Tag Archive for: Christianity

What Does the Bible Say About Illegal Immigration? My Friendly Response to a Well-known Pentecostal Pastor

The topic of immigration is boiling over these days. It’s complex and emotional, especially when it affects our communities and families.

Recently, a well-known Puerto Rican Pentecostal pastor named Omar Lugo  presented a Facebook video and a written post on this issue, citing various Bible verses that discuss how we should treat foreigners. His approach seemed to suggest that human laws regarding immigration shouldn’t matter because divine laws are above them (without explaining how they directly contradict God’s law).

While I share his concern for showing compassion, I believe his argument stems from biblical silence and fails to demonstrate that current immigration laws violate God’s law.

The Argument from Silence in Biblical Interpretation

Pastor Omar used passages like Leviticus 19:33-34, Exodus 22:21, Deuteronomy 10:18-19, Zechariah 7:10, Matthew 25:35, Hebrews 13:2, and Ephesians 2:19 to highlight that we should love the foreigner. He did not, however, address whether these texts assume the foreigners were legal or not.

This is important because Israel’s laws in the Old Testament regulated who could stay in the land (Exodus 12:48-49). In that context, the term “foreigners” (gerim) referred to those who lived legally among the Israelites and were subject to the same laws. Otherwise, they could not remain and had to be “cut off” from the land. Therefore, assuming these passages apply to all types of immigration—legal or illegal—is an argument from silence. It relies on what the text does not explicitly say rather than what it does. This reasoning cannot be used to conclude that human immigration laws always contradict God’s will.

Pastor Omar also indicated that modern immigration laws are not found in the Bible. Again, this is an argument from silence and anachronistic.

Romans 13: Obey the Government. . . . Always?

In his video, the pastor stated that divine laws are above human laws and used examples, if I recall correctly, like same-sex marriage or prostitution, which are legal in some places but not supported by the church. I completely agree with this statement; our ultimate loyalty is to God, not human laws. He did not, however, explain how immigration laws violate divine law, despite being asked.

Romans 13:1-5 reminds us that human authorities have been established by God, and unless a law directly contradicts God’s will, Christians are to obey it.

Everyone must submit to governing authorities. For all authority comes from God, and those in positions of authority have been placed there by God. 2 So anyone who rebels against authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and they will be punished. 3 For the authorities do not strike fear in people who are doing right, but in those who are doing wrong. Would you like to live without fear of the authorities? Do what is right, and they will honor you. 4 The authorities are God’s servants, sent for your good. But if you are doing wrong, of course you should be afraid, for they have the power to punish you. They are God’s servants, sent for the very purpose of punishing those who do what is wrong. 5 So you must submit to them, not only to avoid punishment, but also to keep a clear conscience.

According to Title 8, Chapter 12, code 1325 of the United States Code (if I remember correctly), it is a crime to enter the country illegally. Therefore, those who cross illegally are committing a crime, as stipulated by the law.

The pastor also mentioned that churches are sanctuaries where illegal immigrants could enter, and the police could not remove them since churches were considered “sensitive locations.”

They were. An important point is that this is not a law being violated by the police but rather an internal policy of ICE. A policy serves as a guideline, not as a law (after I pointed this out, he walked it back).

Roman Citizenship and Israelite Citizenship

A historical example illustrates the importance of legality and order. During Paul’s time, the Roman Empire had strict laws on how non-Romans could obtain citizenship. Not everyone could enter the empire, ignore its rules, and enjoy the rights of citizens. There were three main ways a person could acquire Roman citizenship:

1. By birth in a Roman family or Roman province: Citizenship was inherited if both parents were citizens or, in some cases, if the father was a citizen. It was also granted by being born in a Roman province, as was Paul’s case.
2. By purchasing citizenship: Some could obtain it by paying a significant sum, as mentioned by the commander in Acts 22:28: “I acquired this citizenship for a large sum of money.”
3. By merit or special grant: Those who served the empire (such as non-Roman soldiers in the military) or performed exceptional acts could be rewarded with citizenship.

These restrictions show that even in a powerful culture like Rome, there was no indiscriminate access to the benefits of citizenship. The system ensured that people recognized and respected governmental authority.

Necessity, Compassion and Justice: The Principle of Proverbs 6:30-31

The Bible acknowledges that necessity can lead people to break the law. Proverbs 6:30-31 says: “excuses might be found for a thief who steals because he is starving. 31 But if he is caught, he must pay back seven times what he stole, even if he has to sell everything in his house” (New Living Translation).

This principle applies to illegal immigration. We can understand and empathize with those who, out of desperation, cross a border without documents. Many are good neighbors, hard workers, and productive members of society. This does not, however, eliminate the legal consequences or the fact that the initial act was a crime. Compassion must not override the principle of justice. The end does not justify the means. Blessings should not obtain through illegal or immoral methods.

How Should the Church Respond?

As a church, we have a responsibility to balance grace and truth:

1. Show compassion: Help immigrants, regardless of their status, with immediate needs, spiritual, and emotional support. Knowing they are here illegally does not give us the right to mistreat them. Neither is the church a bunch of ICE officials, authorized to make arrests. We should, instead, encourage them to make things right with the law.

2. Be realistic: Acknowledge that disobedience to laws has consequences. Promoting more humane and dignified solutions does not mean ignoring sin or illegality.

3. Advocate for justice: As citizens, we must work for immigration systems that are fair and reflect both human dignity and the need for social order without undermining the safety and well-being of naturalized citizens.

In conclusion, we cannot allow love for our neighbor to become an excuse to ignore justice or legality. The Bible calls us to be compassionate, but it also calls us to obey the laws and promote a balance between the two. To combine compassion with realism, grace with truth. This is a difficult topic, but as Christians, we are called to be a light in the midst of this complexity. The following were 4 common objections I receive from other people after my response to pastor Omar that I think will be of benefits.

Answering Common Objections

The “Hard Working Immigrant” Objection

“But they are hardworking, decent people who do the jobs Americans don’t want to do: planting and harvesting our food, building our homes, cleaning our streets and yards, and caring for our children and elderly.”

This argument sounds noble, but in reality, it is the same one used by 19th-century slaveholders when opposing abolition: “If we free the slaves, who will pick our cotton?” This is not an argument for justice but one of convenience.

Taking advantage of the fear and desperation of people fleeing extreme poverty and persecution to pay them poverty wages—far below the legal minimum—is not compassion. It is exploitation. And justifying it by saying, “They still earn more than they would in their home country,” does not make it any less immoral. This practice, far from being altruistic, is pure greed disguised as pragmatism.

Many business owners prefer cheap labor with no legal protections because it allows them to save thousands, if not millions, of dollars. But when those same workers are deported and their businesses collapse due to labor shortages, breached contracts, and lawsuits over unfinished work, they will have no one to blame but themselves.

And yes, the economy might take a temporary hit.

Prices may rise, and our comfort may be affected. But an economy built on the exploitation of the most vulnerable is neither sustainable nor morally acceptable. We cannot continue justifying illegal immigration under the pretext that “we need them” when, in reality, we have created a system that profits from their suffering.

The “You’re a Privilege” Objection

“You speak from a place of privilege. You don’t care because it doesn’t affect you directly. But if you were one of them, your tune would be different. What wouldn’t you do for your children, for your family?”

Yes, I speak from privilege. God gave me the privilege of being born on American soil, with the rights and opportunities that come with it. But that does not invalidate my argument.

Saying that my opinion holds no weight because of where I was born is like when an atheist says, “You’re only a Christian because you were born into a Christian family and in a country with Christian roots. If you had been born in Saudi Arabia, you would be Muslim.” But the truth of a belief does not depend on how I acquired it.

The veracity of Christianity does not change just because I was born in a Christian nation, just as the validity of my opinion on immigration does not depend on my citizenship. An argument must be evaluated based on its truth, not on the person presenting it.

“What wouldn’t you do for your children?”, they might ask. But I wouldn’t break just laws. Because when a law is just and I choose to violate it to obtain benefits and privileges, I am not acting in faith but in fear and desperation. I am not trusting that God will provide for my family; I am relying on my own means, even if they are unlawful.

