I'm back!

I have been on hiatus from writing for some time now. I was busy but now I'm still busy but not as much. I desire to work out some thoughts on theology, the world, ministry, and the everyday journey of life that we all are moving on to. Thank you to those that have checked back here, I  do desire to post once a week, and I do appreciate any feedback. Thanks

Can a Christian lose their salvation according to John 15:6? A refutal against false doctrine.

According to Jesus' words in John 15:6, is this a reference to a Christian losing his salvation as many teach?

Many do teach John 15:6 is a reference to losing salvation. Those that teach this typically have a man centered view of salvation, which basically teaches that our salvation hinges totally upon our choosing Jesus and our determination to continue to choose Jesus throughout our life. This teaches that Jesus made salvation available through the cross, but steps back and lets the chips fall where they may. These presumptions that are common place in the church today are the result of bad hermeneutics and/or biased use of Scripture to promote doctrinal agendas.

To understand this text we need to view in light of the context and in light of the rest of Scripture. Verse 4-5 reads: “Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit by itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in me. I am the vine, you are the branches. Whoever abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing.”

Case in point is that outside of Christ we cannot bear fruit, above that we cannot do anything outside of Christ. In verse 4-5 Jesus mentions twice that there needs to be an abiding that takes place. We see the word abide again in verses 9 and 10. The first in verse 9 is that ..”As the Father loved me, so have I loved you. Abide in my love.” Secondly in verse 10..”If you keep my commandments you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Fathers commandments and abide in His love.” I notice the abiding in commandments connected with love is Jesus giving direction for the two greatest commandments that sums up all that law of God directs us to. “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the law and prophets.” -Matthew 22:37-40

Jesus is teaching that by abiding in Him is only possible way to bear fruit.

The Expositors Bible Commentary makes the following point: ”Continued production depends on constant union with the source of fruitfulness. Branches that are severed from parent stock may produce leaves temporarily, but inevitably they will wither because there is no source of life to sustain them: and they will never bear fruit. The effectiveness of the believer depends on his receiving the constant flow of life from Christ.” (pp. 151)

By our bearing fruit we do what? By our bearing fruit we do two things. Verse 8: “By this my Father is glorified, that you bear much fruit and so prove to be my disciples.” Firstly, God is glorified in our lives this way and Secondly, the nature of our union with Christ is proven true by the fruit in our lives.

By not bearing fruit and glorifying God we prove to have not been His disciples as referenced in verse 8 and in verse 6 Jesus gives reference to the final judgment of being cast away from from the the fruit bearing branches. 1John 2:19 makes the clear distinction of this point; “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would not have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they are not all of us.” The fallacy of believing that people can fall away from the faith is rooted in believing that all professions of faith are true. People may come to Jesus for many things as we seen throughout His ministry, but unless they come in true repentance and faith their coming to Him will always be in vain.

Sermon manuscript; James 4:11-12

James 4:11-12, 5:19-20; Tearing down strongholds for the sake of sanctification.

Thesis; Judging others for the sake of what?

Introduction; As we continue to work through the book of James, which could be sub-titled; The New Testament Proverbs, we subsequently come to an often misunderstood concept found within Bible. The issue of the command of not judging is formed in two distinct ways; we are not to judge, or/and we judge that which we are not qualified. James is dealing here with later of misuse of judgment. Which we will look at the implications of, and consider how wrongly interpreted it can lead to a problem on the other side of judging others. James has written this letter to a dominantly Completed-Jewish audience with a sprinkling of gentile believers. In the greeting he refers to them as the twelve tribes in the Dispersion (vs.1). They were going through various trials, facing persecution from unconverted Jews, and gentile alike. James congratulates them for their perseverance in the face of all these trials, for their proving of genuine faith. Yet for the past two chapters James seems to be rebuking for sin that they have not yet dealt with. Implying two thoughts; we even as born again believers of Christ will always have to deal with sin in this life, and secondly so will others.

1.The unrighteous use of the law.

