Tag Archive for: apologetics

Christianity and Abortion, Part 1: A Brief History of Abortion in Antiquity

It is always a temptation in an industrial and technological society such as America to fall into what C.S. Lewis called “chronological snobbery.” This is the belief that the present ideas and practices are superior to, or could never have been imagined by, those who went before us. This is no less true concerning the practice of abortion. Many believe abortion is a relatively new idea and that those who preceded our advanced age could never have imagined having the means to abort a human person in the womb. They did not, after all, have the biological and medical knowledge we have today. Right?

 

Nothing could be further from the truth. Abortion, or some equivalent practice, is just about as old as humanity. Those in antiquity may not have had the technology or medical practices to insert chemicals into a child in utero to kill her or even the means to pull off her legs, head, and arms and then vacuum out her parts from the womb. Nevertheless, they had their methods of performing abortions, and they had similar reasons for doing so as some do today.

The Long History of Abortion

Abortion has had a long history, dating back thousands of years. The earliest reference to the practice, notes ethicist John Jefferson Davis, seems to be during the time of the Chinese Emperor Shen Nung (ca 2737-2696 BC).[1] Evidently, some kind of oral abortifacient was recommended to kill a child in utero.

Others promoting abortion (both the child in utero and disposing her after birth, i.e., infanticide) included the two Greek philosophers, Plato and Aristotle, in the third and fourth centuries BC. Both argued that abortion was a necessity in certain instances for the benefit of the State. Plato, for example, believed that the State was to be governed by the most intelligent and knowledgeable philosophers, and one of their duties was to regulate births of those who benefitted the state and dispose of the infants who were born to “inferior breeds.” In Nazi-like eugenic reasoning, Plato stated, “The offspring of the inferior, and any of those of the other sort who are born defective, they [i.e., the governing officials] will properly dispose of in secret, so that no one will know what has become of them.”[2]

In fact, the State was to oversee every aspect of the marital and sexual relationship of every citizen. Once men and women were past their “prime” for begetting children, Plato desired that the State regulate men to have sexual relations with whomever they wished (outside familial relations) as long as they did not “bring to light anything whatever thus conceived.”[3] If they were unable to “prevent a birth,” they were to dispose of the child.

Aristotle, like his mentor Plato, effectively agreed. The “lawgiver’s duty” was to develop children in the best physical way possible. To do this, he was to consider who ought to get married and when they ought to have children. Like Plato, Aristotle believed husband and wife ought to conceive children during their prime for the best chance of conceiving a strong, physically healthy child. In what sounded like an anticipation of some Americans’s view of abortion, Aristotle argued, “Let it be lawful that no cripple child be reared.”[4] If a crippled child was born, then she was to be abandoned.

Aristotle, also like many Americans today, worried about population size. To control human population, Aristotle contended that if “a copulation takes place and a child is conceived,” then “abortion should be procured before the embryo has acquired life and sensation.”[5] In an attempt to establish an ethical guideline, he concluded, “The presence of life and sensation will be the mark of division between right and wrong here.”[6]

Abortion Is Nothing New

As can be readily seen, abortion (and infanticide) is nothing new. It has been around for thousands of years. It seems to be one of the preoccupations of sinful humanity. To summarize the longevity of the practice, comments from John Rasmussen can serve as a good summary:

“Abortion was, then, a familiar practice in the ancient Mediterranean world. One of the most learned of Greco-Roman gynecologists, Soranos of Ephesus (c. A.D. 98-138), discussed two main categories of abortion. Abortion was practiced through an abortifacient (phythorion), which would destroy what had been conceived, or through (ekbolion), which would expel what had been conceived. . . . The conventional Roman attitude toward the fetus and infant was strikingly callous. Seneca referred to the drowning of abnormal or weakly children at birth as a commonplace and as a reasonable kind of action (De Ira, 1.15). Philo noted that it was not unusual for parents to strangle their infants, drown them with attached weights, or expose them in deserted areas to wild beasts and carnivorous birds.” [7]

We may ask at this point, why is it important to consider that abortion was practiced in antiquity? Primarily because it helps us understand how a Christian ought to view abortion. How so? Precisely because if abortion has been practiced for thousands of years, we would expect to find Christians responding to and interacting with the topic. And this is exactly what we find. In part 2 of this series, we will briefly look at what some of the early Christian Fathers and teachers had to say about it.

References: 

[1] John Jefferson Davis, Evangelical Ethics: Issues Facing the Church Today, 3rd ed. (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R, 2004), 139.

[2] Plato, The Republic, Book V, 460, c in Plato: The Collected Dialogues including the Letters, ed. Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns, Bollingen Series LXXI (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2005), 699.

[3] Ibid., 461, c; 700.

[4] Aristotle, The Politics, Book VII.16, trans. T.A. Sinclair, Penguin Classics (Baltimore, MD: Penguin Books, 1962), 294.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Ibid.

[7] John A. Rasmussen, “Abortion: Historical and Biblical Perspectives” Concordia Theological Quarterly 43 1979:19, 21.

Recommended Resources: 

Correct not Politically Correct: About Same-Sex Marriage and Transgenderism by Frank Turek (Book, MP4 )

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

Legislating Morality: Is it Wise? Is it Legal? Is it Possible? by Frank Turek (Book, DVD, Mp3, Mp4, PowerPoint download, PowerPoint CD)

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

 

Peter J. Rasor II is presently the Senior Pastor of Lilburn Christian Church in Lilburn, GA and is an adjunct professor of philosophy at Grand Canyon University (GCU). He previously served as Assistant Professor of Philosophy at GCU (2015-2023). He is co-author of Controversy of the Ages (2017), author of the fantasy novel The Plague of Kosmon: Rise of the Seer, and has a multiple-authored forthcoming book An Introduction to Philosophy: A Christian Guide to the Things that Really Matter (Zondervan; 2025). He holds a ThM in theology and PhD in philosophy from The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (Louisville, KY) and a MA and MDiv from Cincinnati Christian University.

Originally posted at: https://bit.ly/4hSpsmx

/by

Why I Left The Word Of Faith Movement

When I was about fourteen I started listening to teachers such as Kenneth Copeland, Jesse Duplantis, Jerry Savelle, and Creflo Dollar. I had grown up going to church, albeit a very liberal church, but these guys were different than what I was used to. They had passion, zeal, and spoke with power and authority. They taught very differently than what I had heard before, but they used Scripture to back everything up (well, and some direct revelation from God, so they said).

 

They taught that Jesus had secured our physical healing for this life, that we had power over sickness and the devil, that we could transform our finances through our faith, and that we could even use faith the way God does—the God kind of faith. I really enjoyed listening to these teachers, particularly Copeland and Duplantis. I was even able to meet Duplantis and his wife at a meeting in Charlotte, where I gave him a letter thanking him for teaching the truth. Little did I know at the time that I was being sucked into a heretical mess. Since I did not know much at the time about orthodox theology, much of what was said sounded biblical and right. After having spent over a decade of learning theology in college and seminary (long after I left the movement), I began to realize how dangerous their doctrines really are. Let’s look at some of the main teachings of the Word-Faith movement.

God

While the orthodox, traditional view of God among Christians is that God exists as an immaterial being, one in essence with three persons, Word-Faith teachers state that God is a physical being who lives on a planet called heaven. According to Copeland, God stands around 6’2″ around 200lbs. Not only that, God is the “greatest failure in the Bible” since he lost more than any other being at the fall. Further, God has to use faith to do things, like create. God used the “force of faith” that according to Copeland “is a physical force” that is “perceptible to the touch.” We can use this same faith with our positive confession to bring about realities. Our confession, however, can also bring about sickness, disease, and death.