Proverbs 6:30-31 tells us that while we may understand a thief’s hunger, stealing still has consequences. And Romans 13 is clear: opposing just earthly laws is opposing God. Love for our children does not give us a license to do what is wrong. God does not need us to break His principles in order to bless us.

The “But These are Your Compatriots” Objection

“I seriously don’t understand why you have such a big fight against them. We’re supposed to be Latinos, compatriots. We, immigrants (legal ones), should be more empathetic and look for solutions that benefit all of us. Many of these people have been here for years.”

My fight is not against people but against a system that incentivizes human suffering and illegality under emotional pretexts. Promoting, encouraging, or justifying illegal immigration is not an act of empathy but complicity in a cycle of exploitation and violence.

Most people who cross illegally do not do so alone. They do it through coyotes—members of criminal cartels who see immigrants as merchandise. These traffickers not only scam them by charging exorbitant fees (which migrants often pay back through forced labor or sexual exploitation), but they also rape, mutilate, and, in many cases, murder them.

The testimonies are abundant:
• Systematic sexual violence: A 2017 Doctors Without Borders report revealed that 1 in 3 women who cross the border illegally experience sexual violence. Many even take contraceptives before the journey because they assume they will be raped.
• Kidnappings and murders: A 2021 Human Rights First report found that over 6,000 migrants were kidnapped, raped, or murdered at the border between 2020 and 2021 while waiting to cross or after they had crossed.
• Human trafficking and modern slavery: The U.S. State Department estimates that thousands of illegal immigrants end up in human trafficking networks, particularly children and teenagers, who are sold into labor and sex exploitation rings.

When the border is open or permissive, these crimes increase. Allowing illegal immigration is not an act of kindness. It is fueling the cartel and perpetuating the suffering of the most vulnerable. If you truly care about immigrants, you will do as I do: work to discourage illegal entry to minimize these horrors. Compassion is not demonstrated by encouraging danger but by promoting legal and safe pathways for migration.

If you truly care about immigrants, you will do as I do: work to discourage illegal entry to minimize these horrors. Compassion is not demonstrated by encouraging danger but by promoting legal and safe pathways for migration.

The “Immigration Law is Racist” Objection

“But this immigration law is immoral because it’s nearly impossible to become a citizen due to the cost and requirements. It’s even racist and xenophobic! The Bible urges us to treat foreigners well. Refusing to help them in their desperate need goes against the biblical principle of hospitality.”

I understand the concern for the foreigner and agree that every person should be treated with dignity. The Bible calls us to hospitality (Leviticus 19:33-34), but hospitality is not the same as anarchy. A home opens its doors with order, not allowing just anyone to enter without discretion, destabilizing the household itself.

Regulating immigration is not an act of racism or xenophobia; it is an act of protection and prudence towards the citizens. Every nation has the right to determine who enters its territory, just as a family has the right to decide who enters its home.

1 Timothy 5:8 is clear: “If anyone does not provide for his own, especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.” The principle is the same if we extrapolate it to the nation. A government that neglects its own people to indiscriminately care for foreigners is not acting justly. Being compassionate does not mean being irresponsible.

Just as a father cannot sacrifice his family’s well-being to give everything to strangers, a country cannot allow uncontrolled immigration that overwhelms its social and economic resources.

Immigration laws do not exist to exclude certain groups based on race or nationality. They exist to ensure that those who enter contribute to the nation’s well-being. Even in the Bible, foreigners could live in Israel, but under certain conditions:

• They had to integrate into the country’s culture and laws. (Exodus 12:49 – “The same law shall apply to the native and to the foreigner residing among you.”)
• They had to work and contribute to the common good. (2 Thessalonians 3:10 – “The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.”)
• There was no promotion of disorderly entry. (Nehemiah 13:3 shows that the Jews regulated who could live among them to protect their identity and well-being.)

An orderly immigration system allows a nation to flourish. A chaotic system harms citizens, overwhelms public resources, and enriches human traffickers.

When the Bible speaks of welcoming the foreigner, it does so within the context of order and justice. God commanded Israel to protect foreigners, but not at the expense of the nation’s well-being.

If we truly want to help immigrants, the solution is not to open borders indiscriminately but to advocate for fair and sustainable processes. Allowing illegal entry only perpetuates exploitation, abuse, and the overburdening of a system that, when it collapses, can help neither citizens nor foreigners.

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)

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

 

Miguel Rodriguez is the founder of Smart Faith, a platform dedicated to helping Christians defend their faith with clarity and confidence. After experiencing a miraculous healing at 14, he developed a passion for knowing God through study and teaching. He now serves as the Director of Christian Education and a Bible teacher at his local church while also working as a freelance email marketer. Living in Orlando, Florida, with his wife and two daughters, Miguel seeks to equip believers with practical and intellectual tools to strengthen their faith. Through Smart Faith, he provides apologetics and self-improvement content to help Christians live with wisdom and integrity.

Originally posted at: https://bit.ly/4q958kj

/by

How to Be Human (In an AI World) with Abdu Murray

We hear that technology will set us free and that identity is whatever we choose. What we’re not being told is how these promises unravel reality itself, leaving us restless and confused in a world where we can no longer tell what is true. Embrace the Truth president Abdu Murray returns to the program to continue the discussion about his brand-new book, ‘Fake ID‘, and share practical tips for how we can navigate today’s two cultural tsanamis of artificial intelligence and identity ideology. Together, Frank and Abdu answer questions like:

  • What does it mean to say that humans are made in the image of God?
  • Why does humanity collapse when objective truth goes away?
  • Why does increased digital connection make us feel more lonely and depressed?
  • What shocking story did no one talk about in mainstream media and how is it another example of collapsing reality?
  • Should we embrace our “authentic self”?
  • What are some practical tips and tools we can use to navigate the culture we’re in right now?
  • Why is the distinction between epistemology and ontology so important?
  • What is the ultimate solution to all of this cultural confusion and chaos?
  • What was the providential encounter that Abdu recently experienced at MIT?

Reality doesn’t go away just because you stop believing in it! And the reality is, our identity is found in the truth of Jesus Christ and Him alone. You’re not just made in His image, but you can actually become a child of God by trusting in Jesus. The truth will set you free! Continue to pray that others may be released by the bondage of today’s cultural lies. If you would like to receive a FREE copy of Abdu’s ‘Spot the Truth & Spot the Lie’ online tool, be sure to email your request to mail@embracethetruth.org.

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.org
Embrace the Truth
Fake ID: How AI and Identity Ideology Are Collapsing Reality–and What To Do About It
Lead Psychologist at Tavistock Pleads Guilty to Pedophile Charge But Avoids Jail

Download Transcript

/by

Stranger Things: Was Vecna a Victim?

***This review of Stranger Things Season 5 contains major spoilers. Consider yourself warned.

It’s a new year, and the end of an era. Stranger Things, the wildly successful Netflix show, has officially concluded. I watched the show as a fan but also as one who is interested in the underlying worldview. No piece of media is completely neutral. In fact, the arts are meant to be an imaginative exploration of ideas. In story, you don’t just observe beliefs, you inhabit them as an “insider.” If you are not familiar with the show, I would warn that it contains language, violence, and at times depictions of what I determine to be demonic. Season 4 was particularly demonic, and I almost stopped watching. But I was a youth pastor at the time, and most of my students were watching it and needing to debrief. I kept going—and I suspect many other Christians are looking for a debrief as well.

C.S. Lewis draws from Alexander’s Space, Time, and Deity to discuss the difference between “enjoyment” and “contemplation.”[1] Enjoyment is experiencing something: the taste of a cookie, the feeling of the breeze across one’s face, the excitement of a live concert. It is something we experience and about which we have an insider perspective. But contemplation is its opposite. It is to look at something, to examine it, to understand it. Lewis discusses why native religious experiences look silly to outsiders. The reason is because outsiders are looking at the experiences, but the natives are looking along the experiences.[2] They possess a different kind of knowledge. In Stranger Things, I want to enter the experience (look along) a character that audiences were invited into: Henry Creel, also known as Vecna.

Vecna the Victim?

