Archive for category: General Apologetics

Isn’t it amazing that this is the big question today because of the Gibson film? And isn’t it even more amazing that the early church, long before the first gospel was written or the first epistle penned, knew the answer? And isn’t it just sad that most evangelicals don’t even believe what the Bible says about it anymore, and refuse

Real briefly today: two odd, odd things I saw this morning. First, TGE was confusing “New Covenant Theology” with various other viewpoints he doesn’t like, and in the process said,  The Incarnation means the SPACE TIME world is IMPORTANT, which therefore means that BODY is important, which therefore means that RITUAL is important, which therefore means that theology that downplays

OK, I’ve made glancing comments on the Dividing Line without getting specific, mainly due to respect for the individual (I still like this guy!) and out of hope that some semblance of balance might be regained. But today’s rambling comments by Timothy Enloe (see the blog entry for 1/14/04) simply demand a brief response. Seemingly, unless you believe it is

As I have been speaking a lot lately on “New Perspectivism”, I thought I would share a thought that I was developing while speaking on the subject briefly in St. Paul, Minnesota over the weekend. First, as I was flying up there, I had been giving thought to how NPism “flattens out” some of the most precious and full truths

Sadly, in our nation today there is a strong movement under way to steal from our children the freedom to think and examine their world outside of a very narrow, all-pervasive religious perspective. While it is common to hear in the media that it is Christian “fundamentalists” behind this movement, exactly the opposite is true. Rather, those who embrace the

(The following is “The Chicago Statement of Biblical Inerrancy” taken from Inerrancy edited by Norman Geisler, Academie Books, 1980, pages 493-497.) Article I We affirm that the Holy Scriptures are to be received as the authoritative Word of God. We deny that the Scriptures receive their authority from the Church, tradition, or any other human source. Article II We affirm

(Doctrines of Anthropology, Sin, and Soteriology Inclusive) Man as Creature. Man has a derivative nature – Acts 17:28. Man is finite Man is dependent Man must receive revelation Man in the Image of God The Image as Personality The Image as Intellect The Image as differing from animals Man as Sinful Being Sin as rebellion, denial of God’s true Being

The phrase, “Given by inspiration of God,” or “Inspired of God,” occurs, as is well-known, but once in the New Testament–in the classical passage, to wit, II Tim. iii. 16, which is rendered in the Authorized Version, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God,” and by the Revised Version, “Every Scripture inspired of God is, etc.” The Greek word

Few books in the Old Testament provide a richer depth of theological knowledge than the wonderful prophecy of Isaiah ben Amoz. It is not the intention of this paper to deal with issues such as the controversy over the unity of the work – the working assumption here is that the material to be covered is indeed the work of

“Would Jesus have done that?” A Biblical Look at Defending the Faith Matthew 22:29: Jesus told the Sadducees, “You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures, or the power of God.” Matthew 23:13-36: In this passage Jesus pronounced seven woes upon the Pharisees. In this discourse Jesus used such words as “hypocrites” “blind guides” “fools” “blind men” “whitewashed tombs” “serpents” “brood