Jesus

According to Word-Faith teachers, Jesus is not divine. According to Dollar, if he were, he would not have needed any special anointing. Rather, he was adopted by God at his baptism. According to teachers like Copeland, Jesus died spiritually and was reborn in hell before his resurrection. He was the first to be born-again. Regarding this, Copeland makes the scariest, most heretical utterance I have ever heard:

“He [God] said, ‘A born-again man defeated Satan, the firstborn of many brethren defeated him.’ He said, ‘You are the very image and the very copy of that one.’ . . . And I said, ‘Well now you don’t mean, you couldn’t dare mean that I could have done the same thing?’ He said, ‘Oh, yeah, if you’d known that, had the knowledge of the Word of God that He did you could have done the same thing. ‘Cause you’re a reborn man too.’”

—From a sermon titled, “From the Cross to the Throne.”

Jesus did not accomplish his work because of his divinity, according to Copeland, but because he was reborn and had certain knowledge.

Jesus not only secured our salvation, he also secured our physical healing, according to such passages as 1 Peter 2:24 and 3 John 2. He is also our example to live by. But not just for holiness. We need to emulate his faith (through positive confession), attain knowledge (like him), and live the way he lived.

Man

Man is created by God, and so is in the god-class of beings. We are little gods, according to Copeland (and others like Benny Hinn). As already mentioned, man uses his positive confession to activate the force of faith to control his reality and bring about health and prosperity that was secured by Jesus. Man can function like God, since both man and God use the force of faith.

When created, Adam was just like God. After the fall, however, God lost his domain to Satan and had to work with people to covenant with him to get back what he lost (such as Abraham, Moses, etc.). As Robert Bowman says, “Copeland teaches that the true meaning of redemption is the restoration of human nature to godhood.”[1]  On that same page, he cites Copeland’s words:

“Peter said it just as plain, he said we are ‘partakers of the divine nature.’ That nature is life eternal in absolute perfection. And that was imparted, injected into your spirit man, and you have that imparted into you by God, just as same as you imparted into your child the nature of humanity. That child wasn’t born a whale—born a human. Isn’t that true? Well now, you don’t have a human, do you? No, you are one. You don’t have a God in you—you are one”

— Copeland “The Force of Love,” tape #02-0028.[2]

Overall Worries and Evaluation

If you are a Christian of the orthodox sort, then the worries should be obvious. If you are a follower of these teachers, it might not be so obvious. There are more worries and problems than I will address here. I’ll just choose a few.

Regarding God, if he is physical, he is necessarily limited. He can’t be everywhere all at once; he can’t know all things, etc. The Trinity can’t be true since a physical being is a being all to himself. But the doctrine of the Trinity teaches that God is one in being, but exists as three persons. If God the Father is physical, then there are at least two beings that make up the divine nature.

Jesus is taught to be a human with a special anointing and knowledge that allowed him to live the way he did, do miracles, and defeat Satan. The orthodox teaching, however, is that Jesus is completely God, and took on the human nature (without sin).

Finally, man is taught to be a little god, in the class of gods. He can use the force of faith (where did the physical faith that God uses come from?) in the same way God did. According to Copeland, man could have defeated Satan as Jesus did. It did not take God, just being reborn and having certain knowledge.

The Word-Faith teaching has striking similarities with Mormonism: Both teach that God is a physical being, people get direct revelation from God even today, we can become gods just like God, both deny the Trinity, and both downplay the role of reason and stress the spirit as a way of learning.

As you can see, while the positive confession and health and wealth teaching is bad, it does not compare to the heresies of the other teachings. And this is why I left the Word-Faith movement.

References: 

[1] Robert Bowman Jr., Word-Faith Controversy: Understanding the Health and Wealth Gospel, unabridged ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2000), 184.

[2] Bowman 2000, 184.

Recommended Resources: 

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

Can All Religions Be True? mp3 by Frank Turek

How Can Jesus be the Only Way? Mp4, Mp3, and DVD by Frank Turek

Another Gospel? by Alisa Childers (book)

 

J. Brian Huffling, PH.D. has a BA in History from Lee University, an MA in (3 majors) Apologetics, Philosophy, and Biblical Studies from Southern Evangelical Seminary (SES), and a Ph.D. in Philosophy of Religion from SES. He is the Director of the Ph.D. Program and Associate Professor of Philosophy and Theology at SES. He also teaches courses for Apologia Online Academy. He has previously taught at The Art Institute of Charlotte. He has served in the Marines, Navy, and is currently a reserve chaplain in the Air Force at Maxwell Air Force Base. His hobbies include golf, backyard astronomy, martial arts, and guitar.

Originally posted at: https://bit.ly/4htMyjk

/by

From Peter to the Christian Apologist

To the Christian Apologist, 1 Peter 3:15-16 is a ‘mandate’ passage, used to demonstrate the reason we all study and become proficient with apologetics.

 

“But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, 16 keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.”
1 Peter 3:15-16 (NIV)

The REAL Reason for doing Apologetics

We tend to focus, however, on verses 15 and 16 and forget to consider the “lead in” context. The real reason we SHOULD do apologetics is actually shown in the second half of verse 14 and the first part of verse 15. If we take time to look there, we might notice a quote that comes straight out of Isaiah 8:12.

“But even if you should suffer for what is right, you are blessed. “Do not fear their threats; do not be frightened.” 15 But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. “
1 Peter 3:14-15a

Isaiah and Peter were both facing significant persecution. Isaiah wrote, “Fear not what they fear, and don’t be afraid. Set apart the Lord of hosts Himself and let Him be your fear” (Isaiah 8:12).  But Peter, seeing the persecutions looming ahead  for himself and the Christian church he’s writing to, copies Isaiah’s template. But Peter adds a twist, “fear not their fear, neither be troubled; but set apart Christ as Lord in your hearts” (1 Peter 3:14-15a). Theologian Alexander MacLaren describes the significance here.

“Now, if we think for a moment of the Jew’s reverence for the letter of Scripture, and then think again of the Jew’s intense monotheism and dread of putting any creature into the place of God, we shall understand how saturated with the belief in the divinity of Jesus Christ, and how convinced that it was the vital center of all Christian teaching, this Apostle must have been when, without a word of explanation, he took his pen, and, as it were, drew it through ‘Lord God’ in Isaiah’s words, and wrote in capitals over it, ‘Christ as Lord.’[1]

Hallowed be They Name

What does “set apart Christ as Lord” mean in Peter’s letter?  Looking at the term “set apart,” (or “sanctify” in King James language) we see it elsewhere in the New Testament. The first sentence of the Lord’s Prayer in Matthew 6:9, says, “Our Father Who art in heaven, hallowed, be thy Name.” The exact same Greek word, used as “set apart,’ and as ‘hallowed,’ is hagiazo.

We set apart sanctify or hallow one who is holy already, when we recognize the holiness, and then honor it. Thus, the plain meaning of Peter’s text is, ‘elevate Christ to the pedestal; the place He deserves in your life, and then; bow down before Him with all reverence and submission. He is due your highest awe and reverence.