Hinted at during all of season 5 was that Vecna had childhood trauma he did not want to face. Max, as she was trapped in his mind, found shelter in one such memory. Toward the end of the season, Max and Holly Wheeler were trying to escape and found the entrance to a mineshaft. It was clear that this place was not meant to be found. In it was a traumatic memory playing on repeat: the moment Henry became Vecna.

We see a young Henry Creel attempting to rescue a man with a briefcase who was badly injured. But the man, out of his mind and deeply suspicious of Henry, attempted to kill Henry. One shot through Henry’s hand was enough for him to realize he needed to act in self-defense. The result was Henry killing the man with a rock. Henry, still in shock, then opened the briefcase. It was clear that the injured mystery man believed the contents of the briefcase was worth killing over. Curiosity was too much. Inside was a glowing asteroid, and upon touching it, created a connection to what the children called The Mind Flayer. Henry was never the same.

Trauma changes us. Pain is a teacher. Identity is often formed by what is done to us. Henry was forced into self-defense and stumbled upon the alluring power of The Mind Flayer. He did not choose this; it was done to him. This produced great shame, a memory that Henry did not want to face. He avoided that place in his memory until the finale, likely because of the pain it caused him. We all wish that the pain done to us never happened. We imagine what life would have looked like had such pain never occurred. For Henry, the mineshaft was the ultimate place of “what-ifs.” A childhood taken. Innocence corrupted. A new trajectory solidified.

But the showrunners did something unexpected. I thought, while watching it, that they would continue to push a well-established story trope that has become popular in the last decade or so: there are no villains, just victims. Some examples of this. Killmonger from Black Panther (2018) was not evil, he was just abandoned, experienced racial in justice and oppression. Second, Scarlet Witch from Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (2022) was merely a story of the loss of her family and unresolved grief. She was not portrayed as evil; she was simply wounded. I could go on about Elsa in Frozen or Kylo Ren in Disney’s version of Star Wars. The trope has become so engrained in our stories that we are expected to, at some point, empathize with these wounded villains. In the finale of Stranger Things, there was a moment where I thought the show was going to treat Henry (Vecna) the same way. He was not evil; he was just a victim. But to my surprise, Henry revealed to Holly that he could have resisted The Mind Flayer; he could have walked away.

Henry was the victim of a moment, but his identity as the antagonist was a choice. The mineshaft produced a wound in Henry, one that he acted out of from his pain. There are two responses to woundedness: be shaped by it or be healed from it. Henry was shaped; Jesus invites healing. One quick comment on woundedness. The church often mistakes sin with wounds. Victims, and their subsequent woundedness, are told to repent. But how do you repent of a wound? How do you turn from something that was done to you? This is the grave mistake between sin and wounds. You cannot repent of wounds – you repent of sin. But here is another important distinction. Sin often comes from wounds. Henry was deeply wounded, hurt, isolated from this event, yet he chose an identity of sin as a result. There was a moment where Henry was facing this memory, and Will was challenging Henry to (in essence) repent. But Henry was convinced that The Mind Flayer’s critique of humanity was correct: it was corrupt beyond saving. The only solution, to Henry, was to remake the world by destroying it.

Responding to Woundedness

The final battle was between two victims who chose different paths. Henry allowed his woundedness shape his life, whereas El did not. The show does a masterful job of showing Henry and El as two parallel victims – both with powers, both with childhood trauma, both with legitimate motives for revenge. But El healed; Henry did not. The difference? Relationships. Imagine if El was not found by Mike and the gang and she was not “fathered” by Hopper. El was slowly healed by her loving (yet imperfect) relationships. Henry, on the other hand, became filled with malice the longer he was isolated. We can see Henry’s perspective only when we understand who he was connected to: he chose to “abide” in The Mind Flayer, which led to his destruction.

The gospel invites us to both healing and repentance. All of us have things that were done to us, but we all must choose how we respond to such things. Henry responded with more corruption and evil, El responded by healing and, in the end, self-sacrifice. She was the “Christ-type” of the show insofar that she was the self-sacrificing “savior” who ended the cycle of child experimentation. This points to Christ, who experienced great suffering yet sacrificed himself for unworthy humanity. What will you choose? God is the only healer. Psalm 147:3 says, “He heals the brokenhearted and binds up their wounds.”

If you are broken, go to the one who has the power to heal. If you have made sinful choices because of woundedness, receive the gift of repentance and turn from your sins. John the Baptist exclaims,

“’The time has come,’ he said. ‘The kingdom of God has come near. Repent and believe the good news!’” (Mark 1:15)

Henry Creel was the victim who became the victimizer and villain. How will you respond to your own pain?

Choose healing and turn from any subsequent sins.

Choose Christ.

References:

[1] C. S. Lewis, Surprised by Joy: the Shape of My Early Life (San Francisco, CA: HarperOne, 2017), 265.

[2] C. S. Lewis, God in the Dock: Essays on Theology and Ethics, ed. Walter Hooper (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2014), 232.

Recommended Resources: 

If God, Why Evil? (DVD Set), (MP3 Set), and (mp4 Download Set) by Frank Turek 

Why Doesn’t God Intervene More? (DVD Set), (MP3 Set), and (mp4 Download Set) by Frank Turek

Why does God allow Bad Things to Happen to Good People? (DVD) and (mp4 Download) by Frank Turek 

Relief From the Worst Pain You’ll Ever Experience (DVD) (MP3) (Mp4 Download) by Gary Habermas

 

Richard Eng serves as the Lead Pastor at Bethel Evangelical Free church in Devils Lake, ND. He is the author of the illustrated children’s book “What Is Heaven Like?” (2022), and has written on faith and cultural issues for The Expository Times, FreeThinking Ministries, CrossExamined, and others. He received his M.A. in Cultural Apologetics from Houston Baptist University, and degrees Ministry and Bible from Grace University. He and his wife have three young children — who are most likely making a mess in the living room right now. 

/by

Fake ID: How AI and Identity Ideology Are Collapsing Reality with Abdu Murray

What does it mean to be human? And what if artificial intelligence isn’t just changing technology, but undermining our view of reality? Author, apologist, and founder of Embrace the Truth, Abdu Murray, joins Frank to introduce his brilliant new book, ‘Fake ID: How AI and Identity Ideology Are Collapsing Reality–and What To Do About It‘, that confronts the growing confusion around AI, identity ideology, and truth. In this episode, you’ll hear answers to questions like:

  • How is Abdu processing the murder of his father, and how did it impact his faith?
  • What happened at the trial?
  • What inspired Abdu to write ‘Fake ID’?
  • How does AI relate to the modern world’s obsession with identity ideology?
  • How has AI already managed to deceive high-level government officials?
  • Why are “hot takes” usually bad takes?
  • Why does Catherine Maher (current CEO of NPR and former CEO of The Wikipedia Foundation) deny the concept of truth?
  • What has pushed our culture into a post-truth mindset?
  • How does Abdu describe the two cultural “tsunamis” that are collapsing reality?
  • How does the Bible describe and predict this current cultural moment and what’s the solution?
  • What worldview drives transhumanism?
  • How does AI actually point to intelligent design?

Frank and Abdu will only scratch the surface of ‘Fake ID‘, but there’s much more to uncover. Be sure to pre-order your copy of the book and return next week as they continue the conversation in the midweek podcast episode!

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.org
Embrace the Truth
Fake ID: How AI and Identity Ideology Are Collapsing Reality–and What To Do About It

Download Transcript

/by

Top 10 Podcast Episodes of 2025

In 2025, we had unforgettable conversations with some of today’s leading apologists, archaeologists, pastors, theologians, philosophers, and Christian influencers who joined Frank to unpack today’s most compelling arguments and evidence for the Christian faith. From digs in the Middle East to Bible studies and political commentary, we covered a lot of ground and hopefully were able to help you answer some of the questions you’ve asked and encountered surrounding faith, freedom, and philosophy.

We’ve kept up with the biggest news headlines and impact events, keeping you informed and engaged amidst the ongoing culture war from a Christian perspective. And then out of nowhere, we were hit with the most devastating tragedy, the martyrdom of our great friend Charlie Kirk–an event that not only shocked the nation, but by God’s grace, rippled forward to a tsunami of worldwide conversions to Christ.  We’ve grieved together and grappled with the “why” questions, yet we’re still on mission to #makeheavencrowded with a whole new year ahead. If you missed out on any ‘I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist’ podcasts, now’s the time to catch up. We recommend you start with what our statistics say are the most popular episodes of 2025 based on listens and views!