A great issue within the early church was with Jewish Christians use of legalism, and the pagan gentile background and use of anti-nomism. Many of the Jewish believers were inclined to use their knowledge of the law to place undo burdens on those whom did not come from that particular background. Paul dealt with that with the Judiazers, and James deals with it here. Verse 11a; James is dealing empathetically with the believers within the church, he stresses with the term "one another". Even though the church at this point is made up of those with a predominate Jewish background, the Gospel is being spread, and many from dissimilar backgrounds are coming to faith in Christ. The word in the Greek is; "Katalaeite" which taken literally is; slander. It is a broad term that also implies; making false charges that damage reputation. So, in speaking evil within this context, is using the truth of God's Word, namely His law and setting it against someone for the purpose of destroying them.

-In what ways could unrighteous judgment be passed?

* Not conforming what we may think would be the proper outward religious experience.

* Outward appearance, cultural,and/or ethnic background.

* Rules imposed on an interpretation of Scripture but not warranted by Scripture.

2. What is the result of unrighteous judgment?

It harms those whom which is being set against, and also severs and divides the church. Many have been ostracized and disillusioned by those whom make it a point to destroy the work God is doing in their life as opposed to being encouraged and built up in the faith by their brothers and sisters in Christ. *Secondly; The person or persons whom take the law into their hands to pass judgment, do that which they are not qualified. James writes in the second part of verse (11b), is quite complicated and very clarifying at the same time. James says that; those whom presume to pass unrighteous judgment and speaks evil of a brother, may therefore not be converted themselves. This is taken from the use of James repeating what he stated in 1:22-24. If you habitual tear down others you are not a doer of the law. You use the law of God to pass unrighteous judgment on others and then turn, setting it aside in regards to your own conscious . This is a warning from James for those whom make it a point to speak against one another.

*How do we do it? We have actually become really good at passing judgment in subtle ways. It begins with us saying something in judgment against someone, and then we will end it with; "well its not up to me to judge". This is always hurtful to the one we speak of and more to ourselves. We develop a tendency to look down on others all the while we become smug, self-righteous , and prideful.

3. Who has the right to pass judgment?

People cannot pass true judgment because we are not omni-benevolent, nor are we omniscient. Verdicts of someones justification is always judged by God. To truly be able to judge you must be able to pass verdict (Vs.12a). "See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand"-Deuteronomy 32:39. We appoint human judges to serve out the law that we establish, and they judge by our law. There is no one other than God that has the right to make judgment by the supreme law that he has decreed. By the law we are saved by the imputation of Christ's perfect obedience to it, or we are destroyed by our rebellion against it. *The word destroy is from "apollumi", which is does not refer to complete annihilation but to an eternal destruction.

4. All things considered.

So are we to never pass judgment on someone? In this way that James speaks of, no we are not. This is the second issue, this text can be misused to the other degree as well. We might think that since we are not to judge, we should not say anything that might seem judgmental. This type of thinking leads to passive, non-confrontational, wishy washy Christianity. A key point to remember is; what is our motivation? Why am I motivated to speak to someone in such a way that I may come across judgmental? Love, mercy, urgency, and care for another's true life, this is what we should be motivated by. It is of great importance that we bring others from sinful destructive lifestyles to God's glorious light. (5:19-20) Paul wrote to Timothy that he should ".....reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching. -2Tim. 4:2

*Keep all things in perspective, our best works are filthy rags, we are saved by grace alone so that no one may boast. Verse 12b reminds us of our place in the big picture. If we understand the source of our salvation we should therefore have no problem confronting others with out being condescending or hypocritical. For the sake of others we engage them with all humility, urgency for the sake of their eternal destiny.

"For it is written, As I live says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. So then each of us will give an account of himself to God. Therefore let us not pass judgement on one another any longer, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block of hindrance in the way of a brother." -Romans 14:11-13

Those rooted deep in the faith should protect the young saplings from the high winds that may uproot, and stabilize the soil to prevent erosion into the world. Keeping in mind to never be so overbearing to block out the Son. Amen

TV Preachers

Ok, I have had enough of the T.V. Preachers. Are some genuine?.....maybe, but probably not. Why am I concerned with TV preachers? I'm glad you asked. I have unfortunately noticed a tread within the church during the somewhat short time that I have been a Christian.

