Articles

In his book titled Twenty-Six Reasons Why Jews Don’t Believe in Jesus, author Asher Norman outlines twenty six reasons why Jews reject both Jesus and Christianity.  He attacks the person of Jesus, the reliability of the New Testament, and the need for salvation as taught in Christianity.  It would take a book to respond to each and every argument proposed by Norman.  However, this paper will address arguments that lie at the heart of his objections.  It will respond to his objections concerning Jesus as Messiah, the New Testament as inspired, and the need for atonement as taught in the Bible.  The paper will also demonstrate that Norman’s objections to Jesus and Christianity are without merit.

Throughout the history of western thought, numerous philosophers and great thinkers have struggled with what is known as The Problem of Evil.  A number of influential philosophers have posited the incompatibility between the existence of God and the existence of evil.  A number of theists have defended their co-existence.  Former Oxford professor of Philosophy J.L Mackie took the theist to task by attempting to expose their arguments as invalid and unpersuasive.  Mackie represents a number of non-theistic criticisms of theistic arguments for The Problem of Evil.[1]  Because of this, I will examine Mackie’s arguments from a theistic perspective and demonstrate that it is Mackie who has failed to be persuasive in his arguments against the positions that reconcile the existence of God with evil.

As a Christian Apologist, I often engage people who are atheist or of different faiths.  If we talk long enough, the topic of the Crusades is bound to come up.  In this paper, I would like to present a view of the Crusades that goes against the commonly held beliefs of most people.

This paper will focus on the First Crusades.  It will examine the Crusades from a traditional view and then from a historical view.  Both views will then be evaluated.

I remember when I first started learning about the three great arguments for the existence of God.  The first argument is the argument from the universe.  It basically goes like this: everything that comes into existence needs a cause, the universe came into existence, therefore the universe needs a cause.  The argument goes on to demonstrate, scientifically, that the cause is consistent with the God of the Bible.

If there is one assertion that can safely and accurately be made about the Muslim view of the Bible it would be that there is no one unified Muslim view of the Bible. The truth is that Muslims and their scriptures often differ on this subject. Additionally, Muslims differ with one another concerning how to view the Bible.

Did Jesus rise from the dead? Why is it important? What is the evidence? Even if He did rise from the dead, what difference does it make anyway? These are the questions that I, H.C. Felder, will be answering in this article on the evidence for the resurrection.

Aspects of Word of Faith theology varies from teacher to teachers, however, there seems to be one constant.  That constant is this view on the nature of healing.  In this paper, I will look at  some of their most visible teachers to examine what they teach.  I will present their view in their own words.  I will then evaluate this view in light of what Scripture truly teaches.  I will also expose the occult source of this teaching and why it is not only unbiblical, but dangerous.

This paper will examine Open View Theology, particularly from the view point of God’s immutability as defined by Boyd in God of the Possible. The Open View will be examined first, along with a presentation of the biblical and historical basis, as well as its implications as presented by Boyd. Next, the traditional view of God will be examined with its biblical and historical basis. Then, both views will be contrasted, exposing the weaknesses, contradictions, and fallacies inherit in Open View Theology. Finally, the conclusion will summarize of the information presented and give a few closing remarks.

There are a number of scholars who claim that Scripture is not “God-breathed.” Some claim that it cannot be God-breathed because there is no God to breathe it. These scholars pride themselves on the academic knowledge and alleged scientific approach to the study of Scripture. They claim to have scientifically proved that that the Bible is a book written by a number of uninspired men over hundreds of years for their own selfish reasons. They developed what is known as the Document Hypothesis to explain the man-made origin of Scripture and reject divine involvement.

For many Christians today, the Gospel is not Christ centered but self centered.  One can hardly turn on Christian television without hearing how God promises them this or that; how God guarantees them health and wealth in this life; how life is to be blessing filled.  It is sad to see those who follow after Christ for their own sake.  It grieves me that so many are turning to Christ as a new way to prosper or as a new method of happiness.  This is a very skewed view of the Gospel.  At the center of the Gospel message is Christ and Him crucified.  In order to be obedient to Him, we are told that suffering, tribulation, and persecution come along with following Him.  Paul understood suffering very well.  He considered his suffering for Christ an honor and privilege and this is a reoccurring theme throughout his epistles.  We can