You can view the full playlist on our YouTube channel HERE.

#10. Why the Foundations of Islam Are Now Crumbling with Dr. Jay Smith – Part 2

Why the Foundations of Islam Are Now Crumbling with Dr. Jay Smith - Part 2

What’s behind the mass exodus from Islam? Christian apologist Dr. Jay Smith joins Frank in this two-part series to expose the lack of historical evidence for the world’s fasting growing religion. Watch it HERE!

#9. Charlie Kirk Conspiracy Theories That Lead to Death Threats with Seth Dillon


Babylon Bee CEO and founder Seth Dillon stops by the podcast to discuss why baseless internet conspiracy theories surrounding Charlie Kirk’s death are no laughing matter. Watch it HERE!

#8. Why the Foundations of Islam Are Now Crumbling with Dr. Jay Smith


Part one of this epic conversation with Dr. Jay Smith dives headfirst into growing skepticism surrounding the true origins of Islam. Watch it HERE!

#7. If God, Why Evil? Honoring the Life & Legacy of My Friend Charlie Kirk


In the aftermath of the assassination of Charlie Kirk, Frank delivers his first public speech to answer the ultimate question. Why does God allow evil? Watch it HERE!

#6. MAKE HEAVEN CROWDED and Take a BOLD Stand Christ with Jack Hibbs


With over 35 years of ministry experience, Jack Hibbs joins Frank to reveal the keys to standing firmly for the truth (like Charlie Kirk) in a godless age. Watch it HERE!

#5. What’s Next for Turning Point USA? Continuing the Legacy of Charlie Kirk with Mikey & Rob McCoy


How will TPUSA continue the fight for freedom, faith, and patriotism now that Charlie is no longer with us? Charlie’s best friend and Chief of Staff Mikey McCoy and his father, Pastor Rob McCoy share TPUSA’s plan to carry Charlie’s legacy forward. Watch it HERE!

#4. 12 Biblical Archaeological Discoveries You’ve Never Heard of Before with Dr. Titus Kennedy


Archaeologist Dr. Titus Kennedy shares 12 of the most recent archaeological finds that corroborate people, places, and events documented in the Bible. Watch it HERE!

#3. Behind the Scenes at Charlie Kirk’s Memorial Service


Frank shares what went on behind the scenes leading up to the historic Memorial for Charlie Kirk and why this was the perfect opportunity to share the Gospel with the world. Watch it HERE!

#2. Charlie Kirk Conspiracy Theories? Homicide Detective Speaks Out with J. Warner Wallace


Cold-Case Detective J. Warner Wallace joins Frank to debunk some of the most disturbing myths and conspiracies surrounding Charlie’s death and how criminal investigations are handled prior to the trial date. Watch it HERE!

#1. The Greatness of Charlie Kirk: An Eyewitness Account of His Life and Martyrdom


In the first podcast episode following the assassination of Charlie Kirk, Frank gives his eyewitness account of the tragedy while focusing on the power of the Gospel in light of the problem of evil. Watch it HERE!

Recommended Resources:

Answering Islam by Dr. Frank Turek (DVD Set, Mp4 and Mp3)
Correct not Politically Correct: About Same-Sex Marriage and Transgenderism by Frank Turek (Book, MP4, )
I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist (Paperback), and (Sermon) by Norman Geisler and Frank Turek 
If God, Why Evil? (DVD Set), (MP3 Set), and (mp4 Download Set) by Frank Turek 

/by

A Case for an Eternal Hell (Part 1): A Biblical Defense

Recently, the Christian world was abuzz with the news that popular Christian star Kirk Cameron had considered switching his view of hell from the traditional view to annihilationism.[1] While I will not engage the specific comments made by Kirk Cameron on his podcast, I do think that it is important to discuss the topic of hell’s duration, annihilationism, and the traditional view known as eternal conscious torment (ECT). Also, we should note that Kirk is working through his beliefs about hell. Therefore, this article and series are not a response to Kirk Cameron or his beliefs. Rather, the series serves as a necessary engagement on a hotly contested issue.

This article is the first of a three-part series defending the traditional view of hell, otherwise known as ECT. The series will argue that ECT better understands hell from the perspective of Scripture, history, and theological and philosophical understandings of God. In other words, a better case can be made for ECT than other views of hell. I had initially planned to publish this case as a singular article. However, the data grew too large. I acknowledged that the reader would be better served by a series, so we do not get too overwhelmed. A series will help us better digest the material and offer a time of reflection. The first article will review the viewpoints of hell and offer a glimpse of the Scriptural data that supports the ECT view of hell. The second will examine early and major theologians who support the traditional view of hell. The third and final article in the series will review theological and philosophical objections to ECT and see whether they hold as much weight as many purport them to have. Some, not all, annihilationists claim that it is morally reprehensible for God to keep people alive in hell for all eternity.[2] Does the traditional view wreak havoc on the nature of God? Does the Bible suggest that annihilationism is true? While it is not a popular view in modernity, this article will argue that the traditional view of hell is correct and will make a case for the viewpoint by examining material from the Bible, some of the earliest Christian writers trained by the disciples, the four A’s of theology, and the theological and philosophical strength of ECT.

Before we make a case for the traditional viewpoint of hell, it is important to get a lay of the land as it pertains to three major viewpoints concerning the duration of hell. Additionally, it is also important to note that this issue is not what would be considered a matter of heresy. Though the doctrine of hell is extremely important, the doctrine of hell’s duration does not tamper with first-level doctrines that constitute the fundamentals of the Christian faith. Nonetheless, as some have noted, additional discernment may be needed with those who espouse viewpoints that differ from the traditional view, but not by necessity. This is certainly something that should be distinguished on a case-by-case basis. With that in mind, let’s now consider the three viewpoints of hell.

1. The Viewpoints of Hell’s Duration

As I often tell my students, a researcher must first seek to understand the viewpoints on the table before seeking to offer a defense for their own. The same holds true for this theological venture. At the time of this writing, three major viewpoints of hell’s duration have taken center stage: the traditional view, otherwise known as eternal conscious torment (ECT), the annihilationist view (sometimes called conditionalism), and the universalist view.

The Traditional View (ECT)

First, there is the traditional viewpoint called eternal conscious torment. This view holds that hell is an eternal place where the condemned spend an eternity. What this eternity looks like is an area that could be covered in a future article. Nonetheless, as Norman Geisler states, the “doctrine of hell, like the doctrine of the Trinity, was revealed progressively: more implied (implicit) in the Old Testament and more developed (explicit) in the New Testament.”[3]

The Annihilationist View (Conditionalism)

The second viewpoint that has gathered quite a large following, and one that Kirk Cameron now endorses, is called annihilationism or conditionalism. Annihilationism maintains that hell is a place of death for the condemned. That is, the condemned spend a temporary time in hell before being exterminated or non-existent. For the annihilationist, hell is a place where spiritual death occurs, where the condemned become non-existent. Interestingly, though I have not included annihilationism as heretical, it was condemned as such by a synod in Constantinople in 543, the Second Council of Constantinople in 553, and by the Fifth Lateran Council of 1513.[4]

The Universalist View (Universalism)     

The third viewpoint is called universalism. Universalism maintains that the condemned will spend a temporary period of time in hell before they are reformed and restored to a right relationship with God. For universalists, everything will be redeemed and restored back to God’s good graces in the end. Like annihilationism, universalism was also condemned as heretical at the Second Council of Constantinople in 553 and sparked intense debates between the patriarchs of Jerusalem and Antioch, thus showing that just because a view was held by some in antiquity does not mean that it was necessarily viewed as orthodox.[5]

2.Case from Biblical Texts

Since orthodox Christians hold to the inspiration, infallibility, and inerrancy of Scripture, it behooves us to begin making a case for ECT from the biblical text. Often, annihilationists will contend that words like “death” and “destruction” should be understood as the literal death or non-existence of a person or thing. While in their normal literal parlance, the terms mean just that, these terms can also be used as euphemisms pointing to something different.