We in the church are idolaters, as Clavin said; "the heart of man is an idol factory". This a common case within the church, we idolize over so many trivial pursuits that I could write a most boring list in regards to that fact. But I'm not going to. What I do want to address is what I perceive as the biggest problem within the American church culture. We idolize over preachers. Guilty. Yea, me too. I often spend time listening to many distinguished and polished orators of Christendom, and wish that I was even within the same universe in regards to their aptitude in the pulpit.

The positive side of T.V evangelist/preachers:

First I would like to say that this is really our problem, and not so much the speakers. Much in terms of right gospel proclamation has blessed many over the air waves of the television. I'm not sure that the gospel wouldn't have made it to them with out the television, since they cannot be that isolated if they are receiving cable t.v. Anyway, there are some really good Biblical teachers on the Tele, like maybe one percent. That one percent is very good tho........right? If you stay up until one a.m. you might catch a glimpse of Ligoner Ministries, but other than that, good luck. Ok that was my positive side of the argument, or my devil's advocation of the issue.

The dark side of T.V. evangelist/preachers:

The number one problem that t.v preachers have caused is that in many cases Christians have replaced their church family with that of the television. Sure, the church can be a hard place to be, but it is the church, it is God's establishment for the saints, the place of corporate worship, and a known common place for those seeking answers for the hard questions of life.

Secondly, it promotes covetousness within the life of the believer. A believer may desire to be a part of a "big successful" church, as opposed to the less extravagant church that God has placed in their community for them to be of service at.

Thirdly, theological laziness is the norm, much of what comes from the t.v. pulpiteers is watered down theological, feel good, prosperous trash.

Fourthly, watered down teaching produces watered down Christians.

Finally, and unfortunately this is a common introduction to Christianity to many people in our post-modern era. We live in a era in American history where we have multiple generations within families that are growing up un-churched, and un-evangilized. Some people make first contact with Christianity thru Benny Hinn's programing on cable. I rest my case.

A debate between old friends; Part one; the argument

Hey Joe,

Let me preface my argument by stating that I am by no means versed in religious theology, yet even if I were a paragraph or two would hardly be sufficient space to intelligently outline my religious beliefs. That being said after growing up Catholic, becoming an alter boy, going through communion, gaining acceptance into the church, and then subsequently renouncing Catholicism I have developed a myriad of reasons for denying the validity of Christianity. First, yet not foremost, the Christian God is a contradictory God. Second, while I appreciate many of the messages of the scriptures, and feel that they can outline a sustainable, healthy, and “good” way to live, they are stories that have been orally passed down long before the appearance of Jesus, so if Christianity was not the first religion to have very similar creation myths than why would it suddenly become the “Truth.” (I don’t believe in a “truth,” but a multitude.) I would also contend that this adaptation and evolution of other myths into Christianity is something that is still happening today, which further detracts from Christianity’s validity. Moreover, the religion is entirely fear based, which is also contradictory to the teachings of Jesus. The countless millions that have died in the name of Christianity is enough alone to make me turn a blind eye. It is a religion, like most of the others, which relies upon converting others beliefs. My Grandmother (the wise woman she was) always said “change a man against his will he is off the same opinion still.”

Yet the lack of evidence supporting the Bible is the most glaring reason I am not a Christian. I have read The Case for Christ. I have been to more than a few sermons (albeit at the urging of girlfriends), and while I at times find them inspiring the simple basis for the beliefs, the fear mongering, the contradictory actions of most Christians and the Church – let us not forget the Holy Wars, Catholic priests, guilt, shame, and genocide all in the name of the Lord – I simply cannot buy into Christianity or any religion for that matter because there is simply no evidence, and what little evidence is given is always shallow and dependent upon belief in a God or entity. Not even quantum physics can save religion for me – as much as it has tried.

