Tag Archive for: Christianity

It was the only way I knew how to explain my love of Fixer Upper to my bewildered husband. Since the show aired, I would plunk myself down, yell in frustration (who picks a midcentury modern over a classic Victorian, I mean, come on!?), and bask in the beauty of the big reveal. Yes, I loved the shiplap, but like other Christian fans, what I enjoyed most was having a show featuring a Christian couple who truly loved each other.

What Christian fans weren’t expecting was to watch the designing duo green-light the normalization of homosexuality when they partnered with HBO for the newest reality, Back to the Frontier. The fallout gave fans everywhere a front row seat to a Christian accountability meeting, and they had a lot to say.

“Christians shouldn’t judge (Matthew 7:1)!”

“…All you holier-than-thou scripture-spouting know-it-alls pick and choose your bible verses to quote.” Toni (People Magazine)

“I guess someone forgot Matthew 7:1.”

Yep, Matthew 7:1 became the theological “shiplap” of the comments section–That verse was everywhere! What none of those folks seemed to realize, however, was that they, too, were judging. Which got me thinking, if the anti-judgment crew didn’t realize this, would the new believer? Would our kids? That’s why we are going to evaluate whether Christians can judge, and if so, how we can judge well. Grab your spiritual tool belts, mama’s. It’s demo day (Colossians 2:8).

To Judge Or Not To Judge?        

At first glance, Matthew 7:1 appears to be on the side of the comment critics. Jesus warns, “Do not judge, or you too will be judged.” If taken at face value, then everyone from Franklin Graham to Matt Walsh owes the Gaines an apology, but that would be a mistake. Why? Because this verse isn’t banning believers from making any judgments; it’s warning against making improper judgments.

At that time, the Jews (particularly the Pharisees) struggled with two huge problems: legalism and double standards. Instead of leading people to God from a place of humility, they set themselves up as God and rejected anyone who didn’t follow their own subjective version of the law (Matthew 12:1-8).

Jesus was setting things straight by saying that man isn’t holy enough to condemn someone eternally, and that accountability can’t be hypocritically applied. His warning in Matthew 7:1 was meant to spark humility by showing that if people were held to their own “measure,” they would quickly be found wanting. Instead, Jesus told them to examine their own hearts, repent, and then “remove the speck” from the eye of their brother (Matthew 7:3-6).

This is the method of righteous judgment. It leaves eternal judgment to God, while allowing believers to correct one another from a position of humility. Righteous judgment is necessary for protecting believers from false teachings and enables the believer to stand firm against the pressure of secular culture (Colossians 2:8 & Ephesians 6:11-18).

So yes, to follow God, a Christian can make and use good judgment. We can help our kids learn how to judge rightly by following five important practices.

#1- Be Theologically Sound

“Teach Me Knowledge And Good Judgment, For I Trust Your Commands.”
Psalms 119:66

To make the right judgments requires an objective standard of right and wrong from which we base morality. Where does that standard come from? Not man, not culture, but God. God’s word is very clear on sex, sin, and marriage, so then why is there so much debate?

There is a very real war being waged over the heart, mind, soul, and body of each one of us. One of Satan’s goals is to distort the word of God into a counterfeit faith to lure people away from Him. This is why, to judge rightly, we need to be immersed in scripture.

For more help on how to read the Bible well, check out our podcast here.

Next, check yourself before you wreck yourself. . . hermeneutically speaking. Does the conclusion you made align with the world of God, His nature, our identity, the reality of sin, and the redemptive work of Christ? If so, well done![1] This will help you avoid a common but preventable error: cherry-picking verses.

Cherry-picking is when a single verse or part of a verse is (often) taken extremely literally to advance a person’s own desires or conclusions without regard to the verse’s context or application. Like when the Pharisees gave themselves a free pass to perform circumcisions on the sabbath but condemned the disciples for “working” when they plucked a handful of grain for a snack (Matthew 12:1-2).

Sorry-not-sorry critics in the comments section! If you posted Matthew 7:1, you’re guilty of making a judgment based on a verse you had cherry-picked.[2]

When a bumper-sticker-worthy verse pops up during your quiet time, guide your children to read the passages (or chapters!) around it to properly discern its meaning. As you read together, point out how the passage reveals God’s goodness, his grace, and his redemption through Christ. From there, you can play “spot the counterfeit” whenever culture tries to offer its own broken version of love, empathy, and acceptance.

Our ROAR method is great for this and perfect for your next movie night!

#2- Be Restoration Focused 

Every righteous judgement needs two important ingredients: love and humility. Love delights in the truth (1 Corinthians 13). Humility is the anchor that roots our judgement in love. Humility reminds the believer of their life before Christ and guides us when we need to hold each other accountable.

How we do this will look different depending on who we are addressing. If addressing a non-believer, our approach will be evangelistic in nature. The goal is to point them toward Christ by seeking to find out what led them to that conclusion, gently address its logical failings, and offer an account of how truth is rooted in Christianity.

If we’re addressing a believer, our approach is gracious accountability. We affirm our mutual call to submit to the truth of God, address the biblical error, encourage the believer to repent, and be restored in righteousness (James 5:20).

To help kids be restoration-minded, role-play how you would address a correction in love by using a character on a show or in their favorite storybook. What tone should you use? If this person were a believer, how would you speak to them? How would our approach change if they are an unbeliever? How would you correct a logical error while pointing to the truth of Christ?

Remember kids, Elijah may be the patron saint of sass [3], but in most cases our tone should be heaped with grace (Colossians 4:6).[3]

#3- Be Seasoned with Salt   

Grace, however, isn’t possible without a little thing called truth. Truth is what enables us to make a right judgement.[4] If our conversions aren’t rooted in truth, then we will lead people into bondage through progressive affirmation. This is exactly what progressives want.

