-Webb University (with honors); and received certification in Christian Apologetics from Biola University. Brian is enrolled in the Ph.D. program in Theology and Apologetics at Liberty University and is a member of the Evangelical Theological Society and the Evangelical Philosophical Society. Brian has served in pastoral ministry for nearly 20 years. He currently serves as a clinical chaplain.

Original Blog Source: https://cutt.ly/znPPN1r

 

By Ryan Leasure

The Gospel according to John has received more scrutiny than the other Gospels put together. Case in point, dating back to the 1920s, critical scholars have argued that the apostle John could not have written the Gospel. Rather, they’ve suggested a whole slew of other possibilities (anonymous, John the Elder, Lazarus, John Mark, the rich young ruler, etc.) But is there any evidence to back up their contentions? Should we reject the traditional position which the church has subscribed to for almost two thousand years?

In this post, I will argue that John the son of Zebedee penned the fourth Gospel. I will make my case in three steps: First, I will examine the external evidence. Second, I will examine the internal evidence. And third, I will refute the common objections.

External Evidence for John’s Authorship

Writing around AD 180, Irenaeus of Lyons wrote, “John, the disciple of the Lord, who also had leaned upon His breast, did himself publish a Gospel during his residence at Ephesus in Asia.”1 In other words, Irenaeus declares that John wrote the fourth Gospel while living in Ephesus. And this John should be identified with the disciple whom Jesus loved and reclined on Jesus’ breast in John 13:23.

How would Irenaeus be privy to such information? He claims to be a spiritual grandson of John himself! Pay careful attention to how Irenaeus reminisces about his childhood experiences.

I remember the events of those days more clearly than those which have happened recently, . . . so I can speak even of the place in which the blessed Polycarp sat and disputed, how he came in and went out, the character of his life, the appearance of his body, the discourse which he made to the people, how he reported his converse with John and with the others who had seen the Lord, how he remembered their words, and what were the things concerning the Lord which he had heard from them, including his miracles and his teaching, and how Polycarp had received them from the eyewitnesses of the word of life, and reported all things in agreement with the Scriptures.2

Notice that Irenaeus claims to have been taught by Polycarp who was taught by John. That is to say, Irenaeus was in a position to know if John was the author of the fourth Gospel.

Other church fathers also affirm John’s authorship. Clement of Alexandria—also writing around AD 180—stated, “But that John, last of all, conscious that the outward facts had been set forth in the Gospels, was urged on by his disciples, and, divinely moved by the Spirit, composed a spiritual Gospel.”3

The Muratorian Fragment—a late second-century document—states plainly, “The fourth of the Gospels is that of John, [one] of the disciples.”

And finally, writing a couple of decades later, Tertullian reports, “Of the apostles, therefore, John and Matthew first instill faith into us; whilst of apostolic men, Luke and Mark renew it afterwards.” 4

On top of all this, every titled manuscript of the Gospel lists John as its author. In short, the early church affirmed that John wrote the fourth Gospel.

Internal Evidence for John’s Authorship

John 21:24 reports, “This is the disciple who is bearing witness about these things, and who has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true.” Which disciple is this? Verse 20 tell us. “Peter turned and saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following them, the one who also had leaned back against him during the supper.” In other words, the disciple whom Jesus loved and leaned on Jesus’ breast (John 13:23) wrote this Gospel.

But who is this mysterious disciple whom Jesus loved? He was certainly one of the twelve at the Last Supper (John 13:23). The synoptics make clear that only the apostles joined Jesus for this meal. Moreover, the disciple whom Jesus loved is repeatedly distinguished from Peter (John 13:23-24; 20:2-9; 21:20). Finally, he is one of the seven disciples who went fishing in chapter 21:2. That said, he cannot be Peter, Thomas, or Nathanael. He is, therefore, either one of the sons of Zebedee or one of the other two unnamed disciples that were present at the Sea of Galilee in John 21. It must be said, however, that James the son of Zebedee died in the early 40s, which rules him out as a potential author.

An additional note worth mentioning is that John is never mentioned by name in the Gospel. His absence would be extremely odd if someone else wrote this Gospel. After all, the Gospel mentions other prominent characters like Peter and Andrew and even less familiar characters like Philip and Judas (not Iscariot). Moreover, while the synoptic Gospels all refer to the forerunner of Jesus’ ministry as John the Baptist (it was necessary to distinguish him from the other prominent John), this Gospel only refers to him as John. In other words, the author did not feel it necessary to distinguish that John from himself.