“Set apart Christ as Lord in your hearts” is the command. In Scripture the heart is that center node within a person that both affixes and produces your thoughts, words and actions. Remember the verse, “as a man thinks in his heart, so is he,” or when Jesus says “…out of the heart comes the things that defile a man.”  The heart then is the very core of our being. With that in mind, and looking at Peter’s command in the negative sense, he asserts that if we don’t set apart Christ as Lord, you cannot help being afraid of threats and terror, and hence will be inevitably troubled. But, if you do set Christ apart in your heart, then there is no fear that can plague you or render you impotent and ineffective.

MacLaren finishes his narrative with,

“The Apostle comes and says: ‘Sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts; and then, and only then, will you be bold.’ The boldness which fronts the certain dangers and calamities and the possible dangers and calamities of this life, without Christ, is not boldness, but foolhardiness.”[2]

The Heartbeat of Christian Apologetics

The first part of my thesis then is: every Christian, not just the Apologist, should not fear . . . and won’t be fearful, if Christ is rightly placed in that singular, hallowed place at the core of your very being – your identity – and is given the reverence due Him. That is the foundation for studying Apologetics. He is the foundation for studying apologetics. Without that solid footing, your efforts to accumulate and dispense Christian apologetic knowledge will yield little for the Kingdom, and will yield nothing of eternal benefit in your own life.

From there, the rest of our referent passage says, “be prepared to give a defense for the hope that is in you, but do so with grace and truth.”  I finish off with this – the second part of my thesis; offering your apologetic truth to another, infused with genuine grace is only possible when the heart has Christ set apart, hallowed and elevated appropriately in the central place, the core, of your heart. His love will then be manifest in your interpersonal connections in the form of grace, truth and love. If not, only ‘a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal’ will be heard.

References: 

[1] Alexander MacLaren, “Hallowing Christ: 1 Pete 3:14, 15,” [Commentary], Blue Letter Bible [website], N.D., accessed 31 Jan 2025 at: https://www.blueletterbible.org/comm/maclaren_alexander/expositions-of-holy-scripture/1-peter/hallowing-christ.cfm

[2] Ibid.

Recommended Resources:

Debate: What Best Explains Reality: Atheism or Theism? by Frank Turek DVD, Mp4, and Mp3 

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

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

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

 

Dan Hodges has over 40 years of business experience in aerospace, sensor and communications technology. He is a published author and inventor with multiple patent grants in the areas of RADAR systems, telecommunications and intelligence. He had a 26-year career as a military officer and F-16 instructor pilot and likewise has very deep experience in business operations. He has managed more than 400 employees and 16 subsidiary companies simultaneously as an entrepreneur, and has founded and built-out multiple enterprises, both private and publicly traded. He is also the Chairman of two non-profit, ministry-related organizations – CrossExamined and Crossroads Conservation Corp.  Dan holds a Masters in Christian Apologetics from Biola University and both speaks and teaches at churches and schools and via online forums. He currently resides on a family farm in the Blue Ridge mountains with his wife and cultivates apple orchards and edible and medicinal mushrooms.

/by

Should Christianity Be Taught In Public Schools?

My sixth grader ran through the front door sounding slightly short of breath. “My teacher is teaching a unit on world religions,” he huffed. “He’s going to teach us about Islam, Christianity, Egyptian gods and who knows what else!” As a fifth grade teacher I was aware of the California standards for fifth grade but this surprised me. World religions was part of the sixth grade standards? Low and behold, written into the California content standards for sixth grade social studies is the requirement for students to learn “ancient civilizations, religion, slavery, and delving into Hammurabi’s laws, sections of the Torah (first five books of the Bible), and Confucius.”[1]

 

My surprise wasn’t because I was worried about him learning opposing worldviews. I was surprised the curriculum took the students deep into these world religions. I wondered how the teacher would present the information to the students. Will he be unbiased? Biased?  My son went forward with the unit, even taking a field trip to an Egyptian museum in Sacramento. It was an eye-opening experience that led us to deeper conversations about the Christian worldview in comparison to opposing worldviews.

Curriculum Change?

A few months ago, Texas became the latest state to integrate religion into their elementary school curriculum, joining states like Oklahoma and Louisiana.[2] As expected, the reaction to the news has caused a split of, let’s say, cheers and boos. But what I’ve seen is the revelation of false assumptions about worldviews in public education that I’ll address in this article.

  1. Assumption #1: Many people assume that religion and worldview hasn’t been taught prior to this decision.
  2. Assumption #2: Many people assume the public education system has always been neutral and must remain that way. I’ll explain why that’s not possible.

Worldview Integration

What Texas did was add an optional curriculum that infuses biblical stories and concepts into their lessons. It’s hardly teaching worldview, but I won’t split hairs. Schools do not have to adopt this curriculum but the Texas State Board of Education sweetened the deal by offering $60 per student if they do. For a teacher on a budget equivalent to that of a college student, that’s tempting. Consequently, this brought cheers from those who desire to see Christianity brought back into the public education system and boos from those who want to keep it out. It’s rare that anyone is neutral on whether or not religion should be taught in public education.

I want to pose something to think about for the cheerleaders and the boo hoo-ers of this decision. First, everyone needs to calm down because I don’t think it’s as simple as threading some Bible verses into a social studies unit and expecting you’ll get a student who thinks biblically. When it comes to biblical integration, we need to consider the three I’s of worldview formation:

  1. The instructor
  2. The instruction
  3. The integration

 

  1. Have you considered the instructor?

When it comes to education, and in this case, worldview development, it’s not only about what is being taught, it’s also about who teaches it. Every teacher has a worldview and just because she teaches some Bible verses from a teacher’s guide does not mean it will result in a student with a biblical worldview. As Martha MacCollough states in her book Undivided: Developing A Biblical Approach To Worldview Integration,

“Teacher and student must integrate their worldviews together, cooperatively measuring truth and reality by the standard of God’s word. If the teacher’s worldview does not align to the worldview behind the production of the curriculum, the program is fragmented, not cohesive. In other words, it lacks integrity or wholeness.”[3]

  1. Have you considered the instruction?

Teaching bible lessons is one thing; teaching students how to apply them is the necessary connection to worldview development. Therefore, MacCullough goes on to say that,

“Biblical worldview integration in an academic setting must be understood as a function of the curriculum.”[4]

In a public education environment this isn’t possible because the worldview behind the public education system is scientific naturalism. Again, a unit sprinkled with some Bible verses in elementary school is competing with Darwinian evolution in tenth grade science. And although according to The Texas Tribune the Texas Board of Education did add language that allowed students to pushback on evolutionary science, it’s still not a cohesive framework that provides integrity in worldview formation.

  1. Have you considered biblical integration?

To integrate means you “combine one thing with another so they become a whole.” In order to effectively teach from a biblical worldview so the result is a student with a biblical worldview, you must have a teacher with a biblical worldview, teaching a curriculum produced from a biblical worldview, across a school wide program with a unified philosophy of education. If that sounds a lot like the children’s book If You Give A Mouse A Cookie, it should.[5] An effective and cohesive program is going to set off a chain of events that puts everyone on the same page for worldview development. Otherwise, it’s not truly biblical integration. It’s just, as I said above, some Bible verses added into social studies content.

Addressing The Assumptions

From a biblical standpoint, the Bible is clear about whose responsibility it is to teach children about God and it’s not the school. But let’s not be so naive as to assume religion and worldview isn’t taught in school already. Darwinian evolution is taught to tenth grade science students every year and there isn’t one state in the United States where it isn’t. Where are the boo-hooers? Oh, they’re only upset if it’s content they disagree with.