For instance, Jesus used the word “sleep” when he spoke of the death of Lazarus (Jn. 11:11). However, he later confirms that the term “sleep” was symbolic for a physical death (Jn. 11:12-15). Likewise, Scripture may use terms like “death” and “destruction” to refer to something else, something eternal. Let’s examine a few biblical texts.

Daniel 12:2    

“At that time Michael, the great prince who stands watch over your people, will rise up. There will be a time of distress such as never has occurred since nations came into being until that time. But at that time all your people who are found written in the book will escape. Many who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake, some to eternal life, and some to disgrace and eternal contempt” (Dan. 12:1-2). Daniel envisions a time where the archangel Michael and his angelic forces engage Satan (a.k.a., the “Dragon”) and his angels in warfare. Israel will experience a time of great distress unlike anything the world has ever seen.

After the spiritual combat has concluded, a time of global resurrection will commence. There are good reasons to believe that two resurrection periods commence, one prior to the time of tribulation, and the other preceding the Great White Throne judgment. Nonetheless, Daniel reports seeing the resurrection of the redeemed and the condemned. Both are resurrected to an eternal life somewhere. The redeemed will “awake . . . to eternal life” (Dan. 12:2a) with God. The condemned will awake to “disgrace and eternal contempt” (Dan. 12:2b). In this text, “sleep” is used as a euphemism for physical death (e.g., Jn. 11:11-14; Acts 7:60; 1 Thess. 4:13; 1 Cor. 15:51). In this sense, sleep only refers to physical death. As noted by Stephen Miller and Joyce Baldwin, the text lends no support to the theories of soul sleep and annihilation.[6] Baldwin explains that “the reason for using ‘sleep’ here as a metaphor for ‘die’ is that sleep is a temporary state from which we normally awake, and so the reader is prepared for the thought of resurrection.”[7] The term “contempt” comes from the Hebrew term harapot, which designates a plural of “intensive fullness” of great shame.[8] The term dera’on refers to an “object of aversion” or “abhorrence.”[9] Interestingly, the only other occurrence of dera’on in the Old Testament is found in Isaiah 66:24, which depicts an eternal state, saying, “As they leave, they will see the dead bodies of those who have rebelled against me; for their worm will never die, their fire will never go out, and they will be a horror to all humanity” (Isa. 66:24).

Intertestamental Understanding of Hell      

Though not considered Scripture by Protestant Christians, the Apocrypha offers some insight into the understanding of hell’s nature. The writer of 4 Maccabees described hell as a place where “divine judgment delivers thee unto a more rapid and eternal fire and torments which shall not leave hold on thee to all eternity … A great struggle and peril of the soul awaits in eternal torment those who transgress the ordinance of God” (4 Maccabees 12:12; 13:5).

Matthew 22:13      

In a parable, Jesus parallels God the Father with a proverbial king who tells his attendants to “Tie him up hand and foot, and throw him into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Matt. 22:13).[10] The act of weeping and gnashing of teeth does not depict someone who has been burned up and no longer existent. Rather, these actions come from someone who remains metaphysically alive. Some will say, “But this may be at the initial moments of hell.” However, there is nothing in the text that suggests that the actions will not continue. Is fire a metaphor for God’s judgment? Or does it speak to an existence without the loving presence of God—a world of chaos and depravity? Those are some considerations for further research.

Matthew 25:41

In Jesus’s Olivet Discourse, Jesus taught that the angels would divide humanity into two sections: those on their right are individuals who had a right relationship with God, whereas those on the left are those who denied God and rejected his grace. After the gathering occurs, the command will be given to the condemned, “Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels!” (Matt. 25:41). We should note that hell was not planned for humanity. It is a place created for the devil and his minions. For someone to reject God’s grace, they essentially say, “I do not want God in my life.” Therefore, God grants them what they desire. That’s why people wind up in hell. More on that in a future article.

Jude 6, 12-13

Jude, likely a disciple and brother of Jesus, offered some strong teachings on hell. He notes that “the angels who did not keep their position but abandoned their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains in deep darkness for the day of judgment on the great day … [and speaking of those who live in rebellion] These people are dangerous reefs at your love feasts as they eat with you without reverence. They are shepherds who only look after themselves. They are waterless clouds carried along by winds; trees in late autumn—fruitless, twice dead and uprooted. They are wild waves of the sea, foaming up their shameful deeds; wandering stars for whom the blackness of darkness is reserved forever” (Jude 6, 12). In vivid language, Jude acknowledges the darkness of hell and the conscious abiding nature of hell. He notes that hell is a dark place, likely noting that it does not hold the light of God’s glory there.

Revelation 14:10-11  

In Revelation, John notes that the beast will “also drink of the wine of God’s wrath, which is poured full strength into the cup of his anger. He will be tormented with fire and sulfur in the sight of the holy angels and in the sight of the Lamb, and the smoke of their torment will go up forever and ever. There is no rest, day or night for those who worship the beast and its image, or anyone who receives the mark of its name” (Rev. 14:10-11). Here again, the anguish of hell does not cease. Obviously, hell is not a place where anyone wants to be. But remember, God did not design hell for human beings. It is designed for the devil and his angels. To go to hell means that a person resists and rejects the goodness of God and willfully chooses to live their eternal existence away from their loving Creator, apart from God’s kingdom, and willfully rejecting God’s loving watch care. If you are blaming God at this point, let me evoke my best impression of R. C. Sproul and inquire, “WHAT’S WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?!?” Of course, I say this jokingly. But still, how can we blame God for something a person willfully chooses? To reject God is to choose Satan. If that’s the state you want, you cannot blame God for that.

Revelation 20:10, 13-15        

In what I call the judgment chapter of Revelation, Satan’s ultimate demise is shown as he will be “thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet are, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever” (Rev. 20:10). The redeemed and condemned have been resurrected to a new eternal body by this point. Then, when judgment is meted out by God at the Great White Throne judgment, death and Hades gave up their dead” (Rev. 20:13). Note here that death is used to speak of those who are living, yet living without the graces of God. Each one of the dead are consciously judged, indicating that the term “death” is used metaphorically and not metaphysically.

After God delivers his judgment, “Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. And anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire” (Rev. 20:14-15). Since God’s presence permeates the entire new creation, the judgment and Lake of Fire constitute another realm “outside the geography of the new universe,”[11] a place of utter darkness. This ultimate separation from God’s grace and presence is rightly called a second death, because the existence of its residents is without God’s protection, lovingkindness, and glory.

The writer of 2 Baruch of the intertestamental period teaches that righteous will enjoy rest and great blessings in the new creation for “to them shall be given the world to come, but the dwelling of the rest who are many shall be in the fire” (2 Baruch 44:15). In 4 Ezra, one pleads with God for forgiveness, and God told him, “I will show you that also, but do not include yourself with those who have shown scorn, or number yourself among those who are tormented” (4 Ezra 7:75).[12]

Conclusion

As has been shown, a strong case can be made for the traditional ECT viewpoint of hell. Not only do the writers of the New Testament hold this view, but it was also reflected in the writings of the Old Testament and the theologians of the intertestamental period. Granted, ECT is not the most comfortable position to hold. I found myself thanking God for his salvation as I wrote this piece. However, we must ask whether the traditional ECT view comports with the biblical data. Most assuredly, ECT does reflect the overarching theme of the biblical teaching on hell.

Even still, our case continues in our next article with an examination of the views of hell espoused by some of the most important theologians of history. We will look at the theology of those who were impacted by the disciples of Jesus before looking into the theological viewpoints of hell among those who are some of the most important theologians of Christian history.

References:

[1] Kirk Cameron and James Cameron, “Are We Wrong about Hell?,” Dangerous Conversations: The Kirk Camron Show, episode 86, YouTube.com (December 4, 2025), https://youtu.be/_RflbA8Vt_Y?si=asm4iytTdxkM_V9j

[2] Chris Date, “Chris Date’s Second Rebuttal to Jerry Shepherd,” Theologyinthe Raw.com (March 11, 2016), https://theologyintheraw.com/chris-dates-second-rebuttal-to-jerry-shepherd/ .