Progressive theology rejects the truth of God in exchange for whatever feels right to each person.[5] It’s part relativism, part spiritualism, mixed into a deadly cocktail of bad theology by a guy who looks like Jesus without any of his redeeming qualities. Pun intended.

The goal is to convince the theologically weak and the empathetic folks into believing that the truth of God is harmful to those who live contrary to his commands. To truly love their neighbor, Christians have to reject the idea of dying to self and accept everyone without question. This, dear reader, is a pack of lies.

Our kids need to know that we are not ‘casting stones’ when we make a right judgment.[6]   The most loving thing we can do is speak the truth. As you practice your ROAR, remind your kids that empathy is a gift from God. To Chip’s point, we can rightly listen and understand a person’s past, but a person’s past doesn’t get to censor the truth of God. In short, a person’s past should alter how we preach God’s word, not if we preach God’s word.

#4- Be Consistent in Word and Deed   

Now for a little heart check, mamas. Before we confront another, we need to ask two questions.

  1. Am I Currently Living In Sin? 
    I’m not meaning the random times where we fall short…like yesterday in traffic. If that were the case, then no one could judge anything! I mean, is there a part of our lives where we are living in habitual sin? If so, we have no business removing the plank from the eye of someone else until the sawdust is removed from our own, Matthew 7:3-6.
  2. Am I Applying A Double Standard?
    This “good for thee but not for me” problem wasn’t unique to the Pharisees. We, too, can develop this spiritual blind spot when we justify our own sin as “less sinful” than that of another. Don’t be fooled, mamas. Our kids notice when we draw the line at shows normalizing LGBTQ lifestyles, only to erase it when we watch the saucy period drama. When we make a judgment, we need to be consistent with that judgment.

Kids need to see what it looks like to live an integrated faith through our example. Model how to sacrifice earthly pleasures for the glory of God. Show them how to love like Christ, ask forgiveness, and stand firm in the faith. Remind them that it’s not possible to fully unplug from everything ungodly, but to the best of our ability, we can direct ourselves and our money toward that which glorifies God.[7]

#5- Be Confident In Christ       

One of my favorite quotes is from Jason Whitlock: “When we are fearful before God, we are fearless before culture.” This fearlessness is the heart of 2 Timothy 1:7, “For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind.”

When our identity is rooted in Christ, we are issued a set of spiritual armor and are indwelt by the Holy Spirit, who gives us wisdom and the boldness to speak truth. The problem is that too many Christians either callously lob truth grenades or cower the moment a cultural criticism comes blazing toward them, Ephesians 6:16.

Who Then Do We Fear?  

Our kids need to know that to be set apart in Christ means that we are set against culture (John 15:18-19) while still seeking people (Matthew 28:19). People will hate us for speaking truth, but we aren’t called to seek man’s approval; we are called to seek righteousness.

To build up your child’s confidence, affirm their identity in Christ. Remind them that the world is going to push back, but we can equip ourselves for the challenge by knowing God’s word and rebuttals to common objections to the faith. Train them to recognize faulty logic, so when someone attacks their character (or their grammar), the baseless insult will bounce right off their shield of faith.

Final Thoughts     

It’s not easy to watch a believer defend their own worldly compromise, but it shouldn’t wreck us. Here’s the truth: if we are still breathing, and they are still breathing, the Holy Spirit is still working. We can encourage them in truth and lift them up in prayer, whether it’s a TV couple or a family member.

Additonal Resources:

Fallacy Detective by Nathaniel and Hans Bluedorn
The Theology Handbook by The Daily Grace Co.
10 Questions Every Teen Should Ask (and answer) about Christianity by Rebecca McLaughlin
Mama Bear Apologetics Edited by Hillary Morgan Ferrer

References: 

[1] If not, it could be due to a hermeneutical error. Check out our blog here. For some, however, it could be a worldview issue. See if you add anything to these two statements: I am a _______ Christian.  I am a Christian, but/and I believe__________. Whatever is added into those blank spaces will usually reveal what someone truly worships. For example, someone who calls themselves a “progressive Christian” is a person who doesn’t believe in the gospel but a filtered view that Jesus affirms whoever we say that we are and cheers us on as we live our best life now. It has a guy who looks like Jesus, but it’s a false worldview that, if believed, will lead away from Christ. Secondly, if anything was added after the “I am a Christian” statement, it too is usually what the person actually worships, be it social justice, LGBTQ+, BLM, etc. Please know that each of those movements is a separate worldview that is in direct opposition to God. You cannot be a Christian and follow a pop-cultural religion. Only Christ saves; every other religion falls short.

[2] Fair warning: critics will use the “cherry-picking” accusation when a believer rightly quotes scripture. So long as judgment you have taken the verse within context you aren’t cherry picking, you are quoting. There’s a big difference.

[3] 1 Kings 18 records his snarky mocking of the prophets of Baal. This is a description, not a prescription, folks.

[4] It is also a vital aspect of the nature of God, John 14:6.

[5] See chapter 15 of Mama Bear Apologetics.

[6] You practice your discernment with this comment posted on an article from the NY Post. Matt Lustig said: “…A true religion preaches love and acceptance. Jesus would tell us to love, accept, and be kind to everyone. Reverend Graham and those like him are false Christian’s.”

[7] To put this in perspective, you have supported a company who affirms LGBTQ+ & DEI if you have: electronics by apple or android; ate at Chik-Fil-A; shopped at Home Goods, Target, Wal-Mart, Costco, or Amazon; ate a Kellog’s product; had Starbuks; flew United, Delta, or American; have an American Express card; used Pinterest; and more!