Let’s get this straight: no one is neutral. Everyone is passionate about their passionately held beliefs and that’s to be expected. One side will always boo and the other side will always cheer; it’s just dependent on who gets their way.

So, for all of the Christian parents and educators out there where a biblical worldview is not only the correct framework for Christian education but is also expected, this is what I suggest: teach all of it. Teach Islam. Teach New Age. Teach Mormonism, Progressive Christianity, and competing worldviews. But do it on the foundation of biblical truth and teach kids why we shouldn’t be afraid to test the claims of all religions, including their own. After all, isn’t that what we want if we’re confident that what we believe is true? So no, the public educations system shouldn’t teach Christianity in school because they don’t have the framework for it to be effective. The reason my son’s 6th grade unit was enjoyable is because he was testing the claims of other worldviews in comparison with Christianity because we made sure it turned out that way. The school did not. Outside of that, we didn’t expect much else from the public education system by way of a Christian education. And neither should you.

New Course For 7th-9th Graders!

Are you looking for curriculum to help your 7th-9h grader test the claims of major worldviews and religions? Check out our brand new course Expedition To Reality beginning on February 24th at OnlineChrstianCourses.com. This is an 8 week course that builds on the foundation of the core tenets of Christianity while learning about Islam, New Age, Marxism, Progressive Christianity and more. Join the expedition before it’s too late!

Sign-Up Now for the New Course:
Expedition to Reality
Starting February 24th

References: 

[1] https://www.scoe.net/media/ykyfx3ri/parent_overview_hss_6-8.pdf

[2] https://www.newsnationnow.com/us-news/education/states-push-incorporate-religion-school-curriculums/; https://www.texastribune.org/2024/11/19/texas-sboe-bible-christianity-curriculum/

[3] Martha MacCullough, Undivided: Developing A Biblical Approach To Worldview Integration (Colorado Springs, CO: Purposeful Design Publications, 2016), ch. 1

[4] Ibid.

[5] Laura Numeroff and Alicia Bond, If You Give a Mouse a Cookie (New York: Harper Collins, 2015).

Recommended Resources:

Counter Culture Christian: Is the Bible True? by Frank Turek (Mp3), (Mp4), and (DVD)        

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)      

Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions by Greg Koukl (Book)

 

Shanda Fulbright is a credentialed teacher and has a certificate in Christian Apologetics from Biola University, a certificate from the CrossExamined Instructor’s Academy as well as several certificates from Online Christian Courses. She hosts Her Faith Inspires podcast where she takes cultural issues and aligns them to biblical truth. You can read her blogs and find out more about her at shandafulbright.com.

/by

Defending the Deity of Jesus in John 1

John 1:1 is one of the most important verses in the Gospel of St. John to understand grammatically in English but more importantly in Greek.

“In the Beginning was the word and the word was with God and the Word was God” (John 1:1)

Εν αρχή ἧν ὁ λόγος και ὁ λόγος ἧν προς τον θεόν και θεός ἧν ὁ λόγος[i][ii]

The reason is this verse is always under attack by various non-Christian religious groups and even faiths who claim to be Christian but, do not accept Jesus Christ as God the Son (The second person of the Trinity). The two words I want to focus on is “God” and “Word” or Θεός ἧν ὁ Λόγος (Theos hēn hŏ logos). What I am going to focus on is the grammatical construct of John 1:1 and a bit of the history behind ὁ λόγος (hŏ logos).

John 1:1 and Genesis 1:1

In Ancient Greek literature there is no difference in meaning between the two-word adverbial Phrase Ἐν ἀρχη (en arkē) and the three-word adverbial phrase Ἐν τη ἀρχη (en tē archē) but Ἐν ἀρχη is used more frequently. Ἐν ἀρχη parallels Genesis 1:1 Ἐν ἀρχη ἐπιοησεν ὁ Θεος (en arkē hŏ theos), “In the beginning God created.”[iii]

The Historical Background of Hŏ Logos

John may have written his gospel in Ephesus the birthplace of Greek philosopher Heraclitus who lived around 500 B.C. He taught that λογος (logos) was eternal, and it could be compared to fire and gives life to everything in the universe; and this was taught well into the first century.[iv]

Λόγος word

The Greek Term λόγος is found in a number of different English words like logic, logical, prologue, epilogue etc. It can also have a number of different senses like, word, reason, cause, reasoning etc.

Λόγος is associated with “spoken Word” but λόγος in John 1:1 does not mean “word” in the sense of a word found in a dictionary. The Greek term for word is λέξις (lexeis) which is where we get our English word lexicon from. The ὁ λόγος in John 1:1 in a person.[v]

John was writing to a Hellenized audience, so he places Jesus as the ὁ λόγος he did this in the most integral spot, at the beginning of his gospel.[vi]


The Grammatical Construct of John 1:1

The combination of Προς (prŏs) plus the accusative Τον Θεόν (tŏn theon) means “with God.” This is similar in force to how Paul writes: ἐν μορφῃ Θεού ἰσα Θεῳ (en morfē isa theō), which translates as, “In the form of God, equal with God” (Phil. 2:6).

Προς Τον Θεόν (prŏs tŏn theon) literally means “With the God.” The use of the article Τον (tŏn) “the” before a noun identifies that noun. And in this case “the God” means “God the Father.” By reiterating the conjunction και (kai) in και Θεός ἧν ὁ λόγος (kai theos hēn hŏ logos) John is placing emphasis on this instance of ὁ λόγος. He describes in his gospel, in addition to being from eternity with Θεός, is also Himself Θεός.[vii]

The word order is reversed in English, in English it reads “and the word was God” but in Greek it reads, “And God was the Word.”


Θεός ἧν ὁ λόγος (Theos hēn hŏ logos)

In John 1:1 this clause has two nouns. One noun is Θεος (theos) and the other is λόγος (logos). Λογος has an article, ὁ λόγος which means it is an articular noun and Θεος has no article so it is called an anarthrous noun. The articular noun is identified by the definite article “ὁ” as the subject. And the rest of the clause is the predicate.[viii]

So, between the predicate noun and a linking verb, ἧν (hēn; “was”), the linking verb connects the subject, ὁ λόγος, to the predicate noun, Θεός. Θεός adjectivally describes ὁ λόγος. In essence ὁ λόγος was with all the attributes, essence, nature, and qualities of Θεός. [Everything true of God is true of the Logos.][ix]

This article is not intended to be a full comprehensive explanation due to the how in depth this subject can go. John was very intentional about describing Jesus as God the Son, the second person of the Trinity.

References: 

[i] Editor’s note: The Greek transliterates as: “en arkē hēn ho logos kai ho logos hēn pros ton theon kai theos hēn ho logos.” – Transliterations are included throughout, in text, for those of you who don’t read Greek.]