[3] Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Four: Church, Last Things (Minneapolis: Bethany, 2005), 328.

[4] Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Four, 391; See also John Wenham, “The Case for Conditional Immortality,” in Universalism and the Doctrine of Hell, Nigel M. de S. Cameron, ed (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992), 28; and F. L. Cross, Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, 2nd ed (London: Oxford University Press, 1978), 328.

[5] David Griffith, The Great Divide and the Salvation Paradox (Eugene, OR: Pickwick, 2022), Logos Bible Software.

[6] Stephen A. Miller, Daniel, vol. 18, New American Commentary (Nashville: B&H, 1994), 316; Joyce G. Baldwin, Daniel, vol. 23, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 1978), 204.

[7] Baldwin, Daniel, TOTC, 204.

[8] Keil, Daniel, 483.

[9] Miller, Daniel, NAC, 316.

[10] Unless otherwise noted, all quoted Scripture comes from the Christian Standard Bible (Nashville: Holman, 2020).

[11] G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans, 1999), 1061.

[12] The intertestamental texts are added to show the viewpoints of hell among those between the period of the Old Testament and the New Testament.

Recommended Resources: 

Another Gospel? by Alisa Childers (book)

If God, Why Evil? (DVD Set), (MP3 Set), and (mp4 Download Set) by Frank Turek 

Why Doesn’t God Intervene More? (DVD Set), (MP3 Set), and (mp4 Download Set) by Frank Turek

Why does God allow Bad Things to Happen to Good People? (DVD) and (mp4 Download) by Frank Turek

 

Dr. Brian G. Chilton (PhD, Liberty University) is the founder of Bellator Christi Ministries and the co-host of the Bellator Christi Podcast. He serves as a hospice chaplain and an Adjunct Professor of Apologetics for Carolina College of Biblical Studies, a Dissertation Mentor/Adjunct Professor for Liberty University in the PhD in Applied Apologetics program, and an Adjunct Professor/Dissertation Reader at Carolina University in the DMin program. Dr. Chilton’s primary area of research is on early Christianity, oral traditions, NT creeds, the blend of divine sovereignty and human freedom, and near-death experiences (NDEs).

Originally posted at: https://bit.ly/45X6yqO

/by

CANCEL Megyn Kelly? Claiming Bible Verses? PLUS More Q&A

Should Frank ‘cancel’ Megyn Kelly because they disagree on some issues? The previous podcast episode with Megyn sparked a wave of critical comments from listeners, and this week Frank addresses their concerns head-on. Next, he answers a series of listener questions related to biblical interpretation, legitimate reasons to divorce, qualifications for church elders, evidence for the origin of the universe, and other questions like:

  • Why did Frank invite Megyn Kelly on the show?
  • What is the genetic fallacy, and why is it important to talk to people with different views and opinions?
  • What should you say to those who are slandering Erika Kirk and TPUSA?
  • How does the acronym S.T.O.P. help us understand how to read and interpret the Bible?
  • What’s the difference between a descriptive and prescriptive passage in the Bible?
  • What’s the danger of pulling Bible verses out of context?
  • How can the Biblical story be summarized in three short sentences?
  • What are the standards for elders and church leadership? Would being married and divorced three times disqualify someone?
  • Are abuse and abandonment the only legitimate grounds for divorce according to the Bible?
  • What is the recurring Big Bang theory and is the cosmological argument just a “God of the gaps” claim?

Do you have a question for Frank? Send it to hello@crossexamined.org for a chance to be featured in a future podcast episode!

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
How to Interpret Your Bible Self-Paced Course
Top 10 Reasons Why Borders Are Biblical (Part 1)
Top 10 Reasons Why Borders Are Biblical (Part 2)
What the Bible Says About Divorce and Remarriage – Wayne Grudem
Divorce and Remarriage: EVERYTHING the Bible Says About It – Mike Winger
Is ABUSE and ADDICTION Grounds for Divorce? – Mike Winger
‘Change My Mind’ 2026 College Tour Schedule

Download Transcript

/by

The Status of Women According to Islam

The status of women in Islam is a subject enshrouded in controversy. According to many Muslims, Muhammad was a champion of women’s rights, bestowing upon the women in his community privileges and rights that they did not have previously. The notion that women in pre-Islamic Arabia had no rights, however, is demonstrably untrue. Former Muslim Nabeel Qureshi lists some of the rights that women had in pre-Islamic Arabia, which included ease of divorce, the ability to marry multiple men, and become overlords. Women were even able to propose for marriage, as in fact was the case with respect to Khadija’s marriage to Muhammad.

To outsiders, the hijab is often viewed as a symbol of oppression. Since April 2011, wearing of head coverings (including hijabs) in public places has even been outlawed in France. Muslims, by contrast, point out that the tradition of veiling and seclusion was present in pre-Islamic Arabia, and also Syria and Iran, since long prior to Muhammad, and was even seen as an emblem of social status, only affordable by women who didn’t need to work out in the fields.

The first alleged revelation concerning veiling occurred in 627 A.D. This is found in Surah Al-Ahzab (33) 53:

Believers, do not enter the Prophet’s house … unless asked. And if you are invited … do not linger. And when you ask something from the Prophet’s wives, do so from behind a hijab. This will assure the purity of your hearts as well as theirs.

Surprisingly, this verse does not prescribe the veil for all women but only Muhammad’s wives. Reza Aslan, in his book No God But God, points out that the term, darabat al-hijab, used for putting on the veil, was used interchangeably with “becoming Muhammad’s wife” and suggests that the hijab was adopted by other Muslim women only after the death of Muhammad — possibly as a means of emulating Muhammad’s wives — and that the veil didn’t become compulsory or even generally adopted until much later. Reza’s interpretation, however, is disputed by other scholars.

The Hijab should not be regarded as the primary issue in the debate concerning the status of women in Islam. There are many far more concerning issues that need to be addressed.

In this article, I want to draw attention to some of these issues relating to Muhammad’s view of women.

Women Are Mentally Deficient?

According to the Qur’an, the testimony of one man is as good as the testimony of two women. We read in Surah Al-Baqara (2) 282 in the context of writing receipts for paid debt:

“Have two witnesses from among your men, and if two men are not there, then one man and two women from those witnesses whom you like, so that if one of the two women errs, the other women may remind her.”

 

Why is the testimony of a woman only worth half that of a man? Muhammad himself informs us in Sahih al-Bukhari (Volume 3, Book 48, no. 826):

“Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: The Prophet said, ‘Isn’t the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?’ The women said, ‘Yes.’ He said, ‘This is because of the deficiency of a woman’s mind.”

 

This is further stated in volume 1, book 6, no. 301, of Sahih al-Bukhari. Muhammad is reported to have said,

“O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women).” They asked, “Why is it so, O Allah’s Apostle?” He replied, “You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you.” The women asked, “O Allah’s Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?” He said, “Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?” They replied in the affirmative. He said, “This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn’t it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses? The women replied in the affirmative. He said, “This is the deficiency in her religion.”

 

Muhammad, thus, does not seem to take a particularly high view of the intellect of women.

The Majority of Hell’s Inhabitants Are Women?

In Sahih Al-Bukhari volume 1, book 2, number 28 Muhammad again asserts that he saw that “the majority of [Hell’s] dwellers were women who were ungrateful.” After being asked whether this ungratefulness was directed towards Allah, Muhammad answered that “They are ungrateful to their husbands and are ungrateful for the favors and the charitable good (charitable deeds) done to them.” In Sahih Muslim book 36 (no. 6600), Muhammad is reported to have said “Amongst the inmates of Paradise the women would form a minority.”

What if, however, the Muslim women start being grateful to their husbands? What awaits them in Paradise? Well, according to Sahih Al-Bukhari, they get to stand in corners of a pavillion in paradise awaiting men to come and have sex with them. We read in volume 6, book 60, no. 402,

“Narrated Abdullah bin Qais: Allah’s Apostle said, “In Paradise, there is a pavillion made of a single hollow pearl sixty miles wide. In each corner of which there are wives who will not see those in the other corners; and the believers will visit and enjoy them…”

Beating Your Wife Into Subservience

According to the Qur’an, Surah An-Nisa (4) 34,

“Men are caretakers of women, since Allah has made some of them excel the others, and because of the wealth they have spent. So, the righteous women are obedient, (and) guard (the property and honor of their husbands) in (their) absence with the protection given by Allah. As for women of whom you fear rebellion, convince them, and leave them apart in beds, and beat them. Then, if they obey you, do not seek a way against them. Surely, Allah is the Highest, the Greatest.”