A debate between old friends;Part two; the refutal

Part One: The Thesis;

The rejection of truth claims made by individuals and or groups is serious by no short order. What we do in rejecting truth claims; is to reject ones identity and their worldview. By doing so, many are left feeling less in regards of their self worth and their implicit meaning in this life. I have seen first hand venomous tongues lashed out of many representing; philosophies, worldviews, religious groups, all to basically to say; I am right and you are wrong. This is commonly the perception of Christianity, and unfortunately it is often warranted.

At the center of this is; the unrelenting idea that we cannot all be right. Even saying that; we cannot all be right, is a truth claim that subjected to its own idea; it is a redundant statement. A perception of this world reveals that there are truths that cannot be denied without consequence.

Many groups may make truth claims that are in an agreement with one another and all may be wrong on that one point. That is not the problem; the problem is when we make statements that are of a contradictory nature with one another.

1.

This is the case for many differing worldviews; we agree on some issues or doctrines, but we disagree on others.

Unfortunately, what we disagree on is what actually defines us as different. What I want to focus on is the implications of our disagreement in regards to truth. When we disagree, we all cannot be right, one may be right while the other is wrong, and both may be wrong. The world in which we live is maintained by rules; laws that are undeniable, we, therefore; live in a world on a razors edge. The implications of truth in reality define whether or not we exist in a world of laws. I argue that the implications of Christianity in regard to truth are exclusively right in what contradicts other worldviews, and is inclusively right with worldviews whom agree on various points. I do realize that is a bold statement but it is one that is made by all who deny any worldview on account of it disagreeing with their own. I would also like to consider the implications of a right worldview based on truth.

2.

Part two; An argument against the truth claims of Christianity.

I asked a friend from my adolescence that I presumed to not be a Christian, to write me in regards to why he is not a Christian. I thank Facebook networking site, which has allowed us to connect after a decade of not corresponding. It is interesting how we as individuals are both far removed (as far as I can tell) from what we remembered one another as. He wrote back to me in conversational form with a few points in question in regard to the validity of the Christian faith (attached at end of paper). I will like wise engage in a conversational format, to fit the tone of the friendly argument (I will site some sources for academic integrity). I do contest that if we are to be effective in overcoming these issues we should be able to interact with people without out-sourcing our brains. Michael Ransdem coined a term; conversational apologetics, I like that.

The issues brought up by Ned are not irrelevant, but challenges that Christianity needs to and should address. I will summarize as best I can in two issues that Ned has brought to light in regards to his rejection to the truth claims of Christianity: One; The rejection of the Christian Bible

3.

as truth, and secondly; the hypocrisy of those whom claim to be followers of Christ.

Ned is now a teacher in California; I am now a pastor in Montana. I would bet that neither one of us would have guessed that we would be where we are. We both come from the same geological region, I would also dare to say that socially he was from a middle-class background, and mine a lower middle-class. He was an alter boy in the Roman Catholic Church (my condolences) as a youth. He has therefore since renounced Christianity for multiple reasons.

My religious experience as a youth was not structured; it was more sporadic to say the least. My earliest memories were of a old backwoods preacher at a church in Hamersville, Ohio screaming, sweating, extremely upset about something, dropping the N** word occasionally, and just really scaring the hell out of me and everyone else in the church. My dad thought he was called to preach and did so occasionally at local churches. I thought it odd how he treated my mom and me, as everyone else thought he was the greatest thing since Billy Graham. After my mom left him, we didn’t have any consistency in regards to a commitment to a particular church.

4.

I basically grew up a hedonist (even though I didn’t know what I was generalized as at the time), just doing whatever felt good for the

moment. I did once have a youth pastor lead me through the sinner’s prayer and I was baptized thereafter. I really didn’t mean it; I was just manipulated to do it. The guy took interest in me afterwards and sort of tried to take me under his wing. Since I didn’t have a father figure in my life my mom was all for it. A few months later he was convicted for molesting little boys. I hated religion (and still do) from that moment on. Not only was I a hedonist, I was an atheist as well.

Obviously that has changed.

Ned brought up (not formally, but subjectively) two issues that the proponents of Christianity have struggled with. I have touched briefly during my introduction to one of the subjects at hand on the issue of; hypocrisy.