[ii] Editor’s Note: If the translation were to preserve the Greek word order, it would look something like this: “And the word was with [the] God and God was the word.” This phrasing creates a chiasm – inverting the word order between the two parallel lines: Word-God, and God-Word. Additionally, the definite article, ὁ (pronounced hŏ), which is typically unnecessary in Greek except for emphasis or clarity, translates as “the” and is used here for “the God” in the first phrase then “the Word” in the second phrase. The Chiasm, being inverted parallelism, indicates that this verse is intended as poetry – still literally true, but expressed with an eye for beauty, memorability, and maybe even lyricality. Heightening that poetic structure is the shift of the definite article from “the God” to “The Word.” The one and only God is the same being as singular Logos, “The Word.” The author most definitely wanted to draw attention to the strict identity between God and Logos. The Word is God.” – JDF]

[iii] “Philemon, Zachariou Greek Pronunciation John 1:1.” YouTube. YouTube, n.d. Accessed November 20, 2024. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IkIgSpCgtM

[iv] Ibid., see also, Jean Bollack, “Ch. 17 The Heraclitean Logos,” in The Art of Reading: From Homer to Paul Celan, C. Porter and S. Tarrow with B. King, trans; C. Koenig, L. Muellner, G. Nagy, and S. Pollock, eds. Hellenic Studies Series 73 (Washington, DC: Center for Hellenic Studies, 2016), accessed 23 Jan 2025 at: https://chs.harvard.edu/chapter/17-the-heraclitean-logos/.

[v] Ibid.

[vi] Ibid.

[vii] Ibid.

[viii] Ibid.

[ix] Editor’s Note: JDF.

Recommended Resources:

Jesus, You and the Essentials of Christianity by 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

Can All Religions Be True? mp3 by Frank Turek

How Philosophy Can Help Your Theology by Richard Howe (DVD Set, Mp3, and Mp4)   

 

Seattle native Justin Angelos brings a passion for evangelism and discipleship along with theology and apologetics. He has studied at Biola University and Liberty University and recently earned a Master of Arts in Apologetics from Biola University. Justin focuses on providing help for those who suffer from emotional and anxiety issues. He currently resides in Salt Lake City, Utah.

Originally posted at: https://bit.ly/3EtdlxB

/by

Can Christianity Really Be The Only Means Of Salvation?

Most skeptics I know feel pretty confident that all religions “say basically the same thing.” If there actually is a God, they’re not particularly worried, because in their view, “being a good person” is really all that matters. As long as you are “sincere” in your beliefs, whether you’re Muslim, Christian, Hindu or a member of your own individual religion, it will turn out fine in the end. Many go so far as to say that they simply “won’t believe” in a God who warns of a narrow path to salvation.

This view has always struck me as particularly odd, coming as it often does from people who subscribe to a view that nature is all there is, and that science is the best way to attain knowledge. It’s odd because neither nature nor science operates in this fashion. Neither cares about the sincerity of one’s views and beliefs, and neither cares about what experiences or life circumstances led them to form the conclusions they now hold about the “way things really are.” What matters, for both nature and science, is whether the person is getting it right. After all, stepping off a cliff will result in a nasty fall, regardless of whether the unfortunate soul knows or cares that there is a cliff in front of him and regardless of how sincerely he believes the cliff is not really there.

Just Follow Your Heart [Attack]

Consider another example from the natural realm. You awake one morning with a crushing weight on your chest. You’re sweating and short of breath, and pain begins to shoot down your arm. It quickly occurs to you that these are the symptoms of a heart attack, so you dial 911 and soon find yourself in route to a hospital. But a surprise awaits you there. You have a choice of several doors. Behind one is a primitive medicine man, ready to bring you comfort and healing with various incantations and potions. Behind another is an ancient herbalist. Knowing what compounds result in what physical effects, he plans on using a variety of roots and extracts to restore health. Behind a third is a hypnotist, who believes that your symptoms are the product of anxiety, and that clearing away some of the baggage of your past will eliminate both your physical and mental pain. And behind the fourth, is a gruff, unfriendly and disinterested surgeon who tells you that your coronary arteries have collapsed and that without a bypass operation, you will soon be dead.

A frightening prospect one hopes never to face. But imagine for a moment what considerations will be going through your mind: the pain is real and intense and growing stronger with each passing moment. You need help, someone who can save you. Before today, you cared very little about healers or hypnotists or herbalists, nor much for surgeons either. Each, you believe, has something to offer, something he or she can contribute, and each is right in his or her own way. But right now, you don’t care what makes the four similar; what matters is what makes them different. Will each be just as effective in saving you, and if not, which one can best deal with the particular problem you are facing?

Sincerity Is Not Enough

In that pivotal moment, you see with crystal clarity that their individual sincerity does not matter. Nor does the confidence that they express that their approach will work. The medicine man may seem more confident than the surgeon, who tells you bluntly what the risks are. But confidence and sincerity don’t guarantee that a person’s views correspond to reality. What matters here is basic: which one actually has the solution to your problem. The herbalist and hypnotist might solve some problems, but your particular problem needs a surgeon. Because nature doesn’t care about what you like or don’t like.

Of course, none of this proves that Christianity is true, or that Jesus Christ is the “surgeon” that you need. But that is not the point. In the scenario I posited, the crushing weight could not be ignored. By contrast, the prospect of death can be ignored, at least for a while. But every thoughtful person knows that it awaits in the end. Here we deal not with possibilities or probabilities, but with dead (excuse the pun) certainty. No matter how hard we try to avoid it, we have a “problem” that we cannot avoid forever.

Christianity explains the source of the problem. Man has rebelled against his Creator and is now paying a price for that rebellion. Eternal separation from God – from the source of all goodness and power and love – is the necessary consequence of that rebellion. But there is a solution, a particular way that God has provided through which we can get right with him. Over the centuries, this belief has offended many, who view it as exclusive, small-minded and unfair. But having a heart attack is “unfair” and so is dying. Reality can be quite harsh at times.

So next time a naturalist tells you that, if there is a God, he will certainly accept “good” people, ask him where in the world he got that notion. Nature itself stands in testimony to the fact that surviving requires more than wishful thinking – it requires that you actually get things right.

Recommended Resources:

Debate: What Best Explains Reality: Atheism or Theism? by Frank Turek DVD, Mp4, and Mp3 

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

How Can Jesus Be the Only Way? (mp4 Download) by Frank Turek

Is Morality Absolute or Relative? by Dr. Frank Turek Mp3 and Mp4

 

Al Serrato earned his law degree from the University of California at Berkeley in 1985. He began his career as an FBI special agent before becoming a prosecutor in California, where he 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.

/by

I Never Expected to Doubt

“Oh Jesus! Jesus!” My spirit sprung to prayer with catlike reflexes as I watched my 2-year-old daughter tumble down the 15-step staircase. I stood helpless as her little body hurled toward the hardwood floor.

She stood up without a scratch . . . but my soul didn’t. In that moment, I was never more aware of the wound that had been festering for months.

The wound was doubt.

Experiencing Doubt

I had been experiencing doubt about God’s existence and the Christianity I had believed to be true my whole life. But until that moment, I didn’t realize how deeply that doubt had wrapped itself around my mind. To the casual observer, my daughter fell, I prayed, and she was okay. But for the first time in my life, I wasn’t so sure it was divine intervention. For the first time I felt foolish . . . for praying.

I felt silly for crying out to God in that desperate moment. It was terrifying to realize the faith that had once been my identity now seemed more like a child’s fairy tale than the explanation of reality.

For me, doubt was an entirely new concept. Growing up, I watched God’s power at work in people’s lives, in my life. I knew God was real. I knew Jesus died for my sins, was resurrected, and was coming again. I knew the Bible was his Word, and I couldn’t be convinced otherwise. I was active in youth group, went on mission trips, and emerged as a trusted leader among my peers. I was the kid who no one would have dreamed would doubt her faith. I was the kid no one worried about, the one who would be just fine.

