By Ryan Leasure
Is it hateful or arrogant to claim that Jesus is the only way of salvation? Charles Templeton thought so. He argued:
“Christians are a small minority in the world. Approximately four out of every five people on the face of the earth believe in gods other than the Christian God. The more than five billion people who live on earth revere or worship more than three hundred gods. If one includes the animist or tribal religions, the number rises to more than three thousand. Are we to believe that only Christians are right?”[1]
What are we to make of Templeton’s claims? Is it presumptuous to say that Jesus is the one true way of salvation? Or even worse, are Christians guilty of committing “absurd religious chauvinism” as some put it?[2] These common refrains are the fundamental tenets of religious pluralism — the belief that all religions are essentially the same and lead to God.
In a culture that abhors dogmatic truth claims, should Christians heed the warnings of the religious pluralists and stop teaching that Jesus is the only way of salvation? I don’t think so for a couple of reasons. First, religious pluralism is a self-defeating proposition. It crumbles in the face of logical scrutiny. And second, pluralism ignores scientific and historical finding. Let’s explore both in turn.
Religious Pluralism is Self-Defeating
To support their claim, religious pluralists share the parable of the blind men and the elephant. The parable goes something like this:
There were five blind men who all encountered an elephant in a field. The first man grabbed the tail and said, “oh it’s a rope.” The second blind man touched a leg and asserted, “no, it’s a tree.” The third blind man grabbed the trunk and declared, “no, it’s a snake.” The fourth blind man grabbed a tusk and cried, “no, it’s a spear.” The fifth blind man touched its side and exclaimed, “no, it’s a wall.”
The pluralist argues that the blind men are like the different world religions. Each belief system naively thinks their view of reality is the correct one, but, in the end, they’re all misguided. Rather, all the religions are fundamentally the same and will ultimately lead to the same place. No single “right way” exists according to the pluralist.
The Religions Contradict Each Other
While pluralists like to mention that all religions teach essentially the same thing, nothing could be further from the truth. Let’s take, for example, the nature of God in each major religion. Hinduism acknowledges multitudes of gods that are one with creation. Buddhism, while extremely spiritual, does not worship a god. New Age spirituality teaches that each person should see themselves as god. Islam believes in one God, named Allah, who is transcendent above creation. Judaism believes in a transcendent God named Jehovah. Christianity teaches that God is triune in nature, and is both transcendent and immanent in his creation.
Let’s look at one more example — how each religion views Jesus of Nazareth. Hinduism, Buddhism, and New Age all say he was a wise, moral teacher. Islam teaches that he was a prophet, though not divine, and that he didn’t die on a cross. Judaism teaches that he was a false prophet who led many astray and was crucified for blasphemy. Christianity teaches that Jesus was divine, he died on a cross, and he rose again from the dead.
If space permitted me, I could also explain how each of these religions differ on creation, scripture, the nature of humanity, sin, salvation, and eternal life. In other words, these religions have almost nothing in common.
Pluralism Defies Logic
To say all religions teach the same thing commits all kinds of logical fallacies. For example, Christianity teaches that God is a Trinity. God, however, cannot be both a Trinity (Christianity) and not a Trinity (Hinduism, Buddhism, New Age, Islam, and Judaism) at the same time and in the same way.
This would violate the Law of Noncontradiction which teaches that a thing cannot be both A and non-A at the same time and in the same respect. To suggest, therefore, that all religions can be true about the nature of God violates one of the most fundamental laws of logic.
Or consider the nature of Jesus. It cannot be true that Jesus is God (Christianity) and not God (Hinduism, Buddhism, New Age, Islam, and Judaism) at the same time and in the same way. Again, this would violate the Law of Noncontradiction.
Pluralism Makes Exclusive Claims Too
Ironically, pluralists make exclusive claims themselves. In effect, they’re saying that pluralism is true, while all contrary religious claims are false. That is to say, pluralists are guilty of doing the very same thing that they chastise the other religions for doing.
Now that the shoe is on the other foot, should we say the pluralists are hateful for saying their view of reality is the right one while all of us naive religious folk are wrong?
Pluralism Ignores Scientific and Historical Facts
Now it’s one thing to say that all the different religions can’t be right. It’s another to claim that one of them is the truth. Strong evidence, though, points in the direction of Christianity.
Scientific Evidence
Consider the origin of the universe. All the scientific data suggests that space, time, and matter, all came into existence simultaneously a finite time ago. Meaning the cause of the universe must be spaceless, timeless, and immaterial.
This fits nicely with the Christian belief that God created the world out of nothing, but it contradicts pantheistic religions such as Hinduism which teach that god is one with the universe — bound by space, time, and material. Additionally, the scientific data that the universe came into existence a finite time ago contradicts Buddhism’s belief in an eternal/cyclical universe.
The scientific evidence leaves the theistic religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and Deism) as possibilities. Yet when we turn our attention to Jesus of Nazareth, Christianity quickly rises to the top.
Historical Evidence
For example, ancient historians are unanimous that Jesus of Nazareth died by crucifixion in the first century. Islam, however, denies that Jesus — a prophet from God — was crucified. Since dozens of independent historical sources confirm Jesus’ death by crucifixion, we can be confident that Islam doesn’t pass the historical test as the one true religion. In fact, Jesus’ crucifixion is so certain that prominent skeptic scholar John Dominic Crossan admits, “Jesus’ death by crucifixion under Pontius Pilate is as sure as anything historical can ever be.”[3]
With only three viable options remaining, we turn our focus to the resurrection. Did Jesus rise again from the dead? If he did, Christianity is true, while Judaism and Deism are not. And we have lots of reasons to believe Jesus did, in fact, rise again. Let me give you two quick examples.
First, Christians claim that women were the first eye-witnesses to this incredible event. In a culture where nobody took a woman’s word seriously, it’s hard to imagine that Christians would have made up this detail. Since the early Christians would have had no motivation to make up this embarrassing fact, we have good reason to believe that this detail accurately portrays what really happened.