Exhibit A;

Hypocrisy has made its self at home among the church since its conception. I am disgusted by what I read in the news, disgracing acts done by so-called leaders of the church.

5.

The worst times in church history were during the times that the church had more power and sway in world politics. The countless that have been killed for “heresy”, the greed, lust for power, are things that many have chosen to give a blind eye to for the right price. From my own experience I have seen many calling others to repent of sins of the same sort that the one who was calling was committing or doing worse themselves. In the presence of many “Christians” I have felt uncomfortable, I remember when I was converted we took our children to church as a family and the looks our unruly children would receive would make an alligator cry. The list could go on and on in regards to the dreadful atrocities that have been committed in the name of Christ. I would also add honestly that the hypocrisy that I see in others, I continue to see manifest in my own life.

Exhibit B

Christian Scripture as truth has always come into question for its validity ever since it was taken from the Latin into German, and eventually translated to 3,168 languages (at least portions, the full canon of Scripture has only been translated into 457 different languages).

6.

I am not trying to play devils advocate, but to agree with the certain aspects of the argument that needs to be addressed. With that being said; I will struggle with this more than the former. The reason is that the biggest issue with Scripture is not Scripture, but with people. Scripture is often maligned and twisted to meet whatever agenda, or need that may arise. I will say that there is not any work of literature in history that has been taken out of context more than the Christian Bible. The failure of Scripture is in the one whom interprets it. As Ned contended; Christians have tried to adapt other myths to fit into Scripture to remain relevant to the culture, a recent example of this; the theory of macroevolution being used by God in creation, as accepted by the Roman Catholics, and some more liberal Protestants.

It is also reasonable to think God contradictory in regards to the relation of the Old and New Testament. It is not uncommon to see God portrayed in the Old Testament as tyrannical, racist, vengeful, as opposed to a God of love, peace, and mercy as portrayed in the New Testament. The canon of Scripture has been debated within the church for the past 2,000 years, and at the same time the church tries to teach absolute truth. So the new skepticism is really an ongoing skepticism.

7.

Part 3; The other side of the argument.

C.S. Lewis once wrote; that he became the most reluctant convert to Christianity. That was until I came along. My mom bought me a copy of Lewis’ autobiography; Surprised by Joy. She knew I was struggling, I married young, had a child young, and I didn’t like it. I was on a path to destroy three lives, the book sat on my shelf for a year. After contemplating suicide one night I thought about reading my Bible. I hated it and thru it across the room, I noticed the book that my mom had bought me just sitting there. I picked it up and noticed an inscription on the front cover; “I know you love to read, and this book is one I think you will enjoy. Love, mom.” I sat up that night and read that entire book.

I was an existentialist, really influenced by Nietzsche, even though I didn’t know whom he was. I defined myself, I was the means and the end, and anything that prevented me from obtaining happiness must be removed. I was my own deity. Sometime after that; God subjected me to His world, it was a Damascus road experience but without all the experience (I know, doesn’t make sense). I wasn’t seeking, God was. I didn’t want a God, it wasn’t anything in me, but it was something outside of me that made me a Christian. .8

Exhibit A;

Hypocrisy has been a word mostly used in conjunction with Christianity. I would not get much argument with that statement from many skeptics. Why? The reason is; that many that claim to be Christian do not practice what Christianity teaches.

Hypocrisy; if used right is a tool that is of much good use. If Christians are hypocrites it means two things; first it does not take away the truth of the teachings of Christ, because one is contradicting the truth by their actions, so we therefore affirm the sound teaching of Christianity, and secondly; if someone doesn’t look, smell, or act like a Christian, they probably aren’t a Christian. James wrote; But be doers of the Word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves. For if anyone is a hearer of the Word and not a doer, he is like a man that looks intently at his natural face in a mirror. For he looks at himself and goes away and at once forgets what he was like.” - James 1:22-24.

In the U.S. Christianity has been socially accepted, and many people believe they are Christian by birthright. Statistically; roughly 83% of people in the U.S. when surveyed will say that they are Christian (ABC poll). 9.