But now, in my early 30s, I wasn’t fine. I had just spent four months enduring the skepticism and intellectual attack of an agnostic “pastor” who invited me to be a part of a study group at church. A pastor who won my respect and trust had dismantled my faith, one belief at a time.

Doubt Isn’t the Opposite of Faith

By God’s grace and unfathomable mercy to me, my faith was rebuilt. But during my time of doubt, I suffered from an all-too-common misunderstanding about what biblical faith is. I thought doubt and faith were opposites—that if I questioned what I believed, I’d somehow be a failure in God’s eyes. But this definition of faith has more in common with how atheists understand faith than how the Bible defines it. Atheist Richard Dawkins defines religious faith as “blind.” In a debate with John Lennox, he said, “We only need to use the word ‘faith’ when there isn’t any evidence at all.”

But in the Bible, “faith” means trust, not blind belief. We all put our trust in various things every single day. Every time we drive our car across a bridge, we trust it will hold up like it has many times before. We trust, not because we have 100 percent proof, but because we have good evidence to believe the bridge won’t collapse.

Doubt isn’t the opposite of faith. Unbelief is the opposite of faith.

As Tim Keller writes:

A faith without some doubts is like a human body without any antibodies in it. People who blithely go through life too busy or indifferent to ask hard questions about why they believe as they do will find themselves defenseless against either the experience of tragedy or the probing questions of a smart skeptic. A person’s faith can collapse almost overnight if she has failed over the years to listen patiently to her own doubts, which should only be discarded after long reflection.

According to Keller, the strongest form of faith is one that has wrestled through doubt. The Bible is full of great examples. Here are three doubters Jesus responded to with mercy.

1. The Desperate Father
Mark 9 tells the story of a man desperately trying to find healing for his son who was demon-possessed. This particular demon caused the boy to become mute and would often seize him, throwing him into fire or water to kill him. The man asked Jesus to have pity on him and heal his son. Jesus responded, “All things are possible for one who believes.” Without hesitation, the man cried out, “I believe; help my unbelief!” (Mark 9:24).

Help my unbelief. It’s a simple, heartfelt prayer that Jesus readily answered by healing his son. He commanded the demon to come out and restore the boy to health and wholeness.

The man asked for help with his doubt, and Jesus came to his aid.

2. John the Baptist
If there’s any biblical figure who should have no reason to doubt, it’s John the Baptist. This is the man who was filled with the Holy Spirit before he was even born. This is the man who came out of the wilderness proclaiming the coming Messiah. This is the man who baptized the Son of God, witnessed the Holy Spirit descending like a dove, and heard the audible voice of God. Yet at the end of his life, while rotting in Herod’s prison cell, he doubted. “Are you the one who is to come or should we look for another?” (Matt. 11:3).

This is the question he sent his disciples to ask Jesus—and Jesus didn’t scold him for asking. He didn’t reply, “John, you shouldn’t doubt!” or “We don’t ask those types of questions here!” No. Jesus performed miracles in front of John’s disciples and sent them back to testify, even referencing a prophecy about himself that John would understand.

John asked for reassurance, and Jesus was happy to oblige.

3. Thomas
Thomas is often referred to as “Doubting Thomas,” but I don’t think that’s accurate. Thomas was more of a skeptic than a doubter—which is quite reasonable considering the situation. The resurrected Jesus had appeared to the other disciples. When they told Thomas about it, he replied, “Unless I see in his hands the mark of the nails, and place my finger into the mark of the nails, and place my hand into his side, I will never believe” (John 20:25).

Like today, resurrections weren’t everyday occurrences in the ancient world. If they were, they wouldn’t be considered miracles. It was perfectly rational and intelligent for Thomas to ask for evidence to back up the claim of his fellow disciples. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he didn’t shame him for his skepticism. Instead, Jesus said, “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe” (John 20:27). It was only after offering evidence that Jesus instructed Thomas to believe.

Thomas asked for evidence, and Jesus delivered it.

Doubt toward God

In his book Doubting Toward Faith, Bobby Conway writes that doubt is directional. We can doubt toward God, or we can doubt away from him. If you’re struggling with doubt, I encourage you to doubt toward God. If you can’t think of what to pray, pray like the great men of faith who came before you:

  • Ask for help
  • Ask for reassurance
  • Ask for evidence

God is waiting to help and reassure you. The evidence for his existence and the truth of Christianity is plentiful. We don’t need to be afraid of doubt—the gospel can stand up to skepticism and questioning. Jesus could handle the doubts and questions of the desperate father, John, and Thomas. He can handle yours too.

Recommended Resources: 

Another Gospel? by Alisa Childers (book)

Can All Religions Be True? mp3 by Frank Turek

Counter Culture Christian: Is the Bible True? by Frank Turek (Mp3), (Mp4), and (DVD)        

How Can Jesus be the Only Way? Mp4, Mp3, and DVD by Frank Turek

 

Alisa Childers is an American singer and songwriter, best known for being in the all-female Christian music group ZOEgirl. She has had a string of top ten radio singles, four studio releases, and received the Dove Award during her time with ZOEgirl. In later years, Alisa found her life-long faith deeply challenged when she started attending what would later identify as a Progressive Christian church. This challenge pushed Alisa toward Christian Apologetics. Today you can read, listen and watch Alisa’s work online as well as purchase her recently published book on Progressive Christianity titled Another Gospel.

Originally posted at: https://bit.ly/40kTb1j

/by

Archaeology Contributes to the Witness of the Bible

Can stones give you insights into the past? What do they tell you? When I encountered the Rosetta Stone at the British Museum, I was surprised that a stone could say so much. Archaeological pieces like this provide a witness to a society in time.

The Rosetta Stone contributes to the witness of the Bible. It also allows us to gain insights into how ancient cultures lived and experienced life. Archaeologist Randall Price states, “The Bible cannot be proved or disproved by archaeology. . . however, archaeology can bring historical confirmation to the historical statements in the text of the Scripture.” [i] Although archaeology cannot provide certainty of the Bible, it is a witness to the Bible, it contributes to its reliability, and it is a voice offering evidence to confirm the claims of the Bible.

Figure 1The Rosetta Stone – Source: Hans Hillewaert, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=3153928

Archaeology Reveals Mosaic Authorship as Plausible

Many people believed Moses could not have written the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible) because writing did not go back that far in time. In 1799, however, near Rosetta, Egypt, General Napoleon Bonaparte’s officer discovered the famous Rosetta Stone. After the defeat of Napoleon, it was taken by the British and placed in the British Museum in 1802. It cites the celebration of the first anniversary of Pharoah Ptolemy V in 195 BC. The intriguing factor is that the citation on the stone is written three times in three different languages: Egyptian Hieroglyphics, demotic Egyptian, and Greek capital letters. The Greek text could be read by Greek New Testament scholars, who helped crack the code to hieroglyphs. This revealed the hieroglyphics as more than signs but an actual readable language. The discovery of the bilingual text of the Rosetta Stone provides evidence that readable language existed during the time of Moses. Therefore, Moses could have written the Pentateuch.