Additionally, Jesus’ closest followers were all willing to die for their belief that he rose again. Don’t you think, at some point, at least one of them would have caved under the threat of crucifixion or beheading and said the entire thing was a hoax? Yet not one of them did. This is telling, especially since those same disciples acted like cowards during Jesus’ arrest and crucifixion.
If Jesus rose again from the dead, that means what he claimed about himself has been vindicated — namely that he is God, and that he is the one true way of salvation.
Is it Hateful to Say Jesus Is the Only Way?
I don’t know anyone who would say that Jesus of Nazareth was hateful. Most actually affirm the exact opposite, he was incredibly moral and loving. Yet it’s this same Jesus who makes the claim that he is “the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6).
As we ponder the question at hand, consider the following statement by outspoken atheist and famed illusionist Penn Jillette:
“I’ve always said that I don’t respect people who don’t proselytize. I don’t respect that at all. If you believe that there’s a heaven and a hell, and people could be going to hell or not getting eternal life, and you think that it’s not really worth telling them this because it would make it socially awkward—and atheists who think people shouldn’t proselytize and who say just leave me alone and keep your religion to yourself—how much do you have to hate somebody to not proselytize? How much do you have to hate somebody to believe everlasting life is possible and not tell them that? I mean, if I believed, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that a truck was coming at you, and you didn’t believe that truck was bearing down on you, there is a certain point where I tackle you. And this is more important than that.”[4]
So is it hateful to tell people Jesus is the only way? I submit to you that it’s the loving thing to do.
Footnotes
[1] Charles Templeton, Farewell to God (Toronto, Ontario: McClelland & Stewart), 27
[2] John Hick and Paul Knitter, eds., The Myth of Christian Uniqueness, (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock), 141
[3] John Dominic Crossan, Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography (San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1991), 145.
[4] Quoted in, Justin Taylor, “How Much Do You Have to Hate Someone to Not Proselytize?” TheGospelCoalition.org, 18 Nov 2009, accessed 20 March 2023 at: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justin-taylor/how-much-do-you-have-to-hate-somebody-to-not-proselytize/
Recommended Resources Related to This Topic
Is Original Sin Unfair? (DVD Set), (mp4 Download Set), and (MP3 Set) by Dr. Frank Turek
Jesus, You and the Essentials of Christianity by Frank Turek (INSTRUCTOR Study Guide), (STUDENT Study Guide), and (DVD)
Is Original Sin Unfair? by Frank Turek (DVD, Mp3 and Mp4)
How Can Jesus Be the Only Way? (mp4 Download) by Frank Turek
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
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: http://bit.ly/3JF54Wf
Cuando tu oponente hace trampas, ¿qué debes hacer?
EspañolBy John D. Ferrer
You may have heard the phrase “fair play is trade.” If your opponent on the football or basketball field pushes and elbows you, it’s only fair that you push back, right? As they say, fair play is trade. And as long as it’s not against the law, immoral, or physically harmful to someone, that principle can work well, at least in ball and board games. But what about politics?
Frank and I had a podcast on this topic as well. You can check it out at:
When your opponent cheats, what should you do? | with Dr. John Ferrer
How far should we take this idea that “fair is unfair”? A gentleman from Nigeria named Austin sent us a question about this last week.
Austin is clearly concerned about more than just apologetics. He yearns for justice. Under the looming weight of political corruption and injustice, he faces one of the biggest militant fronts in modern Islam. He worries, and rightly so, that religious and political adversaries have rigged the system. Of course, he wants to do something about it.
If their opponents in the Muslim north are cheating and abusing the system to stay in power, perhaps Christians in the south can use the same tactics to oppose the expanding Islamic caliphate. The Christians would have good reasons. The others cheated first. So is it okay to lie and cheat if the other does?
In short, no.
While I sympathize with Austin in Nigeria, I cannot condone such behavior. He is raising a practical question, whether “the end justifies the means.” That axiom is the centerpiece of Utilitarianism [i] , a non-Christian ethical theory formulated by Jeremy Bentham. Sure, lying and cheating may help you win elections. And you may cheat in the same way as your opponents. But the end does not justify the means. The means must justify themselves.
Furthermore, lying and cheating will not preserve the integrity of the church or show the light of Christ to the world. We will discuss some exceptional cases later. But at this point, if you are not literally being forced to lie and cheat, then you should not lie or cheat.
Heart check-up
Perhaps the best starting point to understand this answer is to do some soul searching. Ask yourself: Do you fear and love God more than anyone else?
That is, do you fear God as your sovereign judge and king more than anyone else? And do you love God as your heavenly Father more than you love anyone else? When we can answer this heart check with a resounding “Yes!” then we are in a good position to face the difficulties and do the hard work of apologetics.
This heart-checking was Peter’s advice to first-century believers. Apologists love to quote it in 1 Peter 3:15b: “Always be prepared to give an answer.” But just before that classic call to defend the faith, Peter places it within a context of persecution. In verse 14 he says, “But even though you suffer for what is right, you are blessed. Do not be afraid of their threats; do not be terrified.” Responding to how to do this, Peter says to put Jesus first. “But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord” (vs15a). The surrounding passage, 1 Peter 3:9-17 [ii] reinforces this point by saying, “do not repay evil with evil,” “nor insult with insult,” “repay evil with blessing,” “keep your tongue from evil and your lips from deceitful words,” and “suffer for doing good” rather than “for doing evil.”
It’s easy for you to say it.
Of course, it is easy for me to say all this. My job, my family, my way of life, are safe. There are no political enemies or religious invaders knocking on our door. My church faces no real danger of conquest at the hands of radical Muslims, militant Hindus, or even sarcastic atheists. It is easy for me to tell people to endure persecution heroically when it is their persecution and not mine. That is why I do not speak on my own authority. The apostle Peter said it first. I only agree with him. If I am ever faced with persecution like that suffered by my brothers and sisters in Nigeria, I pray that I will have the courage to follow my own counsel, I pray that I will follow Peter in honoring Christ as Lord and suffering well.
How do we do it?