Finally, John and Peter are repeatedly shown as close companions in the synoptic Gospels, Acts, and Galatians (Mark 5:37; 14:33; Acts 3:1-4:23; Gal. 2:9). Similarly, the fourth Gospel puts Peter and the disciple whom Jesus loved together frequently (13:23-24; 20:2-10; 21:20-23).

The most plausible explanation for this data is that John is the disciple whom Jesus loved, and therefore, the author of the fourth Gospel.

Answering Objections

One of the more frequently cited reasons for rejecting Johannine authorship is the self-description “the one whom Jesus loved.” In other words, John seems rather full of himself to give himself this title. This objection, however, should not deter us from accepting traditional authorship. After all, what Christian doesn’t affirm that God loves them? There is nothing boastful about making this claim. On the contrary, its the mark of humble gratitude. As Carson and Moo assert, it “is scarcely the mark of arrogance; it is rather the mark of brokenness.”5 Paul, for example, declares that Christ “loved me and gave himself for me” (Gal. 2:20). Nothing arrogant about that. Just plain awe and gratitude.

Another frequent objection to the tradition view is that the early church thought a different John wrote the Gospel. This objection stems from a quotation from Papias who mentions a particular “elder John” in addition to the “apostle John.” However, as Carson and Moo point out, the Greek syntax Papias uses, namely the anaphoric use of the article for the second John, strongly suggests that “elder John” and “apostle John” are really the same person.6 Also noteworthy is that Peter calls himself an “elder” in 1 Peter 5:1. In other words, the apostles also understood themselves as elders in the early church. Both 2 and 3 John are said to be by “the elder,” and Papias may simply be echoing that language.

A third objection is that an uneducated Galilean fisherman never could have penned this Greek Gospel. This objection fails on multiple fronts as well. First, while Acts 4:13 states that Peter and John were “uneducated,” that description does not imply that they were illiterate. “Uneducated” simply means that they hadn’t been officially trained in Jewish Rabbinical schools—not unlike Jesus (John 7:15). In fact, most Jewish boys received an education so that they could read the Scriptures. Moreover, John came from wealth (his father owned a large fishing business—Luke 5:3,10; Mark 1:20). Therefore, he most likely received an excellent education.

Recent studies also suggest that Palestinian Jews were often able to speak both Aramaic and Greek.7 With the discovery of Greek coins, Judean-Greek documents, Greek names on burial inscriptions, and even a Greek-speaking synagogue, it’s not unreasonable to think John wrote this Gospel. These pieces of evidence don’t even take into account that John had several decades in Greek-speaking Ephesus to brush up on his Greek before writing his Gospel.

The Gospel According to John

Based on the external and internal evidence, John the son of Zebedee is the author of the fourth Gospel. While the objections cannot be ignored, none of them undermine the evidence in favor of traditional authorship.

Recommended resources related to the topic:

The New Testament: Too Embarrassing to Be False by Frank Turek (DVD, Mp3, and Mp4)

Why We Know the New Testament Writers Told the Truth by Frank Turek (DVD, Mp3 and Mp4)

Jesus, You and the Essentials of Christianity by Frank Turek (INSTRUCTOR Study Guide), (STUDENT Study Guide), and (DVD)

     

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ryan Leasure holds a Master of Arts from Furman University and a Masters of Divinity from the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Currently, he’s a Doctor of Ministry candidate at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He also serves as a pastor at Grace Bible Church in Moore, SC.

Original Blog Source: https://cutt.ly/InPkO6A

 

By Bob Perry

“What is God’s will for my life?” This is a common question to hear from someone who is pondering a difficult life decision. Making big decisions can be confusing. But using “God’s will” as the benchmark for success adds a whole new element of agony to it all. The key to less stressful decision-making is to be clear about what that actually means.

What if we make the wrong choice by picking the wrong place to live? The wrong job? Or, most dauntingly, the wrong spouse? Think about it. If we marry the wrong person that means our spouse was meant to marry someone else. And the person they were supposed to marry also married the wrong person. The string of wrong spousal choices soon multiplies out of control. Something must be wrong with a view that turns one wrong decision into a global catastrophe. How do we prevent the calamity and avoid the uncertainty? Is decision making supposed to be this hard?