Recommended Resources:

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

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

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

 


Amy Davison is a former Air Force veteran turned Mama Bear Apologist. She graduated from Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary with an MA in Christian Apologetics. She and her husband Michael (also former Air Force) have been married for over 17 years and have 4 kids. Amy is the Mama Bear resident expert on sex and sexuality, and she’s especially hoping to have that listed on her Mama Bear business card.

Originally posted at: https://bit.ly/4rB6jLb

Does the Quran actually support Zionism? If not, why does it say that the land we know as Israel was given to Israel by God? In this midweek episode, Frank welcomes back Ridvan Ademir, a.k.a Apostate Prophet, to continue their eye-opening conversation about the Hamas–Israel conflict. Together, they peel back the political headlines and examine the theological and historical roots driving the crisis in Gaza. Together, they tackle questions like:

  • Where do we see Israel mentioned in the Quran and what does it say?
  • Why isn’t “Palestine” mentioned in the Quran?
  • How and when did Palestine’s national identity emerge?
  • Why does the Quran say the Holy Land belongs to the Jews? Is Allah a Zionist?
  • What started the 1948 Israel-Arab War?
  • Why do Palestinians have multi-generational refugee status?
  • What are Hamas’ stated goals and why doesn’t the West take their charter seriously?
  • What roles did Presidents Winston Churchill and Bill Clinton play in the conflict?
  • Why did Yasser Arafat reject the 1993 land deal and launch an intifada?
  • Why have repeated peace negotiations failed and is a two-state solution even possible?
  • What is the irony behind leftist groups who support a pro-Palestine narrative?

You’ll learn how Islamic history shapes modern geopolitics and why Christians must think clearly about what’s unfolding in the Middle East. If you want more context beyond the headlines, be sure to listen in and check out Frank and AP’s previous conversations in the resources below. Understanding the proper history behind this conflict matters now more than ever!

If you enjoyed this podcast episode PLEASE HELP US SPREAD THE TRUTH OF CHRISTIANITY BY SUPPORTING OUR MINISTRY USING THE LINK BELOW. 100% of your donation goes to ministry, 0% to buildings!

Resources mentioned during the episode:

Donate to CrossExamined

Why I Left Islam and Became a Christian (Part 1)

Why I Left Islam and Became a Christian (Part 2)

What No One Ever Told You About the Hamas-Israel Conflict

Were Jews In Israel Before 1948?

The Truth About Hamas in Their Own Words

Apologetics Roadshow with David Wood

The Hamas Charter 1988

AP’s YouTube Channel

Download Transcript

What can Christians learn from a former Muslim who now follows Christ? And how can Christians speak truthfully and lovingly with Muslims about Jesus? This week, Frank welcomes back Ridvan Aydemir, also known as the Apostate Prophet, to share more about his journey from Islam to atheism and ultimately to faith in Christ. Together, they tackle the Israel–Hamas conflict, the ideology behind Hamas, and why understanding Islamic theology is essential for effective evangelism. In this episode, Frank and AP will tackle questions like:

  • What ultimately led AP out of Islam, through atheism, and into Christianity?
  • How can Christians lovingly and wisely point Muslims to Christ?
  • What core memory of Christianity does AP still hold from his childhood?
  • What is AP’s new angle on the Islamic Dilemma and why is it such a powerful apologetics tool?
  • What’s the true purpose and worldview of Islam, including its moral framework?
  • What are some of the key differences between Islam and Christianity?
  • What does the Hamas Charter reveal about Islam’s view of Israel?
  • What was Ridvan taught about Christianity and the Jewish people as a young Muslim?
  • Where did Hamas come from and how did it rise to power in Gaza?
  • Why are so many leftist groups in the West sympathetic to Hamas?

If you’re trying to make sense of the chaos in Gaza—or want to have clearer, more compassionate conversations with Muslims about faith—you won’t want to miss this episode. Tune in as Frank and AP cut through misinformation, expose ideological contradictions, and point listeners toward truth, clarity, and Christ-centered evangelism.

If you enjoyed this podcast episode PLEASE HELP US SPREAD THE TRUTH OF CHRISTIANITY BY SUPPORTING OUR MINISTRY USING THE LINK BELOW. 100% of your donation goes to ministry, 0% to buildings!

Resources mentioned during the episode:

Donate to CrossExamined
Why I Left Islam and Became a Christian (Part 1)
Why I Left Islam and Became a Christian (Part 2)
The Hamas Charter 1988
CE International Website
CE Arabic Website
AP’s Website
AP’s YouTube Channel

Download Transcript

Can a logical person REALLY believe in miracles? Frank responds to a challenge from our skeptic friend, Mike, while tackling the big question: do miracles contradict science and the laws of logic? From science and history to philosophy and faith, we’ll explore what God’s nature reveals about the probability of divine intervention. Tune in as Frank answers questions like:

  • Is it reasonable to believe in macroevolution?
  • What is the acronym L.I.F.E.?
  • Who else besides Christians question the theory of macroevolution?
  • Why must miracles be rare to be meaningful?
  • What are four ways Jesus demonstrates His divinity?
  • How many miracles do we find in the Bible?
  • In what three time periods do we see the most miracles in the Bible and why?
  • Does God have limitations–or is He truly all-powerful?
  • What’s the difference between overpowering and violating the laws of physics?
  • How did Jesus become the central figure of the human race?

During the end of the podcast, Frank also addresses concerns regarding the last podcast episode and Josh Howerton’s “proof of a propaganda war”. Did Josh only get it “half right”? If you’ve ever wondered whether miracles are reasonable, this conversation will pinpoint why faith in God actually makes sense!

If you enjoyed this podcast episode PLEASE HELP US SPREAD THE TRUTH OF CHRISTIANITY BY SUPPORTING OUR MINISTRY USING THE LINK BELOW. 100% of your donation goes to ministry, 0% to buildings!