Archaeology Reveals Israel as A People

Another discovery that contributes to the witness of the Bible is the Merneptah Steele. It was unearthed in Thebes, Egypt, and could be the earliest reference to the people of Israel outside of the Bible. The black granite was inscribed to honor the various gods and the king’s achievements. “The stela concludes with a short list of cities and people in Canaan also defeated by the king: it includes the phrase ‘Israel is laid waste and his seed is not. Egyptologists agree that of the eight names on the stela, seven refer to a land while the reference to Israel refers to a people group, indicating that at this time Israel was not yet settled in a land it could call its own.” [ii] The Merneptah Stela discloses that by 1209 BC, Israel was described as a people group that fits the period of Judges.

Archaeology is a Contribution to the Reliability of the Bible

Archaeology may not be able to prove the Bible with certainty, but it provides evidence for the reliability of the Bible. The Rosetta Stone and the Merneptah both support the Bible’s reliability. The Rosetta Stone suggests that Moses could write the Pentateuch, while the Merneptah Stele offers support that Israel was an organized nation. [iii] Many other discoveries support the Bible’s reliability, especially after King David’s time, that can be further studied. The Bible has the historical support to assure its reliability.

Understanding the evidence supporting the Bible’s reliability can encourage confidence when reading about God and His witness to the nations. The Bible claims to be the “word of truth” in passages such as “Never take your word of truth from my mouth,” located in Psalm 119:43. Also, in 2 Timothy, which states, “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth.” The Bible was given to people so that we might know God and the way of salvation through Christ. Therefore, archaeology can contribute to the witnessing of the Bible so that people can trust it and know the one true God.

References:

[i] Randall Price, Handbook of Biblical Archaeology (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2017), 26.

[ii] Clive Anderson and Brian Edwards, Evidence for the Bible (England: Day One Publications, 2014), 32.

[iii] [Editor’s note: According to the Bible, Israel was organized under judges around that time, but not under a king. That monarchic period wouldn’t happen till the time of King Saul and David, around 1000 BC, long after the time of Merneptah in Egypt. Israel was a distinct and organized people, even in the time of the judges, and in that sense were a nation.]

Recommended Resources:

What I Discovered Digging in Jerusalem by Eli Shukron (with Frank Turek) (DVD) (Mp4 Download)

The Top Ten Reasons We Know the NT Writers Told the Truth mp3 by Frank Turek

Can All Religions Be True? mp3 by Frank Turek

Debate: Does God Exist? Turek vs. Hitchens (DVD), (mp4 Download) (MP3)

 

Deanna Huff is a wife and mother. She is passionate about teaching others to share and defend their faith, drawing on 25 years of experience in the field. Her publications include contributing chapters to Why Creationism Still Matters and Strong Faith. She currently works at the Museum of the Bible. She has also led many seminars for the Baptist General Convention of Oklahoma, the Oklahoma Ladies Retreat, and the State Evangelism Conference. In addition, she taught high school students for ten years at Christian Heritage Academy, covering subjects such as Bible, Universal History, Apologetics and Philosophy. Deanna earned a Ph.D. in Theology and Apologetics at Liberty University. She holds a Master of Theology in Apologetics and Worldview from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, a Master of Divinity with Biblical Languages from Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, and a Bachelor of Arts from the University of Oklahoma. Deanna is an active member of Capitol Hill Baptist Church where she co-hosted a podcast called The Analysis with Pastor Mark DeMoss. She also co-hosted a podcast with her daughter Ellie Huff called but why should i care. She and her husband teach an adult Sunday school class, discipling others in the faith.

Originally posted at: https://bit.ly/41Zc4bl

/by

What is Logos? A look at John 1:1-3

Introduction

One of my favorite passages in the gospels is the prologue of John (1:1-18). I particularly find the first three verses, John 1:1-3, and the use of the “Word”, or Logos in Greek, interesting.

In those three verses, a type of creation narrative arises, revolving around Logos, in which Logos is described as being divine, eternal, and the creator. Later in the prologue, in John 1:17, Logos is revealed to be Jesus Christ, thus applying the description of Logos as divine, eternal, and the creator to Jesus Christ. John 1:1-3 states,

“In the beginning was the Word [Logos], and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made” (ESV).

But what is the background of Logos, and what in John 1:1-3 describes Logos as divine, eternal, and the creator?

Wisdom and Logos

To understand the meaning of Logos, we must understand what it is and where that term comes from. There are several options for where Logos came from, but the Jewish view of Wisdom is the most likely background. By giving a close look at the character Wisdom found in the Old Testament, and other Jewish writings, several similarities between itself and Logos are found. One similarity is the source of Wisdom, which Jewish thought places as the Most High, and that Wisdom was there before the world began, like Logos.[1] Like Logos, Wisdom took part in creation, was sent from heaven to dwell on earth, is the source of life, and is rejected by man.[2] Wisdom is also the tool by which God speaks to man and reveals himself. [3] These are all characteristics and actions that are similarly attached to Logos in John 1:1-18. Wisdom is frequently described in Proverbs, with one example found in Proverbs 8:22-30. This passage describes Wisdom as a helper of God in creation. [4] Another example is Proverbs 8:35 which states,

“For whoever finds me [Wisdom] finds life and obtains favor from the Lord.”

Like Logos, Wisdom is the giver, the source, of life. Another surprising parallel is that Wisdom is thought to be the daughter of God.[5] This is a close connection to our thoughts on Logos, or the Messiah, who we see as the son of God. Whether or not Jews believe that Wisdom is an actual being, the literary connection between Wisdom and Logos is undeniable.

Verse 1-2: Logos as God

Note the opening phrase in, in John 1:1-2:

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.”

Here John exegetes the phrase “in the beginning” from Genesis 1:1 to mean before creation. In comparing the two passages, the origin of the mirrored phrase “in the beginning” in John 1:1-2 is obvious. [6] However, though John 1:1-2 pulls from Genesis 1:1, the purposes behind the passages are different. Genesis 1:1 is focused on creation, and God as creator. John 1:1-2 is focused on eternity and deity.[7] The whole purpose is to proclaim and affirm the eternal and divine nature of Logos.

Eternity and deity are intertwined in John 1:1-2, as Logos is described as being with God, from the beginning, and being God. He WAS in the beginning with God, he WAS there with God, and he WAS God. [8] In this first section, Logos is variously associated with God. Thus, the affirmation of the divinity of Logos. But there is special care to show a distinction between Logos and God. On one hand, Logos is described as God, but Logos is also shown to be distinct from God. [9] Logos being given a different name from God implies a distinction somewhere.[10] This is clarified in John 1:14 when Logos is revealed to be the Son, or the one, from the Father.

Verse 3: Logos as the Creator

Moving to verse three, we see another parallel between the prologue of John and the creation story in Genesis. John 1:3 mirrors Genesis 1:1 with the creation of the heavens and the earth. What is different in John 1:3, is the odd phrasing John used. Genesis 1:1 says,

“In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” Meanwhile, John 1:3 says, “All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.” This “creator” aspect is reappears in John 1:10, “the world was made through him.”