God Will Hunting

Making decisions is hard enough. But we make it worse when we add to the burden by evaluating our options against a false standard. We are misunderstanding God’s will when we equate it with some kind of hidden Divine Plan. The simple fact is that any of us can assess our alignment to God’s Will with clear assurance. To understand how, we need only check this way of thinking against what the Bible actually says about God’s will.

“If there really is a perfect will of God we are meant to discover, in which we will find tremendous freedom and fulfillment, why does it seem that everyone looking for God’s will is in such bondage and confusion?”

Kevin DeYoungJust Do Something

A Hidden Message

The contemporary model of Christian decision-making amounts to something like a treasure hunt. God’s will becomes a secret blueprint that has been hidden from us. We can only access it by imploring God to reveal it to us in doses small enough to protect us from misusing it. He whispers his revelation and guidance to us and we must learn to listen. God uses gentle nudges to assure it to us that we are following the right path.

Under this method, God’s “plan for your life” is a road map we can only decipher through painstaking deliberation. The pressure is on us to uncover the plan or risk straying from the course he has mapped out for our lives. Within this model, our distress is understandable. The pressure to conform to the plan is enormous because the treasure we are seeking is not some worldly, material payoff. It is the very purpose of our life.

There are two problems with this model. The first is that it becomes an exercise in trying to see the future. This is a futile errand if you’re not an ordained prophet endowed with the authority and responsibility that comes with that position. The second and more important problem is that this decision-making model is not found anywhere in the Bible.

God’s Sovereign Will

God does have a Sovereign Will. He planned it before He created the universe. And he put the plan in motion at the moment of creation. It will play out in exactly way the Creator intended. That we know. We can also be sure that we cannot know it ahead of time and that there is nothing we can do to change it.

The Bible describes this sovereign will in passages that refer to God’s purposes. He knows the future. He makes it happen. We can see evidence of this, but we can never see it by looking forward. There is only one way to recognize God’s sovereign will. We see it by looking backward.

Your own life is a testament to this. Look back at all the amazing “coincidences” you have experienced in your life. Each of these have brought you right where you are in the present.

There are times when we don’t appreciate this aspect of God’s will. We want to know how things are going to turn out. Our motivation may be good. We may be sincere about wanting to stay aligned with God’s purposes. We may be trying to avoid pain and hardship for ourselves, or trying to avoid hurting others. But no matter how pure our motives, this desire reveals an unwarranted preoccupation with the future.

God’s Moral Will

There is a second aspect of God’s will that is also crystal clear. Paul tells us what it is in 1 Thessalonians 4:3, “It is God’s will that you should be sanctified.” This is God’s Moral Will. It is an ongoing project, not to decipher the future he has in store for us, but to conform to his likeness. Theologians refer to this process as “sanctification.” Sanctification is a process that begins with the renewing of our minds and continues for the rest of our lives. It is the process that molds our will and character to align with “his good, pleasing and perfect will” (Romans 12:2). Our sanctification manifests itself when we live out the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22). God’s moral will is that we reflect the character of Christ.

The Wisdom Model

If you take these two aspects of God’s will into account, we arrive at the real biblical model for decision making. It is simple and direct. First, when it comes to making life decisions, God’s sovereign purposes will always happen, no matter what decisions you make. After that, any life choices we consider must be consistent with God’s moral will. In other words,

God’s desire is not about the specifics of where we go or what we do; it is about who we are. It is about the person we are becoming.

If the decisions we make are consistent with God’s moral standards, we are free to do whatever we want to do. Our motivation should be to develop wisdom, not to receive marching orders.

What The Wisdom Model Doesn’t Say

This is not to deny that God can speak to anyone at any time. God is God, after all. But nothing in the Bible suggests we should use the common Christian decision-making practice that has become so popular in our culture.