Resources mentioned during the episode:

Donate to CrossExamined
2026 ‘Change My Mind’ College Tour
Hollywood Heroes: How Your Favorite Movies Reveal God
3 BIG Reasons Why God May Choose to Hide Himself

Download Transcript

I never set out to become a witness to the West’s unraveling. I was just a minister seeking to show God’s love to people. In short, I simply loved Muslims—deeply and sincerely—and believed that the surest way to honor that calling was to study Islam from within its own intellectual world. That conviction led me to Islamic College in London. I was excited that I was going to learn under Muslim scholars. So, I wasn’t seeking conflict or controversy. Far from it. Instead, I was pursuing what I saw as a ministry of respect and understanding.

Shifting Cultural Currents

For several years, the professors supported my work. Classmates welcomed my questions, and I completed an M.A. in Islamic Studies believing I had formed genuine friendships. Yet even then, during my repeated visits to London, something unsettling tugged at me. I sensed cultural currents shifting beneath the surface of the city I had come to love, though I lacked words to describe it.

During those visits, especially when staying in neighborhoods with dense Muslim populations, I often felt as if I was walking through two London’s at once. It would become abundantly clear, as I interacted with countless people, that British culture was not very evident. There was not much assimilation. Another culture has overtaken it, and many British elites were on board.

When I landed in London on October 7, 2023, I expected nothing more than a week full of scholarly conversations with Shia leaders.[1] Instead, I stepped directly into the aftermath of Hamas’s massacre of Israeli civilians. Suddenly I noticed that, almost below the level of conscious awareness, the city’s emotional atmosphere shifted with a speed that left me disoriented. Suddenly, it wasn’t the same London I thought I knew. Within minutes, I was added to a group text coordinating rallies, and the words “genocide,” “apartheid,” and “resistance” appeared in messages. I was stunned.

Organized Jew-Hatred 

Later, a Muslim friend urged me to meet protest organizers, and was glad to introduce me to them. He insisted I had a role to play, but the invitation scared me to death. What have I got myself into? By the next morning, October 8, I saw with my own eyes, as I was headed to church in an Uber, coordinated demonstrations filled the streets. It felt less like a reaction and more like a mobilization. I realized that there was an organized network of Jew hatred that I didn’t know existed, at least in that magnitude.

“There was an organized network of Jew hatred that I didn’t know existed, at least in that magnitude”

Throughout that week, I took twenty-two Uber rides across the city, and eighteen drivers delivered unsolicited monologues about Israel with nearly identical certainty. I was stunned by the vitriol. What I noticed was a narrative template toward the Jews that I later discovered was in the Quran. I found myself listening quietly, wondering how these views had become so widespread, so quickly, and so synchronized. With each ride, the sense of ideological cohesion grew more visible, and I felt like a visitor in a city I once understood. The London I loved for its diversity now felt dominated by a single, unchallenged narrative.

What I felt most was that the Church there was very weak. And that weakness carried a cost. That disorientation deepened when I watched American and European universities erupt days later with the same slogans and emotional choreography. It was then I realized I was witnessing the expression of a coherent transnational worldview, not a series of isolated events.

“the Church there [in London] was very weak. And that weakness carried a cost.”

Inside Islamic college, the rupture was equally swift and painful. When I publicly defended Israel’s right to exist, relationships that once felt steady collapsed almost instantly. I found this reaction to be profoundly shocking. What I didn’t know was that I was getting an education that I would have never received in a classroom. A professor who had championed my academic work sent a short message cutting all contact. Others followed. There was only one person maintaining communication, who I would still call a friend, who offered a quiet kindness when the others withdrew.

Mainstream Jew-Hate 

More jarring still, I later learned that certain Shia leaders in the broader network wondered aloud if I might be a spy for Israel. I thought me, a spy? You have to be kidding. That suspicion didn’t anger me; it showed how deep the polarization ran. In that moment, I finally saw that anti-Israel sentiment wasn’t fringe. Instead, it was central in ways I’d sensed but never admitted.

After the initial shock, I turned to research in search of clarity, and what I found reframed my entire experience. I discovered through my Media investigations, that there were concerns raised about possible connections between the Islamic College and Al-Mustafa International University, an institution controlled by Iran’s Supreme Leader and described by some analysts as a “foothold” for exporting revolutionary ideology.[2] Some pro-regime Iranian outlets even called the College Al-Mustafa’s UK “branch,” though the College strongly denies any link.[3]

Reports also documented troubling public statements by staff. For example, one lecturer compared Israel to Nazi Germany, while another described Anders Breivik as an “ultra-Zionist.” A former principal appeared in footage encouraging chants for Hezbollah, a group now banned in the UK. Can you imagine Hezbollah? As I read, a cold clarity settled over me—these were not scattered controversies but pieces of a coherent pattern.

More investigation yielded that processes had been triggered by UK regulatory bodies far before my own personal breaking point. Middlesex University, the higher education body that validated the College’s degrees, withdrew its partnership with the organization after damning accusations were leveled on national news channels.[4] The Office for Students stated that it was reviewing the situation.

Reports also detailed how the Islamic Centre of England, which was described as having close connections to individuals at the College, held a vigil where IRGC commander Qassem Soleimani was praised, resulting in a Charity Commission warning.[5] The group of students from the college was reported to have visited the home of Ayatollah Khomeini on their trip to Iran in 2016.[6] It became clearer that the philosophy I was being confronted with was institutional.