At this point, you might be saying to yourself, “Well, be fair and don’t ‘stoop down to their level.’ I get that. But how do we do that?” That’s a great question. I’m glad you asked. Stay tuned for part 2, where I explain seven principles we should all follow when our opponent isn’t fighting fairly.
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
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Dr. John D. Ferrer is an educator, writer, and graduate of CrossExamined Instructors Academy. A diplomate of Southern Evangelical Seminary and Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, he is currently active in the pro-life community and his home church in Pella, Iowa. When not assisting his wife Hillary Ferrer with her Mama Bear Apologetics ministry, John can usually be found writing, researching, and teaching cultural apologetics.
Translated by Yatniel Vega Garcia
Edited by Jennifer Chavez
Original Blog Source: https://bit.ly/3U9AOYv
Is it Hateful to Say Jesus is the Only Way?
Culture CrossExamined, Jesus Christ, Theology and Christian ApologeticsBy Ryan Leasure
Is it hateful or arrogant to claim that Jesus is the only way of salvation? Charles Templeton thought so. He argued:
What are we to make of Templeton’s claims? Is it presumptuous to say that Jesus is the one true way of salvation? Or even worse, are Christians guilty of committing “absurd religious chauvinism” as some put it?[2] These common refrains are the fundamental tenets of religious pluralism — the belief that all religions are essentially the same and lead to God.
In a culture that abhors dogmatic truth claims, should Christians heed the warnings of the religious pluralists and stop teaching that Jesus is the only way of salvation? I don’t think so for a couple of reasons. First, religious pluralism is a self-defeating proposition. It crumbles in the face of logical scrutiny. And second, pluralism ignores scientific and historical finding. Let’s explore both in turn.
Religious Pluralism is Self-Defeating
To support their claim, religious pluralists share the parable of the blind men and the elephant. The parable goes something like this:
The pluralist argues that the blind men are like the different world religions. Each belief system naively thinks their view of reality is the correct one, but, in the end, they’re all misguided. Rather, all the religions are fundamentally the same and will ultimately lead to the same place. No single “right way” exists according to the pluralist.
The Religions Contradict Each Other
While pluralists like to mention that all religions teach essentially the same thing, nothing could be further from the truth. Let’s take, for example, the nature of God in each major religion. Hinduism acknowledges multitudes of gods that are one with creation. Buddhism, while extremely spiritual, does not worship a god. New Age spirituality teaches that each person should see themselves as god. Islam believes in one God, named Allah, who is transcendent above creation. Judaism believes in a transcendent God named Jehovah. Christianity teaches that God is triune in nature, and is both transcendent and immanent in his creation.
Let’s look at one more example — how each religion views Jesus of Nazareth. Hinduism, Buddhism, and New Age all say he was a wise, moral teacher. Islam teaches that he was a prophet, though not divine, and that he didn’t die on a cross. Judaism teaches that he was a false prophet who led many astray and was crucified for blasphemy. Christianity teaches that Jesus was divine, he died on a cross, and he rose again from the dead.
If space permitted me, I could also explain how each of these religions differ on creation, scripture, the nature of humanity, sin, salvation, and eternal life. In other words, these religions have almost nothing in common.
Pluralism Defies Logic
To say all religions teach the same thing commits all kinds of logical fallacies. For example, Christianity teaches that God is a Trinity. God, however, cannot be both a Trinity (Christianity) and not a Trinity (Hinduism, Buddhism, New Age, Islam, and Judaism) at the same time and in the same way.
This would violate the Law of Noncontradiction which teaches that a thing cannot be both A and non-A at the same time and in the same respect. To suggest, therefore, that all religions can be true about the nature of God violates one of the most fundamental laws of logic.
Or consider the nature of Jesus. It cannot be true that Jesus is God (Christianity) and not God (Hinduism, Buddhism, New Age, Islam, and Judaism) at the same time and in the same way. Again, this would violate the Law of Noncontradiction.
Pluralism Makes Exclusive Claims Too
Ironically, pluralists make exclusive claims themselves. In effect, they’re saying that pluralism is true, while all contrary religious claims are false. That is to say, pluralists are guilty of doing the very same thing that they chastise the other religions for doing.
Now that the shoe is on the other foot, should we say the pluralists are hateful for saying their view of reality is the right one while all of us naive religious folk are wrong?
Pluralism Ignores Scientific and Historical Facts
Now it’s one thing to say that all the different religions can’t be right. It’s another to claim that one of them is the truth. Strong evidence, though, points in the direction of Christianity.
Scientific Evidence
Consider the origin of the universe. All the scientific data suggests that space, time, and matter, all came into existence simultaneously a finite time ago. Meaning the cause of the universe must be spaceless, timeless, and immaterial.
This fits nicely with the Christian belief that God created the world out of nothing, but it contradicts pantheistic religions such as Hinduism which teach that god is one with the universe — bound by space, time, and material. Additionally, the scientific data that the universe came into existence a finite time ago contradicts Buddhism’s belief in an eternal/cyclical universe.
The scientific evidence leaves the theistic religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and Deism) as possibilities. Yet when we turn our attention to Jesus of Nazareth, Christianity quickly rises to the top.
Historical Evidence
For example, ancient historians are unanimous that Jesus of Nazareth died by crucifixion in the first century. Islam, however, denies that Jesus — a prophet from God — was crucified. Since dozens of independent historical sources confirm Jesus’ death by crucifixion, we can be confident that Islam doesn’t pass the historical test as the one true religion. In fact, Jesus’ crucifixion is so certain that prominent skeptic scholar John Dominic Crossan admits, “Jesus’ death by crucifixion under Pontius Pilate is as sure as anything historical can ever be.”[3]
With only three viable options remaining, we turn our focus to the resurrection. Did Jesus rise again from the dead? If he did, Christianity is true, while Judaism and Deism are not. And we have lots of reasons to believe Jesus did, in fact, rise again. Let me give you two quick examples.
First, Christians claim that women were the first eye-witnesses to this incredible event. In a culture where nobody took a woman’s word seriously, it’s hard to imagine that Christians would have made up this detail. Since the early Christians would have had no motivation to make up this embarrassing fact, we have good reason to believe that this detail accurately portrays what really happened.