There is no hint that we should grovel for guidance, then listen for personal messages from God about what to do. Quite the opposite. As apologist Greg Koukl puts it, the record shows that personalized guidance in the Bible is not only rare but an intrusion into the lives of those who receive it. No one in the Bible pleads for secret knowledge and then waits quietly for instructions. God’s voice is supernatural and unmistakable. Even Paul, a man who hated and persecuted Christians, heard God’s voice on the Road to Damascus. In short, if God speaks to us, there will be no doubt who is talking, or what he is trying to say.

Do Good, Then Do What You Want

Making life decisions does not have to be disconcerting or overwhelming. As long as the options we consider don’t violate God’s moral boundaries, we can do whatever we want to do. The Wisdom Model allows godly believers to pursue their own desires. Once we understand that, decision-making becomes a joy. We learn to pursue life with confidence and humility. We don’t approach difficult life decisions with fear and trembling. Instead, we pursue a God-centered lifestyle.

What is God’s will for your life? Paul couldn’t make it any clearer. “Be joyful always, pray continually; give thanks in all circumstances, for this is God’s will for [us] in Christ Jesus (1 Thessalonians 5:18).

Recommended resources related to the topic:

How to Interpret Your Bible by Dr. Frank Turek DVD Complete Series, INSTRUCTOR Study Guide, and STUDENT Study Guide

Jesus, You and the Essentials of Christianity by Frank Turek (INSTRUCTOR Study Guide), (STUDENT Study Guide), and (DVD)      

 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Bob Perry is a Christian apologetics writer, teacher, and speaker who blogs about Christianity and the culture at truehorizon.org. He is a Contributing Writer for the Christian Research Journal and has also been published in Touchstone, and Salvo. Bob is a professional aviator with 37 years of military and commercial flying experience. He has a B.S., Aerospace Engineering from the U. S. Naval Academy, and an M.A., Christian Apologetics from Biola University. He has been married to his high school sweetheart since 1985. They have five grown sons.

Original Blog Source: https://cutt.ly/BnIHaSc

 

How do we know the New Testament writers actually told the truth?  Could the New Testament story be invented?   Building on two previous shows, Frank gives five reasons why it takes more “faith” to believe that the New Testament writers invented the story. 1) non-Christian sources, 2) historical crosshairs and eyewitness details, 3) embarrassing details about themselves and even Jesus, 4) demanding sayings and commands of Jesus, and 5) the fact that they carefully distinguished their words from the words of Jesus.

If you want to send us a question for the show, please email us at Hello@CrossExamined.org.

Subscribe on iTunes: http://bit.ly/CrossExamined_Podcast Rate and review! Thanks!!!
Subscribe on Google Play: http://bit.ly/CE_Podcast_Google
Subscribe on Spotify: http://bit.ly/CrossExaminedOfficial_Podcast
Subscribe on Stitcher: http://bit.ly/CE_Podcast_Stitcher

 

By Wintery Knight

We were having a discussion about whether the Bible teaches that sex before marriage is morally wrong, and someone said “impure thoughts counts as adultery… there isn’t a virgin among us.”

Regarding her point that lust is equal to adultery, and so no one is really a virgin, here’s Ligonier Ministries:

In demonstrating that the seventh commandment was given also to prohibit lust, Jesus is not somehow saying that an unconsummated lustful intent is sinful to the same degree as an actual extramarital affair (though both sins merit punishment). The latter is a more blatant violation of the statute against adultery, and it has greater consequences in the form of divorce and the loss of one’s reputation as a trustworthy person.

Any serious student of the Bible is aware of Jesus’ tendency to exaggerate/use hyperbole.

Also, 1 Corinthians 7 says that wives are not supposed to make a habit of denying their husbands sex. Sex withholding is more of an epidemic today than pornography, and it should also be on the adultery spectrum. It isn’t as bad as adultery, but it definitely breaks the marital covenant.

So why would someone say that lust is the same as adultery and that there is no such thing as a virgin?

Dr. Michael Krueger recently blogged about this “all sins are equal” view.

Krueger says this:

First, to say all sins are the same is to confuse the effect of sin with the heinousness of sin. While all sins are equal in their effect (they separate us from God), they are not all equally heinous.

Second, the Bible differentiates between sins. Some sins are more severe in terms of impact (1 Cor 6:18), in terms of culpability (Rom 1:21-32), and in terms of the judgment warranted (2 Pet 2:17; Mark 9:42; James 3:1).