Input from external perspectives contextualized the anecdotal evidence I was presented with about Al-Mustafa. Analysts such as Kasra Aarabi describe Al-Mustafa University as the “heart of Iran’s international ideological messaging,” from where the regime seeks to grow its reach abroad through highly-supervised networks of scholars.[7] This is an idea that many progressives turn their heads in denial. These studies say the university claims affiliated centers in dozens of countries, including some reported to be operating in the UK.

Pro-regime Farsi outlets have also suggested that certain leaders at the London college were connected to Al-Mustafa, though the College denies any formal ties. These were not antagonistic voices. They were pro-Iranian regime. Still, the mix of rhetoric, leadership backgrounds, and institutional relationships suggested a shared ideological direction rather than coincidence. Only then did I understand that the reflexes I saw in London after October 7 were not improvised. They were cultivated over time.

Asymmetric Integration  

All this led me to start seeing things through a particular framework that made sense of both my experience and the wider crisis in the West: Asymmetric Integration. The West assumes that integration is symmetrical – that newcomers to the open society will enter with a mindset of adopting civic norms and contributing in a pluralistic, multi-valued context. But that assumption breaks down when a new mindset sees openness not as a value to be mutually held, but a thing to be used.

Asymmetric Integration happens when a liberal society welcomes newcomers, which is great. But when it allows certain ideological networks to quietly pull that society into their own worldview, this is problematic. That’s what I saw, writ large. The result isn’t multiculturalism but one-way permeability. The West values rights and freedoms; the ideological ecosystem values faith and internal cohesion. One system is permeable; the other is rigid. That asymmetry constitutes a vulnerability the West doesn’t yet comprehend.

“[With] asymmetric Integration . . . the result isn’t multiculturalism but one-way permeability.”

Beyond culture, the asymmetry is civilizational: Liberal societies assume identities can coexist without hierarchy; many ideological systems born abroad assume truth rests on hierarchy and authority. It’s a deep conflict. Take the interview Der Spiegel conducted with Russian President Vladimir Putin last week. Putin asked, “Can you imagine the Russian Federation negotiating with some party inside the European Union?” And yet that’s conventional practice in Europe, which doesn’t pretend all its constituent powers have identical identities and interests.

Liberalism presumes debate and dissent; these networks presume cohesion and loyalty. Liberalism believes diversity dilutes the strength of beliefs; these networks believe beliefs should remain pure. And because liberal democracies assume good faith, they have difficulty recognizing when a different worldview does not. Thus, the West is not just failing to integrate certain communities, it is being integrated into ideological architectures it did not choose, and doesn’t understand. Suddenly the transformations I felt in London, the rapid mobilization of protests, and the rupture in my academic community all made painful sense.

“Because liberal democracies assume good faith [and mutual respect], they have difficulty recognizing when a different worldview does not.”

Another element of this asymmetry is how crises function within each worldview. In liberal societies, a crisis provokes questions, such as “What happened?”, “Why?”, and “What can we learn from this?” In ideological ones, whose foundation is different, crises are opportunities for rollout, not inquiry. The narrative is set, the action plans are in place, the orchestra of emotions is expertly rehearsed. A crisis doesn’t inspire their reaction; it triggers it.

That is why protestors appeared on the streets in London within hours, why college campuses in the United States exploded days later with matching slogans, and why the attitudinal response seemed harmonized across the world. It was only those on the inside, who recognized that this was not a task for improv theater, for whom this was a reflex, rather than an act of hesitation

The Biggest Weakness in the West       

I think the biggest weakness in the West is that they have lost confidence in their core values and everything that Western philosophy stands for. These days, with the rise of multiculturalism, it feels like a lot of institutions are scared to stand up for the things they believe in because they do not want to get labeled as intolerant or bigoted. In that kind of environment, “being open” is not always positive. Instead of being a virtue, it becomes a vulnerability.

I did not really get this at first. It was only after I personally lost my place in a community that I had really been trying hard to understand. The exact moment this happened was when I acknowledged Israel’s right to exist. It was at that moment that the whole illusion of “shared values” just disappeared, and I was exposed to the underlying truth beneath the community.

Today, I can say with confidence that “tolerance” without discernment, without understanding, and without inclusion is not really a virtue or moral strength. Instead, it’s a sort of surrender to power and loss of legitimacy. This moment was the end of innocence for me, and that I now look at the institution and the civilization that embraced me in a fundamentally different way.

These insights did not come from theory alone; they emerged from years inside Islamic academic environments where I was welcomed warmly until the moment I stepped outside the boundaries of ideological conformity. My story is only one expression of a larger structural phenomenon, which is networks shaped abroad embedding themselves into Western institutions that no longer defend their philosophical foundations. Unless the West recovers the confidence to distinguish between integration and absorption, it will continue to erode silently.

Our culture is in danger, but the shift isn’t going to be obvious. It won’t be announced or declared, just slowly shoved out of place. Key institutions will be overtaken and our moral footing will slip away. So, I first fell in love with these institutions and held high hopes for them. That’s why it was so painful when I left them, having gained an understanding of something that few in the West are honest with themselves about.

I thought I could understand myself and my place in the world by studying in London. Instead, what I learned shocked me, and my world was turned upside down. In the future, Western countries will have to recognize the asymmetry in these kinds of cultural encounters, and quickly, or else it will find out that the institutions it’ll be welcoming won’t be integrating as it expects, but slowly transforming the West.

References:

[1] [Editor’s note: Islam has two main factions or denominatios – Sunni (about 85-90% majority) and Shia (the minority). Here, ‘Shia’ refers to a subset of orthodox Islam.]