Additionally, Jesus’ closest followers were all willing to die for their belief that he rose again. Don’t you think, at some point, at least one of them would have caved under the threat of crucifixion or beheading and said the entire thing was a hoax? Yet not one of them did. This is telling, especially since those same disciples acted like cowards during Jesus’ arrest and crucifixion.
If Jesus rose again from the dead, that means what he claimed about himself has been vindicated — namely that he is God, and that he is the one true way of salvation.
Is it Hateful to Say Jesus Is the Only Way?
I don’t know anyone who would say that Jesus of Nazareth was hateful. Most actually affirm the exact opposite, he was incredibly moral and loving. Yet it’s this same Jesus who makes the claim that he is “the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6).
As we ponder the question at hand, consider the following statement by outspoken atheist and famed illusionist Penn Jillette:
So is it hateful to tell people Jesus is the only way? I submit to you that it’s the loving thing to do.
Footnotes
[1] Charles Templeton, Farewell to God (Toronto, Ontario: McClelland & Stewart), 27
[2] John Hick and Paul Knitter, eds., The Myth of Christian Uniqueness, (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock), 141
[3] John Dominic Crossan, Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography (San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1991), 145.
[4] Quoted in, Justin Taylor, “How Much Do You Have to Hate Someone to Not Proselytize?” TheGospelCoalition.org, 18 Nov 2009, accessed 20 March 2023 at: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justin-taylor/how-much-do-you-have-to-hate-somebody-to-not-proselytize/
Recommended Resources Related to This Topic
Is Original Sin Unfair? (DVD Set), (mp4 Download Set), and (MP3 Set) by Dr. Frank Turek
Jesus, You and the Essentials of Christianity by Frank Turek (INSTRUCTOR Study Guide), (STUDENT Study Guide), and (DVD)
Is Original Sin Unfair? by Frank Turek (DVD, Mp3 and Mp4)
How Can Jesus Be the Only Way? (mp4 Download) by Frank Turek
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
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: http://bit.ly/3JF54Wf
How Did Thomas Aquinas Prove the Existence of God? | with Dr. David Haines
PodcastDo we need deep scientific knowledge in order to make arguments for the existence of God? Or can we demonstrate a general, objective, rational case for God’s existence using common observations found in our everyday life? Philosopher and theologian Thomas Aquinas introduced the world to his “Five Ways” for the existence of God back in the 13th century, and they are still being discussed and debated today. There are some similarities between Aquinas’ Five Ways and many other common arguments for the existence of God (Kalam cosmological, moral, teleological, etc.) but there are also some important distinctions to keep in mind.
In this midweek podcast episode, Frank sits down with Dr. David Haines, assistant professor of theology and philosophy at Bethlehem College and Seminary, to discuss two of the five arguments Aquinas used to prove the existence of God. David is active in research related to ancient and medieval philosophy, early Reformed theology, C.S. Lewis, Thomism, natural law, and natural theology. He has given conference presentations and published a number of articles and books in these areas, including Natural Theology and Natural Law. As Frank and David introduce the audience to two of these Five Ways of Aquinas, you will see that their (relative) simplicity can be deceiving, and their nuances will continue to spark discussion for many more centuries to come!
To view the entire VIDEO PODCAST, be sure to join our CrossExamined private community. It’s the perfect place to jump into some great discussions with like-minded Christians while simultaneously providing financial support for our ministry.
David at Bethlehem College and Seminary: http://bit.ly/3XREnn5
Natural Theology: A Biblical and Historical Introduction and Defense: https://a.co/d/40Qj0Sn
Natural Law: A Brief Introduction and Biblical Defense: https://a.co/d/cnIo1HP
If you would like to submit a question to be answered on the show, please email your question to Hello@Crossexamined.org.
Subscribe on Apple Podcast: http://bit.ly/CrossExamined_Podcast Rate and review! Thanks!!!
Subscribe on Google Play: https://cutt.ly/0E2eua9
Subscribe on Spotify: http://bit.ly/CrossExaminedOfficial_Podcast
Subscribe on Stitcher: http://bit.ly/CE_Podcast_Stitcher
Is Hell An Eternal Restraining Order?
Atheism, Theology and Christian ApologeticsBy Al Serrato
Making sense of the existence of a place like Hell is a common struggle for the Christian apologist. Almost immediately, we are placed on the defensive, being asked to justify how a “loving” God could condemn any of his creation to a place of constant, and eternal, torment. I’ve often heard the challenge brought like this: “Isn’t God’s love for us like that of a parent? Can you imagine any loving parent ever wishing, or wanting, such extreme punishment for their own child?”
The answer, of course, is no. No parent would delight in tormenting his children. And neither does God. But just as human parents must sometimes resort to court orders to keep their children away, so too does God employ the equivalent of an eternal “restraining order.” Though not intended this way by the atheist, the analogy to parental love actually works against the challenger’s case, because it makes clear the need for enforced separation to be imposed even in the context of what was originally intended as a loving relationship.
Sometimes Children Victimize Their Parents
Everyday throughout this country, there are parents who are being victimized by their children. In many cases, the children want something that the parent is not able, or willing, to give. Often, the abuse consists of verbal or physical assaults or of some form of theft, and many times the problem is fueled by an underlying drug or alcohol addiction. In many such cases, the abused parents seek assistance from the police and the courts to have their offspring restrained from contacting them. For most, this final step is heartbreaking, but it is often the last resort, the only means by which the parent can safeguard his or her wellbeing. In some, more extreme, cases, the parent’s testimony in court might contribute to a criminal conviction which will land the son or daughter in prison, sometimes for life. The point is simple enough: love has its limits, and there comes a time when separation from an abuser is the only path that is left.
If this causes the offspring pain, that pain is not “intended” by the parent; it is, instead, an unavoidable consequence of the path set in motion by the offender.
How Does This Analogy Apply to God?