Krueger explains the motivation behind the slogans:

[S]ome Christians… use this phrase as way to “flatten out” all sins so that they are not distinguishable from each other. Or, to put it another way, this phrase is used to portray all human beings as precisely the same. If all sins are equal, and all people sin, then no one is more holy than anyone else.

In a world fascinated with “equality,” this usage of the phrase is particularly attractive to folks. It allows everyone to be lumped together into a single undifferentiated mass.

Such a move is also useful as a way to prevent particular behaviors from being condemned. If all sins are equal, and everyone is a sinner, then you are not allowed to highlight any particular sin (or sinner).

Needless to say, this usage of the phrase has featured largely in the recent cultural debates over issues like homosexuality. Yes, homosexuality is a sin, some Christians reluctantly concede. But, they argue, all sins are equal in God’s sight and therefore it is no different than anything else. Therefore, Christians ought to stop talking about homosexuality unless they are also willing to talk about impatience, anger, gluttony, and so on.

Krueger also posted this fascinating follow-up post, where he looks at how the phrase is being used by people on Twitter.

Look at these tweets:

  • All sins are equal. People tend to forget that. There is no bigger or smaller sin. Being gay and lying, very equal.
  • all sins are equal in God’s eyes. whatever you’re doing, is no better than what someone else is doing.
  • If you have sex before marriage please don’t come on social media preaching about the wrongs of homosexuality. All sins are equal
  • Need people to realize that all sins are equal… don’t try to look down on me or question my faith just cuz you sin differently than I do.
  • Don’t understand why you’re so quick to judge me, when all sins are equal. So much for family..
  • if you think being gay is a sin, let me ask you something, have you not done anything wrong in your life? all sins are equal. we’re sinners
  • Nope no difference at all. All sins are equal no matter what you’re running for. The bible says do not judge lest ye be judged
  • A huge problem I have with religion is the notion that all sins are equal. Like pre-marital sex and murder are the same amount t of bad.
  • people do bad things because they believe that all sins are equal and ~god~ loves y’all equally so he’s going to forgive you naman ha ha ha
  • It a sin to condemn another sinner and their actions. All sins are equal. So what makes you better than the person you’re condemning?
  • I think so b/c having sex before marriage doesn’t make you less of a women then if you waited until marriage.. all sins are equal soo
  • a friendly reminder, all sins are equal in god’s eyes so you’re not better than I am in any way. please worry about your own sins before mine.
  • People don’t like when I suggest abortion as an option. This is a free country and all sins are equal so mind your business!!!
  • What I do is no worse than what you do… all sins are equal no matter what it is… a sin is a sin
  • to god all sins are equal so you have no right to compare your sins to someone else’s bc in the end it doesn’t matter

The first thing that I noticed is that premarital sex and homosexuality are the most popular sins. I would think that divorce and abortion would be up there in the rankings, as well.

People want to be free to follow their hearts when seeking pleasure, then quote the Bible (badly) afterward, to attack anyone who says that anything they’ve done is morally wrong. They would rather escape the judgment of their peers than admit fault and try to fix the mistake and do better next time. And they would rather tell people who are hurting themselves by breaking the rules that there are no rules. It makes them feel good to “not judge” – they feel as if they are being kind. Their compassion looks good to non-Christians. And they’re promoting moral relativism which, when it becomes widespread, prevents anyone from judging them.

It’s so bad now, that the people who have morals and who make moral judgments are seen as the real bad people. The immoral people are on the offense, and even trying to ban people from being able to disagree with them.

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Is Morality Absolute or Relative? by Frank Turek (DVD/ Mp3/ Mp4)

Jesus, You and the Essentials of Christianity by Frank Turek (INSTRUCTOR Study Guide), (STUDENT Study Guide), and (DVD)      

 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Original Blog Source: https://cutt.ly/Gnxf6os

 

By Timothy Fox

In my last blog post, I shared some of the most important books regarding cultural issues that I read in the year since the COVID lockdowns began in March 2020. While those books dealt with the culture at large, my next two reads focused on cultural and theological issues impacting the church: Confronting Injustice without Compromising Truth by Thaddeus Williams, and the book I am reviewing here Another Gospel?: A Lifelong Christian Seeks Truth in Response to Progressive Christianity by Alisa Childers.