Does that mean that those whom fall into that category define what a Christian is when they contradict the teachings of Christ? Do those who profess Christ as Lord define the truth when they don’t live it out? Are those whom commit atrocities in the name of Christ really Christian, if their actions are contrary to the Gospel? If they are not Christian than who is to blame? The individual is. This transcends all religious beliefs; we are responsible for our own actions. Christianity doesn’t commit acts of injustice, people do. Some may say that Christianity influenced them to do it. No it didn’t, not if their actions are contrary to what is commanded. All evil that is manifested comes from the desire of man to be existential. To carve out his existence by what ever means necessary. Enter the Caesars of Rome, the tyrannical leaders of Marxist Russia, Communist China, post Nietzsche Germany. All humanist philosophy, share one trait; they are commonly detrimental to human advancement, because in advancing a few many are destroyed. I do not need to go into detail. Of course many have done horrible things in the name of Christ, but that is not what Christ taught. Many have done horrible things denying an authoritative God.

10.

By doing these horrible things, denying God in the process; they are living out their worldview to the mark. Since 1973 there have been over 46 million legal abortions done in the U.S. alone. The sanctity of life has been degraded in this country not because of a Christian persuasion, but because of a secular hedonistic worldview that is practiced. Here are the stats¹ based on a 1.3 million murder year that is average:

Gestational Age	Percentage	Yearly Total
Less than 9 weeks	57.9%	752,700
9-10 weeks	20.3%	263,900
11-12 weeks	10.2%	132,600
13-15 weeks	6.2%	80,600
16-20 weeks	4.3%	55,900
21+ weeks	1.5%	19,500

That is the difference between Christianity and any other worldview.

To add in passing, there is not a perfect Christian, and their actions are not always in sync with what Christ taught. True Christians will admit to wrongdoing and repent of it (ask for forgiveness, and turn from the wrong action). The life of a Christian is like a seed germinating; we live in a decaying body being tended to life. A thought to consider; we talk about the consequences of worldview but never the benefit.

10.

^{1.prolife action .org}

Exhibit B; The validity of Christian Scripture.

Ned wrote; Yet the lack of evidence supporting the Bible is the most glaring reason I am not a Christian. I will take the liberty of saying that this statement includes other references that were made in light of denying the truth claim of scripture. First is the Christian God contradictory? How is He contradictory? Often we consider the Old and New Testament and think that God is speaking from both sides of His proverbial mouth. That is because we come to the Bible with a pretext, and typically take it out of context. Jesus spoke of hell and judgment more than anyone, God in the Old Testament showed mercy to gentiles, and many undeserving people throughout history.

Before the incarnation of Christ, God made a promise to Israel; that from that nation the whole world would be blessed. Through the line of Judah would come the Messiah, Israel was and will be the only theocracy in the history of the world. By whatever means necessary God protected His promise to the world. Understanding the anthropomorphic implications that we have attested to so far; men are evil and corrupt by nature, only the Bible of all literature attests that fact that has been proven over and over by our perception of mankind.

11.

“None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one. Their throat is an open grave; they use their tongues to deceive.” –Romans 3:11-13.

We also must realize that the God of the Old Testament is the same as the New.

Oral tradition and example was the common practice in conveying information 6,000 years ago just as it is today. I drive on the right side of the road because I have been told to do it orally, and for 16 years I witnessed it being done (obviously this is contingent upon your location). It is written somewhere in a law book to drive on the right side, I already knew it to be so because it was orally passed down from my parents. The Bible commands parents to pass down His word, and if it is His word, and if He is God, through his chosen vessel of blessing (Israel) he has preserved it. Jesus came through the preserved line of Judah, he affirmed the Old Testament by his life fulfilling prophecy (over 300) and by quoting the Old Testament. Jesus affirmed the Old Testament books by quoting out

12.

of at least 27 of them. In the epistles the apostles quoted the Old Testament 209 times.