Applying this analogy to an eternal setting has its drawbacks. God, of course, cannot be victimized. He has no fear of us, and no need to incarcerate us in order to protect himself. But does he not have the same right to association that we do? When a person uses his or her free will to rebel against God, God is not required to ignore that rebellion. Indeed, if God truly is a perfect being, embodying perfect justice, he could not simply ignore it and remain true to his nature. For God to maintain perfect justice, he must attach an appropriate consequence to violations of his law. On earth, that justice often involves incarcerating the wrongdoer, to both punish the offender and to minimize his ability to continue to use his free will to harm others. Similarly, God makes use of his power to separate those who refuse to accept the gift of life that he offers, an offer, it bears noting, he makes on his terms only
Consider Eternity
For those who have died in rebellion, no further chance is offered them. Eternally “restrained” from fellowship with God, they experience eternity aware of all that they have lost. Consider for a moment what eternal separation from God must be like. Despite the effort by so many to pile up money and toys and success in this world, these things do not make life rich or fulfilling. All the riches and success in the world would mean nothing if a person were utterly alone. No, such things are simply means to an end, an end which always involves relationship with others. That is why solitary confinement is so destructive to the human mind and spirit. In the end, it is human companionship – rich and meaningful relationships – that brings joy in life. Conversely, the loss of such attachments often lead to depression, alcohol and drug use to blunt the pain, and in some cases suicide.
Every relationship on earth, however satisfying, necessarily involves a flawed human being that is not capable of bringing limitless joy. Additionally, while we still draw breath, the possibility of adding new relationships continues. What happens to us, however, at death? What do we encounter when we see more clearly, for the first time, the One who created us, the source of all life, the Being who embodies all perfections? Every person on earth is but a mere shadow of this ultimate Being. When we begin to consider the joy we feel when deeply in love, or conversely the agony brought on by the loss of a loved one, and multiply that experience not by millions or billions, but by infinity itself, we may begin to see why human writers, even divinely inspired ones, cannot quite grasp the horror of the thought. A lake of fire would seem tame by contrast.
But this place of suffering is internal, self-centered, self-focused. An eternity of caring only about oneself, apart and alone and without hope of reunification with the source of joy and love. It is not a place where God inflicts torture, but rather one in which infinite torment awaits on the far side of the abyss. God derives no pleasure when he acts to restrain an unrepentant sinner. Indeed, he provides an alternative – a means of salvation – to all.
For those who refuse His gift, they will have only themselves – literally, and eternally – to blame.
Recommended resources related to the topic:
Hell? The Truth about Eternity (MP3 Set), (DVD Set), and (Mp4 Download Set) | Frank Turek
Short Answers to Long Questions (DVD) and (mp4 Download) | Frank Turek
Was Jesus Intolerant? (DVD) and (Mp4 Download) | Frank Turek
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
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 worked for 33 years. 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.
How Can We Be S.U.R.E. That God Exists?
PodcastWhat’s more likely? That no one created something from nothing, or that someone created something from nothing? If you ask an atheist or an agnostic this question, the answer may shock you. According to Aristotle, “nothing is what rocks dream about.” And yet nearly all scientists agree that the universe came into existence from just that, nothing.
In this week’s podcast, Frank guides us through S.U.R.E., an acronym he uses to show the scientific evidence that the universe had a beginning from nothing. From that fact, we can see that cause of the universe has the attributes of God. Frank will also address questions such as:
Who created God?
What is the Big Bang Theory?
What if science changes?
Is there other evidence that the universe had a beginning?
How “fine-tuned” is the universe?
Did Einstein believe the universe had a beginning?
If God exists, what are His attributes?
How does cause and effect point to God’s existence?
Do atheists have more “faith” when they say the universe didn’t have a cause?
Skeptics beware! This episode may cause you to doubt your doubts!
To view the entire VIDEO PODCAST, join our CrossExamined private community. It’s the perfect place to jump into great discussions with like-minded Christians while providing financial support for our ministry.
If you would like to submit a question to be answered on the show, please email your question to Hello@Crossexamined.org.
Subscribe on Apple Podcast: http://bit.ly/CrossExamined_Podcast Rate and review! Thanks!!!
Subscribe on Google Play: https://cutt.ly/0E2eua9
Subscribe on Spotify: http://bit.ly/CrossExaminedOfficial_Podcast
Subscribe on Stitcher: http://bit.ly/CE_Podcast_Stitcher
What is Divine Omnipresence?
2. Does God Exist?, Philosophy of Science, Theology and Christian ApologeticsBy Brian Chilton
The term omnipresence describes the all-presence of God. Omnipresence is a compound word comprised of the word “omni”, meaning “all,” and “presence” which defines a person or being’s location. Thus, “omnipresence” speaks of God’s all-present nature. This means that spatial locations do not limit God. Existing as a transcendent being, God is present in all places at all times. Let’s take a brief look at how omnipresence impacts our understanding of God.
Divine Omnipresence Implies God Is Not Limited by the Physical Realm
First, God’s omnipresent nature implicates that the physical realm does not limit God’s presence. Contrary to popular opinion, God is not limited by the physical sphere. Thomas Aquinas argues that in addition to God’s omnipresent nature, God is the only Being in all existence that exists as pure act.[1] That means everything else, including the laws of nature, are potentialities. God is pure existence.
We will return to the distinction between God’s presence and the physical realm in a moment. But for now, one should understand as the psalmist extolled in his rhetorical question, inquiring, “Where can I go to escape your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence?” (Psa. 139:7, CSB). David continues by saying, “If I live at the eastern horizon or settle at the western limits, even there your hand will lead me; your right hand will hold on to me” (Psa. 139:10, CSB). David teaches that God’s presence is everywhere, at all times and places. Even though the universe is estimated to be some 250 times bigger than what is observed, God is not limited by even the incomprehensible expanse of the universe.