 

Women are here viewed as the property of their male caretakers, and men are permitted to beat their wives in cases where they “fear rebellion”.
Muhammad’s favorite wife, Aisha (to whom he was betrothed to be married when she was six and he fifty-one, a marriage that was consummated when she turned nine and before she had reached the age of puberty), makes an observation that is recorded in Sahih al-Bukhari volume 7, book 72, no. 715:

Narrated Ikrima: Rita’a divorced his wife whereupon Abdur-Rahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complaining to her (Aisha) of her husband and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by beating. It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah’s Apostle came, Aisha said, “I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women. Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes.”

Even during the lifetime of Muhammad, Aisha observed that nobody suffered so much as the believing, i.e., Muslim, women — in other words, Muslim women were being treated worse than pagan women. Rather than rebuke the man for beating his wife until her skin turned green, as one might expect of the champion of woman’s rights that Muhammad is supposed to have been, Muhammad instead took the side of the husband and rebuked the woman.

Aisha’s father, Abu Bakr, a close companion of Muhammad and the first of the four rightly-guided caliphs, also seems to have abused Aisha. According to Sahih al-Bukhari volume 8, book 82, no. 828.

Narrated Aisha: Abu Bakr came towards me and struck me violently with his fist and said, “You have detained the people because of your necklace.” But I remained motionless as if I was dead lest I should awake Allah’s Apostle although that hit was very painful.”

 

Muhammad is even reported to have said (according to Sunan Abu Dawud book 11 no. 2142), “A man will not be asked as to why he beat his wife.”

The Qur’an Permits Rape Of Female Captives

According to Surah An-Nisa (4) 24, “Also prohibited are the women already bound in marriage, except the bondwomen you come to own.”    

Surah Al-Mumenoon (23) 1-6 says the same thing:

“Success is really attained by the believers who concentrate their attention in humbleness when offering Salah (prayers) and who keep themselves away from vain things, and who are performers of Zakah and who guard their private parts except from their wives or from those (bondwomen who are) owned by their hands, as they are not to be blamed.”

 

A similar instruction is given in Surah Al-Maarij (70) 30. What is the historical context of these verses? We need only go to the Hadith sources to find out. We read in Sunan Abu Dawud 2150,

“The Apostle of Allah sent a military expedition to Autas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the companions of the Apostle of Allah were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Qur’anic verse: ‘And all married women are forbidden unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess.’ That is to say, they are lawful for them when they complete their waiting period.”

 

Another report is given by Sahih Muslim book 8, no. 3432,

“Abu Sa’id al-Khudri (Allah be pleased with him) reported that at the Battle of Hanain, Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) sent an army in Autas and encountered the enemy and fought with them. Having overcome them and taken them captives, the companions of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) seemed to refrain from having intercourse with captive women because of their husbands being polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that: “And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess.”

 

In Sahih Muslim book 8, no. 3371, we read,

“Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa’id al Khadri (Allah be pleased with him): O Abu Sa’id, did you hear Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) mentioning al- ‘azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi’l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing ‘azl (withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid conception, also known as coitus interruptus). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah’s Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born.”

 

Sahih al-Bukhari volume 5,book 59, no. 459, says,

“Narrated ibn Muhairiz: I entered the Mosque and saw Abu Said Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl. Abu Said said, “We went out with Allah’s Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So when we intended to do coitus interruptus, we said, “How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allah’s Apostle who is present among us?” We asked (him) about it and he said, “It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist.”

 

Muslims sometimes try to argue that this would have taken place only after marriage to these captive women. But this is clearly not the case, since the men wanted to fetch a ransom price for them afterwards.

Prostitution

Muhammad permitted temporary marriage contracts whereby one could contract with a woman for a temporary marriage. According to Surah An-Nisa (4) 24, “…to those of them whose company you have enjoyed, give their dues (dower) as obligated. There is no sin on you in what you mutually agree upon after the (initial) agreement.”

 

We also read in Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 139,

Narrated Abdullah: We used to participate in the holy wars carried on by the Prophet and we had no women (wives) with us. So we said to the Prophet “Shall we castrate ourselves?” But the Prophet forbade us to do that and thenceforth he allowed us to marry a woman temporarily by giving her even a garment and then he recited “O you who believe! Do not make unlawful the good things which Allah has made lawful for you.”

 

Here, Muhammad gives permission to Muslims to offer a woman clothing in exchange for access to her body. A further reference to this practice is given in Sahih Muslim, book 8, number 3252:

“Sabra Juhanni reported: Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) permitted temporary marriage for us. So I and another person went out and saw a woman of Bana Amir, who was like a young long-necked she-camel. We presented ourselves to her (for contracting temporary marriage), whereupon she said: What dower would you give me? I said: My cloak. And my companion also said: My cloak. And the cloak of my companion was superior to my clock, but I was younger than he. So when she looked at the cloak of my companion she liked it, and when she cast a glance at me I looked more attractive to her. She then said: Well, you and your cloak are sufficient for me. I remained with her for three nights, and then Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: He who has any such woman with whom he has contracted temporary marriage, he should let her off.”

Conclusion

The items raised above represent just a few of the many issues that could be raised in relation to Muhammad’s view of women. The bottom line is that the assertion that Muhammad was a champion of women’s rights is historically untenable. By contrast, the Bible has a very progressive view of women, certainly for its day. According to Paul, although the sexes may have different roles in marriage and ecclesiology, men and women are ultimately equal in the sight of God, all being one in Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:28). Jesus Himself forgave a woman caught in the act of adultery and saved her from being stoned to death (John 8:1-11), spoke to a Samaritan woman about the way of salvation (John 4:1-42), allowed his feet to be anointed by Mary Magdalene, and tasks John the Apostle with looking after his mother Mary (John 19:26-27). Jesus’ first post-resurrection appearances are even to women. Many women are also key players in the book of Acts, as well as the Old Testament — for example, the story of Esther is about a woman who saves her people, the Hebrews, from being exterminated. When one examines and compares the Qur’an and the Bible, the stark contrast in view of women becomes very apparent.

Recommended Resources: 

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

Was Jesus Intolerant? by Frank Turek (DVD and Mp4)

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

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

 

Dr. Jonathan McLatchie is a Christian writer, international speaker, and debater. He holds a Bachelor’s degree (with Honors) in forensic biology, a Masters’s (M.Res) degree in evolutionary biology, a second Master’s degree in medical and molecular bioscience, and a Ph.D. in evolutionary biology. Currently, he is an assistant professor of biology at Sattler College in Boston, Massachusetts. Dr. McLatchie is a contributor to various apologetics websites and is the founder of the Apologetics Academy (Apologetics-Academy.org), a ministry that seeks to equip and train Christians to persuasively defend the faith through regular online webinars, as well as assist Christians who are wrestling with doubts. Dr. McLatchie has participated in more than thirty moderated debates around the world with representatives of atheism, Islam, and other alternative worldview perspectives. He has spoken internationally in Europe, North America, and South Africa promoting an intelligent, reflective, and evidence-based Christian faith.

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

/by

What the Mainstream Media Doesn’t Tell You About Immigration Law with Megyn Kelly

Why is the biblical (and common sense) purpose of the government to punish wrongdoers being reversed in Minnesota? Federal agents are being blocked from arresting criminals, local officials are shielding criminals from accountability while sweeping massive amounts of fraud under the rug, and anti-ICE agitators are disrupting worship services without any local police response? Who is in the right, legally?

Political journalist Megyn Kelly joins the program to expose the legal reality behind the radical activism happening in Minnesota and the growing conflict between the feds and the state. Drawing on her experience as a lawyer, Megyn explains clearly and concisely why sanctuary cities are defying federal authority, and why Americans (especially Christians) can no longer afford to stay silent as Islam quietly gains ground in the West.