Looking closer at John 1:3, Meier makes a note of the usage of “was” in the first few verses of the prologue. Meier writes that John only used “was” for the eternal and divine. The Greek word eimi,  here translated as “was,” means “to be” or “to exist.” John did not use eimi to describe creation, he only used eimi to describe God and Logos. John used the Greek word ginomai which is translated as “was”, but it means “to become”.[11] Eimi implies an eternal nature that creation does not have, whereas ginomai implies something coming into being. John is telling his readers that all things came into being through Logos and that Logos did not come into being, but always existed.[12]

This explains the awkward phrasing found in John 1:3 and teaches, in part, that the universe has a beginning and that it is created, unlike Logos. The purpose of John 1:3 is that Logos had a role in creation; specifically, that God acted through Logos to create the world. Logos does not play a passive role, but an active role in creation, and could be described as the mediator of the creation act. [13]

Conclusion

Thus, we are given another reason as to why the gospel of John is widely known for having the most obvious claims of the divinity of Jesus. The prologue of John, especially John 1:1-3, plays no small role in proclaiming the divine nature of Jesus. Even if one only looks at the surface of John 1:1-3, a beautiful picture of Logos being with God, and being God, before the beginning is presented. However, so much depth, and beauty, is missed if one does not look into the Jewish background of Logos. Either way, it is impossible to miss the power and divine nature of our Lord Jesus Christ and the role he has played in the creation of all things.

Bibliography

Borgen, Peder. “Creation, Logos, and the Son: Observations On John 1:1-18 and 5:17-18.” Ex Auditu, 1987: 88-97.

Brown, Raymond. “The Prologue of the Gospel of John: John 1:1-18.” Review & Expositor, 1965: 429-439.

Burge, Gary, Lynn Cohick, and Gene Green. The New Testament In Antiquity: A Survey Of The New Testament Within Its Cultural Contexts. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2009.

Kelber, Werner. “The Birth of a Beginning: John 1:1-18.” Semeia, 1990: 121-144.

Meier, John. “Biblical Reflection: John 1:1-18.” Mid-Stream, 1996: 391-394.

Pilcher, Charles. “Note: the Jewish background of the prologue of the Fourth Gospel.” The Reformed Theological Review, 1947: 30-31.

Rissi, Mathias. “John 1:1-18 (The Eternal Word).” Interpretation, 1977: 394-401.

References:

[1] Werner Kelber. “The Birth of a Beginning: John 1:1-18.” Semeia, 1990: 122; Brown, 430.

[2] Kelber, 122.

[3] Charles Pilcher. “Note: the Jewish background of the prologue of the Fourth Gospel.” The Reformed Theological Review, 1947: 30.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Borgen, 92.

[7] Brown 430-431.

[8] John Meier. “Biblical Reflection: John 1:1-18.” Mid-Stream, 1996: 392.

[9] Mathias Rissi. “John 1:1-18 (The Eternal Word).” Interpretation, 1977: 397.

[10] To be clear, the use of distinction is not meant to make Logos a completely separate divine being from God, but that Logos is a separate divine personality within God. It is to separate the person that is Logos from the person that is the Father.

[11] Meier, 392.

[12] Ibid.

[13] Rissi, 397.

Recommended Resources:

Jesus, You and the Essentials of Christianity by 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

How Can Jesus be the Only Way? Mp4, Mp3, and DVD by Frank Turek

Reflecting Jesus into a Dark World by Dr. Frank Turek – DVD Complete Series, Video mp4 DOWNLOAD Complete Series, and mp3 audio DOWNLOAD Complete Series

 

Thomas Moller began studying astrophysics at the University of Nebraska-Kearney, specifically in Cosmology. Through the study of the universe and the laws that guide it, a passion for understanding the Creator and Fine-Tuner of the universe provided the catalyst for Thomas diving deeply into theology. He then left the study of astrophysics to pursue a theology degree. Now graduated from Trinity College of the Bible and Theological Seminary, he is pursuing a master’s degree in theological studies at Houston Christian University. With a love of biblical theology, Thomas wants to help educate believers in how to study the Bible in its proper context. He also will tackle a multitude of topics in Christian living, culture, and literature. Though he no longer studies astrophysics at an academic institution, he still has a love for science and scientific arguments for God.

Originally posted at: https://bit.ly/3BylxvH

/by

3 Reasons to Believe in God

In presenting apologetics there are certain points I focus on in order to systematically examine the evidence for the truth of Christianity.  While there are many other areas of interest and concern for the apologist, these areas are essential in determining the veracity of the Christian religion.

 

These main features of Christianity include:

  1. The existence of God
  2. The reliability of the Bible
  3. The divine claims of Jesus
  4. the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus.

I organize these four points in the form of a question, which can possibly be answered yes or no, in order to be objective in the analysis. I’d like to focus on point #1 by asking the question: “Does God Exist?”

Does God Exist?

Obviously, if God doesn’t exist then Christianity cannot be true.  It is pretty fundamental. There are dozens and dozens of arguments for God’s existence, but there are three powerful arguments for theism that are the most popular.  If you can just remember GOD’s name you can remember these three arguments:

G = Good and evil

O = Origins of the universe

D = Design of the universe

The ‘g’ in God’s name stands for good and evil.  The fact that there exists objective moral truth is evidence for God.  Check out this video titled “The Moral Argument” for a quick introduction.  The ‘o’ in God’s name stands origins of the universe.  This video, titled “The Kalam Cosmological Argument” provides evidence for the origins of the universe that deduces that existence of God.  There are many versions of the cosmological argument, but the kalam version argues from the beginning of the universe to the existence of God.  The ‘d’ in God’s name stands for design of the universe.  This video shows how design is the best explanation for the fine-tuning for life in the universe.

Good and Evil

The first of these arguments for God is from morality. The Moral Argument (or the argument from good and evil) can be summarized as such:

P1: If God doesn’t exist, objective moral truth does not exist.

P2: Objective moral truths does exist.

C: So, God exists.

Origins of the Universe

The second argument is from the first cause of the universe. The Kalam Cosmological Argument (or the argument from the origins of the universe) can be summarized:

P1: Whatever begins to exist has a cause.

P2: The universe began to exist.

C: So, the universe has a cause

Design of the Universe

The third of these arguments deals with the amazing design we see in the universe. The Fine-tuning Argument (or the argument from the design of the universe) can be summarized:

P1: The fine-tuning for life in the universe is either due to chance, necessity, or design.

P2: It is not due to chance or necessity.

C: So, it is due to design.

Check out this page for a complete presentation of these three arguments for God’s existence which provides a summary of each argument along with links to other articles and videos for the existence of God.

Recommended Resources:

I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist (Paperback), and (Sermon) by Norman Geisler and Frank Turek 

Macro Evolution? I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be a Darwinist (DVD Set), (MP3 Set) and (mp4 Download Set) by Dr. Frank Turek

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)

 

Steve Lee has taught Apologetics for over two and a half decades at Prestonwood Christian Academy.  He also has taught World Religions and Philosophy at Mountain View College in Dallas and Collin College in Plano.  With a degree in history and education from the University of North Texas, Steve continued his formal studies at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary with a M.A. in philosophy of religion and has pursued doctoral studies at the University of Texas at Dallas and is finishing his dissertation at South African Theological Seminary.  He has published several articles for the Apologetics Study Bible for Students as well as articles and book reviews in various periodicals including Philosophia Christi, Hope’s Reason: A Journal of Apologetics, and the Areopagus Journal.  Having an abiding love for fantasy fiction, Steve has contributed chapters to two books on literary criticism of Harry Potter: Harry Potter for Nerds and Teaching with Harry Potter.  He even appeared as a guest on the podcast MuggleNet Academia (“Lesson 23: There and Back Again-Chiasmus, Alchemy, and Ring Composition in Harry Potter”).  He is married to his lovely wife, Angela, and has two grown boys, Ethan and Josh.

Originally Posted Here: https://bit.ly/3VSB3cO

/by