This even impacts dimensional thinking. Physicists claim that the physical universe contains at least 11 dimensions and could escalate to amazingly 28 dimensional realms. If true, this would mean that God would exist in all dimensions and even one beyond. Omnipresence also indicates omnidimensionality.[2] Hugh Ross explains,
Divine Omnipresence Implies God Is Not Limited by the Spiritual Realm
Second, divine omnipresence also indicates that God is not limited by the spiritual domain. Romans 8:35 says,
Notice that the text states that no angelic or spiritual being could separate a believer from God’s love. Neither death nor life could separate a person from God’s incomparable love. But how is this possible? God’s love is inseparable when the tremendous ability of God to transcend the scope of time, space, and the spiritual domains of heaven and hell is understood. Not even the spiritual domain can separate us from the benevolent, loving presence of God Almighty.
Divine Omnipresence Implies The Special Nature of God’s Essence
Third, God’s omnipresent essence does not indicate that everything in nature is God. Thus, omnipresence does not teach a pantheistic notion of God—that is, the idea that all things are in some way divine. Aquinas contends that “God is in all things by His power” by his presence and essence. [4] In other words, all things are held together by the omnipresent power of God. However, Aquinas distinguishes between God’s essence and the essence of the thing itself.[5] Though the creation is held together by God’s presence and power, that does not indicate that the material thing becomes God. God’s presence is distinct from the physical and spiritual domain.
Divine Omnipresence Implies That God Alone Possesses Omnipresence
Fourth, nothing and no one can possess the omnipresent attribute that God possesses. Aquinas asserts, “To be everywhere primarily and absolutely, is proper to God … But a thing is everywhere absolutely when it does not belong to it to be everywhere accidentally … It belongs therefore to a thing to be everywhere absolutely when, on any supposition, it must be everywhere; and this properly belongs to God alone.”[6] Aquinas goes on to eloquently state, “Therefore to be everywhere primarily and absolutely, belongs to God, and is proper to Him: because whatever number of places be supposed to exist, God must be in all of them, not as to a part of Him, but as to His very self.”[7] Therefore, the claim that people can be God is sheer insanity when considering that people are spatially confined to a singular spatial location. Only God could possess the attribute of omnipresence. No angel or demon, and not even Satan himself, could possess the awesome power of omnipresence. God and God alone is the Omnipresent Being.
Divine Omnipresence Implies That God Is The Perfect Judge
God’s benevolent and just judgment serves as a powerful aspect of God’s omnipresent nature. Since God is always present in every place, that indicates that God sees all that happens in every place at every point in time. Just the sheer immensity of such a task overwhelms my feeble mind.
Understand that this is not just mere philosophical conjecture. The statement is found securely in the context of Scripture. For instance, Solomon conveys that the “eyes of the Lord are everywhere, keeping watch on the wicked and the good” (Prov. 15:3, NIV). Because of God’s omnipresent vision, God is able to issue just and fair judgment as God knows all the circumstances of an event while even understanding the internal thought processes of each person involved.
God’s omnipresent judgment should cause a believer to pause before judging their neighbor. Paul asks, “why do you judge your brother or sister? Or you, why do you despise your brother or sister? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God” (Rom. 14:10; CSB). James, agreeing with Paul, writes, “There is one lawgiver and judge who is able to save and to destroy. But who are you to judge your neighbor?” (James. 4:12, CSB).
Conclusion
God’s omnipresent nature is truly awe-inspiring. God’s omnipresent nature ensures that God can help us at any point in our lives and in any place. It assures that God can be with our friends and families even when we are physically separated from them by hundreds of miles. God’s omnipresent nature also guarantees that nothing can separate us from God’s loving presence, not even death. With a firm grasp of God’s omnipresent nature, we should be led to live our lives with courage and faith rather than fear and doubt. If we have a personal relationship with God, then we are never alone.
Footnotes
[1] Aquinas, Summa Theologica 1.q8.a4.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica 1.q8.a3.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Hugh Ross, Beyond the Cosmos: What Recent Discoveries in Astrophysics Reveal about the Glory and Love of God (Colorado Springs, Colo.: NavPress, 1999), 33–34.
[6] “First, because it was shown above that there is some first being, whom we call God; and that this first being must be pure act, without the admixture of any potentiality, for the reason that, absolutely, potentiality is posterior to act. Now everything which is in any way changed, is in some way in potentiality. Hence it is evident that it is impossible for God to be in any way changeable.” Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica I.q9.a1, in A Summa of the Summa: The Essential Philosophical Passages of St. Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologica, ed. Peter Kreeft (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1990), 105.
[7] That is, God is not limited by any dimension.
Recommended resources related to the topic:
What is God Really Like? A View from the Parables by Dr. Frank Turek (DVD, Mp3, and Mp4)
What is God Like? Look to the Heavens by Dr. Frank Turek (DVD and Mp4)
How Philosophy Can Help Your Theology by Richard Howe (DVD Set, Mp3, and Mp4)
Layman’s Manual on Christian Apologetics by Brian Chilton (Book)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Brian G. Chilton earned his Ph.D. in the Theology and Apologetics at Liberty University (with high distinction). He is the host of The Bellator Christi Podcast and the founder of Bellator Christi. Brian 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); earned a Certificate in Christian Apologetics from Biola University, and plans to purse philosophical studies in the near future. He is also enrolled in Clinical Pastoral Education to better learn how to empower those around him. Brian is a member of the Evangelical Theological Society and the Evangelical Philosophical Society. Brian has served in ministry for over 20 years and currently serves as a clinical hospice chaplain as well as a pastor.
Original Blog Source: https://bit.ly/3meSo0c
The Case for Criticizing False Teachers – Plus Q&A
PodcastEvery writer of the New Testament warned against false teachers. Even so, it seems that most people today are under the impression that it is a bigger sin to warn people of false teaching than to actually be a false teacher! How did this happen?
In this midweek episode of the ‘I Don’t Have Enough Faith To Be an Atheist’ podcast, Frank makes the case for criticizing false teachers and uses excerpts from his recent blog post to explain that the people who are causing the divisions are NOT those defending the truth–but those who are bringing false teachings into the Church.
He also takes the time to answer listener questions on the topics of how to stay politically engaged when you don’t like any of the candidates and the best way to bridge the gap between Roman Catholics and evangelicals.
To view the entire VIDEO PODCAST, join our CrossExamined private community. It’s the perfect place to jump into great discussions with like-minded Christians while providing financial support for our ministry.