[2] Turner, C. (2023, March 4). University watchdog “engaged” in talks with London college over Iran links — Discussions follow claims that the Islamic College in Willesden has ties to Iranian Revolutionary Guards. The Telegraph.

https://web.archive.org/web/20240412001735/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/04/university-watchdog-engaged-talks-london-college-links-iranian/

[3] C. Turner, “University watchdog “engaged” in talks with London college over Iran links — Discussions follow claims that the Islamic College in Willesden has ties to Iranian Revolutionary Guards,” The Telegraph, (4 March 2023)

https://web.archive.org/web/20240412001735/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/04/university-watchdog-engaged-talks-london-college-links-iranian/

[4] Campaign Against Antisemitism, “Middlesex University reportedly cutting ties with the Islamic College over links to Iran and inflammatory staff, (7 March 2023), https://antisemitism.org/middlesex-university-reportedly-to-cut-ties-with-islamic-college-over-links-to-iran-and-inflammatory-staff

[5] Aarabi 2023.

[6] Aarabi 2023.

[7] Aarabi 2023.

Recommended Resources: 

Answering Islam by Dr. Frank Turek (DVD Set, Mp4 and Mp3)

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

Why We Know the New Testament Writers Told the Truth by Frank Turek (mp4 Download)

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

 


Tim Orr serves full-time with the Crescent Project as the Assistant Director of the Internship Program and Area Coordinator, where he is also deeply involved in outreach across the UK. A scholar of Islam, Evangelical minister, conference speaker, and interfaith consultant, Tim brings over 30 years of experience in cross-cultural ministry. He holds six academic degrees, including a Doctor of Ministry from Liberty University and a Master’s in Islamic Studies from the Islamic College in London. In September, he will begin a PhD in Religious Studies at Hartford International University.

Tim has served as a research associate with the Congregations and Polarization Project at the Center for the Study of Religion and American Culture at Indiana University Indianapolis, and for two years, he was also a research assistant on the COVID-19 study led by Hartford International University. His research interests include Islamic antisemitism, American Evangelicalism, Shia Islam, and gospel-centered ministry to Muslims.

He has spoken at leading universities and mosques throughout the UK, including Oxford University, Imperial College London, and the University of Tehran. His work has been published in peer-reviewed Islamic academic journals, and he is the author of four books. His fifth book, The Apostle Paul: A Model for Engaging Islam, is forthcoming.

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

What began more than three years ago as a Substack post is now headed to the Arizona Supreme Court. That fact alone should give Arizonans pause, not because of me, but because of what Arizona State University is arguing the law allows it to do.

The controversy began with a required ASU employee training called Inclusive Communities. On its face, that title sounds unobjectionable. Having worked at ASU for over two decades as a philosophy professor, I have seen many trainings and ideological fashions come and go. Universities, after all, are places where leftist ideas circulate freely and enforce a chilling effect on the few conservatives that slip through the DEI filter.

The ASU email announcing the required training read: “The training accelerates continuing efforts to encourage meaningful change at ASU while contributing to a national agenda for diversity, equity, inclusion, belonging and social justice.” The letter tells us it is required to be taken every two years.

But this training was different. Once I began it, I realized I was being compelled, as a condition of employment, to sit through material that engaged in race-based blame and overt anti-Christian rhetoric. It caused psychological harm and emotional distress.

There were slides with the following teaching straight out of Neitzche’s power dynamic: “Privilege is interconnected with power in our society i.e. those who have privilege have the ability to create/maintain social norms, often to their benefit at the expense of others.” Truth is whatever those in power say it is and the only solution is to disrupt the power dynamic and get your truth into the privileged position. There was a module about how white supremacy is normalized in our society by the unconscious bias of white people.

The race-based content instructed employees to judge entire groups of people according to skin color—precisely the sort of racial essentialism Arizona law prohibits in education when funded by the state. The anti-Christian content was equally clear. Employees were told we must “decolonize” from Christian missionaries and be liberated from “heteronormativity,” the belief, rooted in Scripture, that God created human beings male and female.

This was not optional professional development. It was mandatory bigotry. And it was funded by taxpayer dollars.

Knowing Arizona law well enough, I believed ASU was violating it. So, I wrote about the training on my Substack, expecting little more than to register a protest. Instead, I was surprised when the Goldwater Institute reached out to confirm that yes, ASU’s required training did in fact violate state law, and asked whether I would be willing to take the issue to court.

There is no money involved in this case. The goal is straightforward: enforce Arizona law and end race-based, ideological anti-Christian training imposed on public employees.

ASU’s response has been telling as it flails about trying to find a strategy. First, it denied the training existed. Then it claimed the training did not involve race-based evaluation. Next, it said the training was not required. When those arguments failed due to the simple existence of screenshots, the university abandoned its in-house legal team and hired Perkins Coie (the firm best known for its role in the Clinton campaign’s Russia dossier) to reframe the case entirely.

ASU now argues that I lack standing to sue, that even if the university violated the law, no employee has the right to challenge it in court.

That argument should alarm every state employee, regardless of political ideology. Suddenly, I have gone from the conservative Christian professor opposing DEI intersectionality, to the champion of all employees in Arizona.  I’ll take the promotion.

If ASU prevails, the implication is clear: state employees have no legal recourse when their employer violates the law. Today, the issue involves DEI training. Tomorrow it could involve something else entirely.

Imagine a future administration in which MAGA ideology dominates the university, and faculty are required to attend a hypothetical ICE training they believe violates state law. Under ASU’s position, those employees would have no standing to challenge it. The university would simply move to dismiss the case, and the courts would never reach the merits.

I do not expect bags full of thank-you cards from Marxist professors to arrive at court a la Miracle on 34th St. But ASU has chosen a strategy that places it squarely against employee rights. That is no small matter.

This case is no longer just about defending Christianity against intersectional ideology. It is about whether state employees in Arizona retain the basic right to hold their employer accountable under the law.

That is a cause worth fighting for, all the way to the Arizona Supreme Court.