Content

Another Gospel? follows the story of former ZOEgirl, Alisa Childers, as her orthodox Christian faith was challenged in a study group led by a progressive Christian pastor. In the first two chapters, Alisa sets the stage of her spiritual journey and traces the history of progressive Christianity from its roots in the emerging church to its current form. While progressive Christianity has no set dogma, its hallmarks are the rejection, or at least questioning, of core classical Christian doctrines, such as the deity of Christ, Jesus’s physical resurrection, and the divine nature of the Bible. This key aspect of progressive Christianity, the process of rejecting or questioning Christian doctrines, is known as deconstruction, “where all beliefs someone was raised with and had never questioned are systematically pulled apart” (7). Another Gospel? subsequently explores the deconstruction and reconstruction of Alisa’s faith.

Chapters three through eleven each tackle a main question or issue raised against classical Christianity. Most topics are intellectual, such as the authority of the Bible, while others are emotional, such as spiritual abuse and disdain for traditional biblical morality. Alisa shows how progressive Christianity has imbibed the spirit of the age in that it offers a more “tolerant” and “inclusive” Christianity. Yet, it does so by ignoring or outright rejecting much that the Bible and historical Christianity has taught for centuries.

The book closes with Alisa’s reconstruction. By seeking answers to the questions that the progressive pastor raised, Alisa’s faith in Christianity became stronger than before. This is also Alisa’s hope for those reading her book, that they will have confidence that Christianity—classical, traditional, orthodox Christianity—is really true.

Audience

The target reader of Another Gospel? is obviously someone who is in the same position in which Alisa found herself, a person wrestling with the questions and challenges of progressive Christianity. Alisa shows us the types of objections that are raised and how Christianity can fully answer them all. It’s important to note, however, that none of the topics discussed are specific to progressive Christianity. The objections to which Alisa responds are also commonly raised by skeptics and atheists, such as the reliability of the New Testament or the fairness of Hell. This shows us that there really are no new objections to Christianity (that haven’t already been answered) and that progressive Christianity itself isn’t new. It’s just skepticism and postmodernism posing as Christianity. So even if someone is not interested specifically in progressive Christianity, one will still find Another Gospel? to be a great, accessible apologetics resource.

But what about someone who is already well-studied in apologetics and theology? While many of the objections to which Alisa responds are standard apologetics fare, they are framed within the context of progressive Christianity. Alisa explores the tactics and methods by which progressive Christians cause others to doubt their childhood faith. Another Gospel? shows us the progressive Christian mindset, as well as the types of arguments for which a Christian should prepare when engaging progressive Christians. So, even Christians who are familiar with the objections raised in the book can still benefit from reading it.

Other Thoughts

Most importantly, Another Gospel? highlights just how dangerous progressive Christianity can be. As I mentioned above, many of the objections to which Alisa responds are the same objections of the typical skeptic. When challenged by a skeptic, though, a Christian may naturally know to keep up one’s guard, as the skeptic will be viewed as an opponent. But a progressive Christian may be viewed as a trusted friend, a brother or sister in Christ, and so the challenges raised will seem legitimate and not detrimental to one’s faith.  This is the true danger of progressive Christianity. Another Gospel? is yet another reminder that challenges to Christianity do not always rise from outside, but also from within through wolves in sheep’s clothing (Matt. 7:15).

Conclusion

Alisa Childers has provided Christians an important resource for a growing challenge against the Church. She exposes progressive Christianity for what it is—a dangerous combination of skepticism and postmodernism that can easily destroy the faith of an uninformed Christian. Another Gospel? is a great safeguard against the objections raised by progressive Christians. Although Alisa grapples with difficult issues, she does so simply and clearly, making her book accessible to anyone, from apologetics veterans to laypersons. I highly recommend Another Gospel? by Alisa Childers to those concerned with the increasing influence of progressive Christianity within the Church, as well as to anyone who simply wishes for good answers to difficult questions.

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Jesus, You and the Essentials of Christianity by Dr. Frank Turek (INSTRUCTOR Study Guide), (STUDENT Study Guide), and (DVD)      

How to Interpret Your Bible by Dr. Frank Turek DVD Complete Series, INSTRUCTOR Study Guide, and STUDENT Study Guide

 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

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.

Original Blog Source: https://cutt.ly/inxsLIT