Together, Frank and Megyn will answer questions like:

  • Why did Megyn become a lawyer and how did she make the shift into political journalism?
  • Does freedom of speech give us the right to protest and disrupt a worship service?
  • What is the FACE Act of 1994?
  • What’s the connection between BLM and the church agitators in Minnesota?
  • What will happen to Tim Walz, Jacob Fry, and Don Lemon?
  • Why does ICE face resistance in blue states but not red states?
  • How are sanctuary cities complicating ICE’s ability to enforce immigration laws?
  • What is the ultimate endgame of woke activism, according to Megyn?
  • Who has jurisdiction over immigration, the federal or state government?
  • Why is Islamophobia a bogus term?
  • Why should Americans take note of what’s happening in the UK?

Winston Churchill once said, “A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to put its pants on.” If you’re feeling overwhelmed after reading through the latest news headlines and need clear and concise explanations of what the law says about today’s most complicated cultural issues, this is the episode for you!

Did you enjoy this podcast? 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
Top 10 Reasons Why Borders Are Biblical (Part 1)
Top 10 Reasons Why Borders Are Biblical (Part 2)
Anti-ICE Agitators and Don Lemon Disrupt MN Church Service
Church Agitator ARRESTED…But is Don Lemon Next?
MegynKelly.com
‘Change My Mind’ 2026 College Tour Schedule

Download Transcript

/by

Do the Crusades Prove that Christianity is Evil?

There have been many reasons people have refused to take on the Christian faith since the time Christ was on earth. Some couldn’t believe in miracles. Some rejected Jesus’ claim to be the only way to God. Others didn’t want to abide by God’s rules for living and chose to risk the threat of an eternity separated from their Creator.

Today, those reasons seem to be less cited by those who reject or leave the faith. When you read or hear the stories of many who “deconstruct” their faith or deny Christianity, the reason often comes down to one central idea: Christianity is “evil”. The Crusades are pointed to as evidence that Christianity is used for conquest and subjugating people. Is this true? How should a Christian respond to this?

Caveats

This can be an extremely emotional argument for some people, and I want to make a few things clear. This article is to serve in no way to justify any immoral or unethical act by anyone claiming to be a Christian, ever. It is also an extremely small summary of a very long and complex history. That said, if people use the idea of the crusades as evidence that Christianity is evil, a Christian should be able to grapple with the question.

A Very Brief Summary of the Crusades

It should be remembered that the story of the Crusades was not only about the Christian faith. An objective reading of history shows that this was a struggle between two faiths, Christianity and Islam. Islam came about in the 7th century AD, long after Christianity had become a common faith all over Europe, Northern Africa, and the Middle East, joining pagans, polytheists (Romans, Greeks), and other worldview groups that typically existed in relative peace by the 7th century

There were eight individual military campaigns deemed by historians as “The Crusades”. They occurred between 1096 and 1270. The Crusades were initiated at times by church leadership, at times by kings, and at times by diplomats. The first Crusade (The Prince’s Crusade, 1096) was actually in response to aggression by Muslim forces that attacked Christians on pilgrimage to the holy lands, and in response to a request for aid from Byzantine Christians who were dealing with Muslim aggression from the Turks. Jerusalem was captured by the Christian crusaders, and protective forts were established to allow for safe pilgrimage from Europe to the holy land.

This led to a back-and-forth between Christians in “Crusader States” and Muslims seeking to exert their dominance in those regions. The successive Crusades were almost always in one way or another called in response to cities or regions that had fallen to Muslim conquerors following the first Crusade. (1) In the end, the areas the crusaders were able to temporarily control for a time largely fell to Muslim armies.

Notable Atrocities

Even though the Crusades were usually in response to Muslim advances, Christians committed acts that are widely condemned by historians as atrocities during the Crusades. In addition to civilians, Jews, pagans, and Christian “heretics” were also put to the sword by crusaders at various times in some of the campaigns. Notable massacres occurred in Jerusalem in 1099 and in Constantinople in 1204. That said, atrocities were not limited to Christian crusaders. Muslim forces were known to enslave, rape, and murder Christian civilians and hostages in the course of their advances. While the body count is very much in dispute, the accounts from eyewitnesses in that era from both Christian and Muslim sources tell a very dark story of humans mistreating other humans.[i] (2)

Summary of the Summary

Despite recent scholarship that attempts to paint the Crusades as nothing but bloody, unjustified aggression by colonializing Christians, it is well documented that the Crusades are more accurately described as an attempt by Western European Christians to respond to centuries of Islamic wars of expansion, reclaim the control of the holy land, and check the expansion of Islamic control in the East.[ii] (1) An objective view of history tells us that both the Christian and Islamic faiths were responsible for their shares of ungodly behavior. The fact that some crusaders committed atrocities should not be left out of any conversation about the Crusades. That should also be true for the acts of those with whom they fought. The story of the Crusades deserves a fair hearing with all of the evidence available for context.

Bad Religion?

Acknowledging that some Christian crusaders committed atrocities, should we deduce that the religion itself is evil? As Christian Apologist Frank Turek often argues, when someone plays Mozart poorly, you don’t blame Mozart. Where Christians sinned, Christians sinned. This is not an exclusive feature of the Crusades, and Christians (including yours truly) sin to this very day. But that does not affect the message of the namesake of Christianity.

Compared to What?

I would also expect that the honest critics would consider the actions of non-Christians who have also done evil in the name of things like progress, socialism, humanism, and other systems that sought (or seek) to conquer or eliminate people groups. Atheistic socialist regimes like Russia, China, and other countries are credited with killing more than 100,000,000 people in the 20th century alone.[iii] (3) This is a far more bloody history than anything the Crusades could be charged with. If that is life without Christianity, I will take Christianity. How does the atheist defend non-Christian atrocities?

One could easily write many, many books about all the evils committed by Christians since Christ last walked the earth. And it is worth remembering that Christ is far more knowledgeable of all of the sins committed by Christians than we are. How saddened and angry He must be with us for the way we have treated our fellow image bearers, and for the way we have failed to love others as He loves us.

The Christian can and should acknowledge the wrongdoing of other Christians at any time, but they are certainly justified in also pointing out that there are no perfect non-Christians either. This can be a way to help people understand a point so apparent throughout the Bible, and summed up in the passage that states, “there is none who does good, not even one” (Psalm 14:1-3). Now, we can talk about the good news.

The Good News

Christians must remember that the object of our faith is not the perfect behavior of 12th-century knights, or, for that matter, 21st-century pastors and priests. The object of our faith is not in how well Christians behave. The object of our faith should be Jesus Christ and His perfect life, death, and resurrection, displaying the willingness of God to save us from our sins by our faith in Him and His work.

There is no need for anyone to lose trust in Christ, even when we lose trust in Christians. We have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. No amount of other people’s sins will allow you or me to be considered sinless. But Christ lived a perfect life, told us to love God and one another, and died to save any who would repent and follow Him. So, consider your own sins, and seek Christ for yourself, being confident that we are all guilty and in need of what only a loving Creator could do through His Son’s death and resurrection.

References:

[i] Encyclopaedia Britannica. (n.d.). Crusades. In Encyclopaedia Britannica. Retrieved October 14, 2025, from https://www.britannica.com/event/Crusades

[ii] Ibrahim, R. Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West. Grand Central Publishing, 2018.

[iii] Rummel, R. J. Death by Government. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1994.

Recommended Resources:

What is God Really Like? A View from the Parables by Dr. Frank Turek (DVD, Mp3, and Mp4)

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

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

 

Tony Williams is a retired police officer from Southern Illinois and currently lives in Kentucky with his family. He has been studying apologetics in his spare time for two decades, since a crisis of faith led him to the discovery of vast and ever-increasing evidence for his faith. Tony received a bachelor’s degree in University Studies from Southern Illinois University in 2019. His career in law enforcement has provided valuable insight into the concepts of truth, evidence, confession, testimony, cultural competency, morality, and most of all, the compelling need for Christ in the lives of the lost. Tony plans to pursue postgraduate studies in apologetics in the near future to sharpen his understanding of the various facets of Christian apologetics.

Originally posted at: https://bit.ly/3NO4vPG

/by