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)

The Case for Christian Activism (MP3 Set), (DVD Set), and (mp4 Download Set) by Frank Turek 

 


​​Dr. Owen Anderson is a Professor of Philosophy and Religious Studies at Arizona State University, a pastor, and a certified jiu-jitsu instructor. He emphasizes the Christian belief in God, human sin, and redemption through Christ, and he explores these themes in his philosophical commentary on the Book of Job. His recent research addresses issues such as DEIB, antiracism, and academic freedom in secular universities, critiquing the influence of thinkers like Rousseau, Marx, and Freud. Dr. Anderson actively shares his insights through articles, books, online classes, and his Substack.

How do you make the case for Christianity? It seems that the burden of proof always falls on Christians, but there are certain aspects of reality that need to be explained regardless of your worldview (even atheism!). The question remains, which worldview fits the story of reality better than the others?

In this evergreen podcast episode, Frank breaks down 10 aspects of reality that support the Christian worldview by answering questions like:

  • What is the cosmological argument?
  • How is the universe fine-tuned at three different levels?
  • Why is atheism, not Christianity, at odds with science?
  • Where do the laws of logic come from?
  • Why doesn’t science say anything?
  • Where does objective morality come from?
  • How did Jesus Christ become the most influential person in human history?
  • Why is it essential to not make hasty generalizations about a whole group or worldview from single incidents?
  • What proof is there that you are in a propaganda war right now?

In the last part of the program, Frank explains why you can’t make firm conclusions about entire groups with insufficient data, which is especially true about short videos we see online (like ICE arrests). Don’t let propaganda poison your perspective! For more information on how to think clearly and logically be sure to check out the resources below!

If you enjoyed this podcast episode PLEASE HELP US SPREAD THE TRUTH OF CHRISTIANITY BY SUPPORTING OUR MINISTRY USING THE LINK BELOW. 100% of your donation goes to ministry, 0% to buildings!

Resources mentioned during the episode:

Donate to CrossExamined
Stealing From God
I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist
You Are In a Propaganda War–Here’s Proof with Josh Howerton
Train Your Brain: An Introduction To Logic

Download Transcript

It’s been over a decade since the 2015 Obergefell ruling that mandated same-sex marriage and the stats are in. Has redefining marriage strengthened families, or has it quietly harmed the most vulnerable among us? Frank sits down with Katy Faust, founder and president of Them Before Us, to confront the real-world consequences of so-called “gay marriage,” and introduce the brand-new Greater Than movement—a bold effort to return to the natural law and biblical definition of marriage on behalf of children. During their conversation, Frank and Katy answer questions like:

  • What personal experiences growing up make Katy uniquely qualified to talk about this topic?
  • Why was marriage and family such an important issue to Charlie Kirk?
  • What are the 3 institutions that God created and how are they related?
  • Why does the government care about marriage?
  • Who is statistically the most dangerous person in a child’s life?
  • What is the “Cinderella Effect”?
  • Why does Frank believe the term “gay marriage” doesn’t address the real issue?
  • Are all family structures equally beneficial for children?
  • Why are the biological distinctions between mothers and fathers so important to children?
  • What does the data show about biological parents vs. non-biological caregivers?
  • What are the 3 main goals of the Greater Than movement and how can you help?

In today’s society, children are often treated like trophies—spoken for, negotiated over, or reshaped to serve adult priorities. Greater Than works from a different premise: children’s rights should not be overridden by adult feelings or desires. To learn more and get involved, be sure to visit GreaterThanCampaign.com!

If you enjoyed this podcast episode PLEASE HELP US SPREAD THE TRUTH OF CHRISTIANITY BY SUPPORTING OUR MINISTRY USING THE LINK BELOW. 100% of your donation goes to ministry, 0% to buildings!

Resources mentioned during the episode:

Donate to CrossExamined
GreaterThanCampaign.com
Correct, Not Politically Correct by Frank Turek

Download Transcript

John and I were at the Iowa State Fair this weekend (in 2019). My husband loves all the fried food. Calories at the fair don’t count, right? Among our scheduled stops, we wanted to see a band that advertised itself as a mix between Stomp and Accapella. Sounds cool right?

We sat down with whatever artery-clogging victual we had just purchased and as the band started to sing, John and I realized that they weren’t exactly what we had thought. They weren’t bad necessarily. They just sounded a whole lot like a group that you’d hear brought to a middle school to give some flowery feel-good generic message—which consequently is exactly what they did.

The lead singer proudly proclaimed that they had decided to switch their focus from just music to making a positive difference in the world (sounds good, right?) They had decided to use their music to spread a message of unity and love. (Again, sounds good, right?) They then launched into a song about how we are all children of the earth.

John and I stayed for a song or two, but once we realized that it wasn’t getting any better, we moved on. However, at the behest of my cousin however, (shout out to Martha!) I decided to share the conversation that John and I had on the way out.

What exactly did they mean by “unity”?    


This is one of those linguistically thefted words that our society is obsessed over. (If you’re not sure what linguistic theft is, check out chapter 4 of the first Mama Bear Apologetics book.) Linguistic theft is when a word (especially a word with Christian connotations) has been taken, redefined, and then put back on the market to champion something that Scripture never intended. Or sometimes, it’s a word that just sounds really great, but upon digging, has no meaning whatsoever. A word like “unity” only has meaning when coupled with a message of what we are to unify with. Without defining what we are unifying over, it’s just empty words, and people can fill in the details with whatever message they want. Share on X

What were we supposed to be unified over?