Frank’s blog post: http://bit.ly/3ZS3mry
If you would like to submit a question to be answered on the show, please email your question to Hello@Crossexamined.org.
Subscribe on Apple Podcast: http://bit.ly/CrossExamined_Podcast Rate and review! Thanks!!!
Subscribe on Google Play: https://cutt.ly/0E2eua9
Subscribe on Spotify: http://bit.ly/CrossExaminedOfficial_Podcast
Subscribe on Stitcher: http://bit.ly/CE_Podcast_Stitcher
Can Moral Guilt Feelings Ever Be Objective?
Atheism, Culture CrossExamined, Legislating Morality, Culture & Politics, Theology and Christian ApologeticsBy Bobby Conway
The feeling of moral guilt is a universal experience – that inward gnaw or inner ouch that we have done something wrong. It is that feeling a line has been crossed, a law has been broken, which leaves one wondering if we are genuinely guilty. But are these feelings just that—feelings? A mere subjective experience? A cognitive disrupt? A snafu?
Are Guilt Feelings only Guilt Feelings?
Well, that depends. A person can feel guilty and not be guilty, i.e., pseudo guilt, while a person can also be guilty and not feel guilty. This may be the result of an anesthetized conscience, one’s moral ignorance, some level of psychopathy, or whatever the case may be. In the event we feel guilty, how can we know if our feelings are objective? The answer is surprisingly simple. We should look for a corresponding link between our feelings of guilt and our moral actions. For example, if Steve feels guilty for robbing a local bank that he never did, then he’s not experiencing objective guilt, but from a bad case of pseudo guilt. However, if Steve feels guilty for robbing a bank because he did, then his feelings of guilt are objective in that his feelings correspond to reality. In other words, there’s a corresponding link. An objective match. The reason Steve feels guilty is because he is guilty.
Unfortunately, some people wrongly relegate our feelings to the subjective department, while claiming only reason is objectively dependable. That’s not only wrong. It’s naïve, really naïve.
Just as our reason can provide logically informative thoughts that are either true or false, objective, or subjective, so to our feelings can provide emotionally informative thoughts that are also either true or false, objective, or subjective. Therefore, it’s patently false to assume all our feelings are subjective and can’t provide objective intel. Just as it’s patently false to assume that our reason provides only true thoughts and is always objective.
Feelings Aren’t All Bad
While our feelings certainly can mislead us, they also have the capacity to capture our attention and rightfully so. And this is especially true relating to feelings of guilt. From the Christian worldview perspective, our feelings of guilt are God’s way of grabbing our attention. Like a check engine light, these feelings are meant to alert us to the objective fact that we have failed to make good on our moral obligations. That we have offended our Moral Lawgiver. That we have fractured our relationship with him and need moral repair. But fortunately, God has not left us without a remedy. There’s a way to unload our guilt. And that way is through Christ. Via his atonement, believers can both acknowledge their moral trespass and ask for forgiveness and subsequently experience both forgiveness for their objectively morally guilty action, while also expecting to have their feelings of guilt soothed on account of Christ’s atoning love and grace.
Recommended Resources Related to This Topic
Can Atheism Account for Objective Morality (crossexamined.org) by Ryan Leasure [Blogpost] | Ryan Leasure
Can Empathy Ground Morality (crossexamine.org) by Timothy Fox [Blogpost] | Timothy Fox
Does Our Morality Come From Our DNA? (crossexamined.org) by Neil Mammen [Blogpost] | Neil Mammen
Legislating Morality (Book), (mp4 download), (DVD Set), (MP3 Set), (PowerPoint download), and (PowerPoint CD) by Frank Turek
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Bobby serves as lead pastor of Image Church in Charlotte, North Carolina, and is well known for his YouTube ministry called, One Minute Apologist, which now goes by the name Christianity Still Makes Sense. He also serves as the Co-Host of Pastors’ Perspective, a nationally syndicated call-in radio show on KWVE in Southern California. Bobby earned his Master of Theology degree from Dallas Theological Seminary, his Doctor of Ministry in Apologetics from Southern Evangelical Seminary, and his Ph.D. in Philosophy of Religion from the University of Birmingham (England) where he was supervised under David Cheetham and Yujin Nagasawa. Bobby’s also written several books including: The Fifth Gospel, Doubting Toward Faith, Does God Exist, and Fifty-One other Questions About God and the Bible and the forthcoming Christianity Still Makes Sense to be published by Tyndale in April 2024. He’s married to his lovely wife Heather and together they have two grown kids: Haley and Dawson.
How to Speak the Truth on Same Sex Marriage (Even If the World Hates You For It)
Podcast“If the world is against the truth, then I am against the world.” The words of Athanasius remain relevant even in modern times, as society continues to pressure the church to abandon Christian orthodoxy. In a video that has now gone viral, Father Calvin Robinson shared this quote from Athanasius during his 12-minute long debate speech at the Oxford Union. When bishops within his own church made the decision to “bless same-sex unions”, Robinson chose to defend the sanctity of marriage in response.
Listen as Frank highlights numerous “truth bombs” that were dropped in the debate and explores some of the questions posed by Father Robinson, including:
Most of us will never go viral for defending the faith, but we will undoubtedly encounter this issue within our own communities. This podcast episode is guaranteed to help Christians and conservatives address this sensitive topic. In the words of G.K. Chesterton, “We do not want a church that will move with the world. We want a church that will move the world.”
To view the entire VIDEO PODCAST, join our CrossExamined private community. It’s the perfect place to jump into great discussions with like-minded Christians while providing financial support for our ministry.
5-minute version of the speech: https://youtu.be/TfgTPTS5Aa8
Full lecture at the Oxford Union: https://youtu.be/ymbTb2HS5Rc
Full transcript of speech: https://t.co/c2Y1TpSbfe
Fr Calvin Robinson’s website: https://www.calvinrobinson.com/
If you would like to submit a question to be answered on the show, please email your question to Hello@Crossexamined.org.
Subscribe on Apple Podcast: http://bit.ly/CrossExamined_Podcast Rate and review! Thanks!!!