Since the 2^nd century Christians have had the best resources in regards to ancient manuscripts as opposed to any world religion. Could you name any ancient manuscript that has historical figures in it, and also claims to be directed by God? The characters that we find in the Bible are not fictional, but are attested to blemishes and all. Rahab a prostitute mentioned from the book of Joshua is a direct line to the genealogy of Christ. If this was all borrowed, some one would have cleaned that up a while ago. The Bible never focus on mythical characters, like many books of that era, but on regular guys like you and me. That was extremely uncommon for any books throughout ancient civilization. Hinduism and Buddhism rely on legends that need no grounding in history, many religions deny history, but Christianity embraces it. There are countless artifacts and extra biblical texts that affirm Biblical accounts.

Those whom followed Christ and had a direct link to him physically have acted out the truth claims to the extreme. All of the apostles but John were martyred for their devotion to Christ.

13.

Christianity didn’t grow from myths centuries after Christ’s ascension, but the next day.

Louis Markos wrote the following; “…the most common critique of the Bible is, simply, that it is full of contradictions. This critique, I have found, is usually made by people who cannot think of one offhand but who “know” the critique is true. As it turns out, when these contradictions are actually listed, they turn out to be few in number, and most can be resolved either by some help from history or archaeology or by a more careful reading of the text.”²

Like wise there may have been influences to Christianity throughout the years, but the core doctrines of the orthodox faith have remained the same. We should also consider the brightest minds in the world have beat against the Bible and have not yet been able to crack it. It remains the number one selling book in the world regardless. One last thought; the Bible was written over a course of two thousand years, 66 books, aprox.37 authors, no contradictions within the context in which it was written. Is there anything else in the known world even close? The Bible claims to be God’s revelation to humanity, and it demands to be our absolute truth.

^{2 Apologetics for the 21st Century} 14.

Conclusion;

There is much more that can be said about the topics that we have just barely touched on during this conversation. One thing that I have hoped to accomplish is that you would realize that Christianity is a tough nut to crack. I would also argue in closing that it is more consistent than any other worldview that man could embrace. Christianity is not a religion it is redemption from religion. Religion is man-centered, Christianity in its pure teachings are God centered. I do agree that self-serving individuals have corrupted it countless times, but it remains true regardless. Knowing Christ is knowing freedom, knowing freedom is knowing truth.

“If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” –Jesus (John 8:31-32)

I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else. –C.S. Lewis

15.

A review of Beisner and Meister's debate in regard to the origins of evil

Two different arguments to solve the same problem; how can Christians explain evil in the world if God is good. It would seem that Beisner comes from a classical reformed perspective, and Meister is coming from a classical Armenian view. Both of these views would claim to be biblical, and both of these views if stretched to the extreme can develop into heresy pretty quick. I am personally a Calvinist for the most part but I hold very loosely to that persuasion when necessary. When dealing with soteriology,ie.; the doctrine of salvation, the sovereignty of God is easily perceived. When we come to the problem of evil it becomes a bit harder to digest. I do agree with the free will argument in regards to the introduction of evil into the world. God created a moral world, and in order for it to be moral there must be a choice between to do what is pleasing to God and what is not. In the garden Adam did what was pleasing to God until he disobeyed Him and ate of the forbidden tree. That tree represented the moral dilemma, don't eat, or eat, you are commanded not to eat. Who planted the tree? God, even though God is good, He must know evil as well, or how could he say that He is good? Evil would be the opposite of God. By eating of the tree, that would be the opposite of the command of God, so therefore; it must be evil to eat of it. Up to that point all Adam knew was good, all he knew was God. When tempted by the Serpent, Eve was tempted with the ability to be like God, in other words to deny God and know something other than God. Something other than God is evil.

The million dollar question is this; did God know they would break His command? A resounding yes! We can glean this from Ephesians 1:3-14; If God predestines us for redemption in Christ before the foundation of the world, then He would know of man's rebellion before he created him. Man was free initially, but post fall man became enslaved by sin, unable to choose to not sin. Christ sets us free to have faith in Him, and establish a relationship with God in Christ's righteousness imputed to us. So I agree with Meister untill the fall, and I agree with Beisner for the most part.