We actually debated waiting until the concert was over to go and talk to the band and ask them “What exactly is your message of unity regarding?” We expected that they would give some generic version of how we were all humans and needed to stick together. To which we would ask, “What about sex traffickers? Should we be in unity with them?” I’m assuming they would have said no. And of course we’d follow up with, “What about bullies? Should we be united with them?” I’m assuming they’d say no. “So you’re saying there are some people we are supposed to divide ourselves from?” We expected blank faces by that time. But this was the fair. They probably had 12 shows a day and needed a break. This wasn’t the time, so we just quietly left and went to pet a bunch of baby goats.

Who are we supposed to be unified with? Sex-traffickers? Bullies? No? So you’re saying there ARE people from whom we should divide ourselves… #linguistictheft #emptyphrases  Share on X

Unity requires division          

The problem with unity is that it implies division. In order to unify over one thing, you have to divide from its opposite. But nobody wants to talk about that (unless they are in politics, and then all you hear is how evil the other side is.) Everyone wants everyone else to unify with whatever their message is. They just want unity with themselves. Everyone is welcome on my team (as long as you agree with my team.) Why can’t everyone just agree with me?! Is that too hard?!

In order to unify with one thing, you have to divide from its opposite. Teach your kids to ask for clarity early on before they jump on the bandwagon of ‘unity.’ #linguistictheft #emptyphrases #apologetics Share on X

Unity has to have a conviction that people are unified around. Unity without a unifying message is just a group of people with no convictions whatsoever. In Christianity, we are called to unity. 1 Peter 3:8Philippians 2:21 Corinthians 1:10Psalm 133:1Ephesians 4:3. . .  I could go on. But implicit in the Bible’s message of unity, is the source of our unity—the message of the cross, Christ’s life, death, and resurrection. Loving God with all our hearts, minds, souls, and strengths and loving others as ourselves. We are called to divide from the world and its practices, and unite over shared Lordship and obedience to Christ as defined in the Scriptures. True unity is actually very divisive! It cannot tolerate its opposite.

A call for unity without defining the message is basically asking for a whole crowd of people to gather with no convictions whatsoever. #linguistictheft #whatdoyoumeanbyunity? Share on X

Teaching our kids to critically think through unity  

So this is the message we need to be instilling in our kids day in and day out. When we see messages calling for unity, ask them “What are they asking us to unify over?” or “What does unity with their message mean that we need to divide over?” When our kids only hear smooth and attractive sounding words and dig no further, there is no telling what kind of movement they might accidentally align themselves with in the future. Teach them that it is important to define words before we pledge our allegiance to something that sounds good. Because remember, Satan masquerades as an angel of light. It is not often that the true agenda is on display for the world. (Just look at our blog regarding the Women’s March of 2017. How many people knew that the principles listed were what they were actually marching for?)

As you train your kids to examine a message before they swallow it, you’ll raise kids who are discerning thinkers and less likely to be taken victim to smooth sounding ideologies raised against the knowledge of God.

Recommended Resources: 

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

Can All Religions Be True? mp3 by Frank Turek

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

Your Most Important Thinking Skill by Dr. Frank Turek DVD, (mp4) download

 

 


Hillary Morgan Ferrer is the founder and President of Mama Bear Apologetics. She feels a burden for providing accessible apologetics resources for busy moms. She is the chief author and editor of the bestselling books  Mama Bear Apologetics: Empowering Your Kids to Challenge Cultural Lies, Mama Bear Apologetics Guide to Sexuality: Empowering Your Kids to Understand and Live Out God’s Design, and the soon to be released Honest Prayers for Mama Bears. Hillary has her master’s degree in biology and loves helping moms to discern truths and lies in both science and culture. She and her husband, John, have been married for 16 years and minister together as an apologetics team. She can never sneak up on anybody because of her chronic hiccups, which you can hear occasionally on the podcast and in interviews.

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

As Christians, we all believe that Hell is real. But what is the exact nature of God’s eternal punishment? Is Hell eternal conscious torment, or will it ultimately come to an end? This week, Kirk Cameron joins Frank to unpack the controversy that led him to host, ‘Hellgate: The Christian Debate We’re Afraid to Have‘, a roundtable discussion featuring biblical scholars Paul Copan, Chris Date, Gavin Ortlund, and Dan Paterson, examining what Scripture actually teaches about eternal punishment, conditionalism, and the justice of God. Frank and Kirk will tackle questions like:

  • What caused Kirk to reconsider the traditional doctrine of eternal conscious torment?
  • How did some prominent Christian leaders react to his comments?
  • What is conditionalism (annihilationism) and how does it compare to the traditional view of Hell?
  • What did the early church fathers believe about Hell?
  • Does conditionalism undermine the Gospel?
  • Is God unjust if he punishes people for all eternity in Hell?
  • Is eternal punishment overkill for temporal sins?
  • Do passages like Matthew 25:46 and Revelation 14 & 20 rule out annihilationism?
  • Is conditionalism heretical or a legitimate orthodox disagreement?
  • How should Christians debate difficult doctrines without fracturing unity within the Church?
  • Has Kirk’s position on Hell changed since the roundtable discussion?

For more information on this important topic, be sure to watch the full ‘Hellgate’ discussion on Kirk’s YouTube channel. Not only is it a deep and thoughtful theological discussion, it’s a great example of humility and graciousness on display among Christian brothers who sharply disagree with each other.

If you enjoyed this podcast episode PLEASE HELP US SPREAD THE TRUTH OF CHRISTIANITY BY SUPPORTING OUR MINISTRY USING THE LINK BELOW. 100% of your donation goes to ministry, 0% to buildings!

Resources mentioned during the episode:

Donate to CrossExamined
Hellgate: The Christian Debate We’re Afraid to Have
Albert Mohler – The Deadly Danger of Remodeling Hell
Are We Wrong About Hell? The Kirk Cameron Show
BRAVE Books
Iggy & Mr. Kirk

Download Transcript