Subscribe on Google Play: https://cutt.ly/0E2eua9
Subscribe on Spotify: http://bit.ly/CrossExaminedOfficial_Podcast
Subscribe on Stitcher: http://bit.ly/CE_Podcast_Stitcher
Cinco señales de la madurez espiritual
EspañolBy Melissa Dougherty
We all want to be wise in our spiritual walk. We want to progress and make good decisions that will pay off in the long run. We long to live wisely in all areas of our lives and be an example to others. But what I have seen is that the path to get there is not always the easiest. In my experience, I have witnessed what we would consider mature Christians who truly live according to these characteristics. But I have also seen others who lack them. Today I want to share with you five signs of what I consider to be proof of spiritual maturity. These characteristics have a biblical basis and are observable by the way some Christians behave in certain situations.
1.) They react according to the Scriptures and based on the character of God and not according to their feelings and emotions.
The most spiritually mature people I know are also the most emotionally mature. They make their decisions in accordance with the wisdom of Scripture and logic, and the fruit of the Spirit is visible in their lives, especially the part about self-control. They take time to think and evaluate situations and treat others the way they want to be treated. They do not project their faults on others and are conscious of this in their interactions and when expressing their judgments and opinions. They think before they act. They usually have a witty and intentional sense of humor but without humiliating or offending others. They are an example of what is written in James 1:19, where it says to be quick to listen, slow to speak, and slow to get angry. They obtain their values from the Scriptures and also follow them. All of this is placed above their emotions and with this they avoid making hasty decisions or having emotional outbursts. Did you know that there is an IQ to measure general intelligence? Well, there is also an IQ for “emotional intelligence,” and I have found that spiritually mature people also have a high IQ for emotional intelligence. Costi Hinn once said, “A mark of maturity and self-control is having enough control over your emotions to be able to understand those who disagree with you.”
2.) They listen more and talk less.
In the previous point I referenced James 1:19. People who live by this passage tend to be more interested in the person they are talking to and avoid unnecessary arguments. And they don’t get offended by everything. I read a post on social media that said, “An immature Christian is hard to please and easy to offend.” Luke 6:45 says that people show good or bad things depending on what is in their heart. Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks. Restraining your mouth is directly related to what is in your heart, and it is especially seen in what is said on social media. If you only have a hammer, everything will look like a nail. But spiritually mature Christians are different. They are people who seek first to understand and then to be understood. They try to respond to their listeners from a place of love grounded in love for God. They weigh the other person’s perspective even when it is contrary to their own. But they are not condescending when theological errors appear. They can sort out and decide which topics to avoid and which to delve into, and they are able to engage in deep conversations without arguing every time. Proverbs 15:1 says that a gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger. They look to others for spiritual advice and answers, and they welcome their shortcomings to be pointed out to them.
3.) They have a marked sense of humility.
They don’t seek to be above others. After observing them I realized that they live to serve, and they live like that in ministry too. They are like strangers or go unnoticed (even though everyone knows who they are!) They have a healthy self-confidence, and it is normal for them to be interested in others. They don’t always do it with the intention of teaching them something, but they instinctively know how to ask questions, they are easy to get to know others, and they treat everyone with respect because everyone is made in the image of God, especially when they don’t agree with them. They don’t tend to rebuke those who have a different opinion than them, nor do they demonize things they don’t approve of. They show love as described in 1 Corinthians 13. They are kind, patient, not boastful, they rejoice in the truth, and they seek God’s glory, not their own. In my experience, these Christians don’t brag about “having discernment” or “being humble.” They just show it off. They don’t need people’s praise for what they do. They do what they do to please God and God alone. But without being indifferent to others. This is easily visible by the way they treat, converse with, and love others. When they make mistakes, they have enough awareness and humility to recognize that it is necessary to make amends and admit their mistake. They don’t get defensive and if necessary, they take steps to change.
4.) They are self-aware.
A spiritually mature person can read an audience and is aware of how others perceive them. They show restraint in their social behavior. They are people who are able to control themselves during conversations and know when and in what situations they should step back to reconsider their feelings. They are aware that they represent Jesus and that their actions and words have consequences. And more than that, they are sharp-witted enough to understand how their words and actions will affect others. James 3 tells us a lot about controlling our tongue. He compares the tongue to the rudder that steers a great ship. In verse 5 it says, “So the tongue is a small member, and yet it boasts of great things. Behold, how a great forest is set on fire by a small fire!” James 1:26 says, “If anyone thinks he is religious but does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless.”
5.) They set healthy boundaries and have authentic discernment.
Not every occurrence or feeling is attributed to a sign from God or interpreted as the movement of the Holy Spirit, nor do they consider that everything they think, feel or hear is the Holy Spirit speaking to them. They do not boast about their ability to discern. They just do it. They learn to develop discernment without resorting to paranoia. They are not conceited about the vast spiritual experiences they have lived, or how intense they were, or even about their great intelligence. They are like any person who comes to listen to a conversation believing that they can learn something from the other person, even though they know more than the one who is speaking! They do not listen to them in order to ridicule them later. They also know when to say no and when to say yes. A spiritually mature person knows that the word “no” is a healthy response. They know how to honor God with their time and they know their personal limits. They have enough common sense to know when to enter into a conversation, event or activity and when to leave. And they are equally aware of where God wants them to be. They prefer to trust in what God will do as they persevere in prayer and reading the Scriptures rather than being carried away by their moods that change every day.
In short, they are the living example of what Galatians 5:22-23 says: “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.” And they also live out what we find in Hebrews 3 regarding living a life of obedience.
So by their fruits, you will recognize them.
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
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Melissa Dougherty is a Christian apologist best known for her YouTube channel where she features content from a former New-Ager . She holds two associate’s degrees, one in Early Childhood Multicultural Education and another in Liberal Arts . She is currently pursuing a Bachelor of Arts degree in Religious Studies from Southern Evangelical Seminary .
Translated by:
Translator Gustavo Camarillo
Edited by Monica Pirateque
Original Blog Source: https://bit.ly/41fvOEj