“Reasons for the Faith, aka Apologetics”

Universities Must Give Christian Clubs Equal Treatment

Universities Can’t Hold Christian Clubs to a Different Standard than Other Clubs.

The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday ruled for the Intervarsity Christian Fellowship against the University of Iowa, calling the university’s decision to deregister a Christian student group one of the most obvious examples of discrimination that it has ever seen.

The case is Intervarsity Christian Fellowship v. the University of Iowa. https://becketnewsite.s3.amazonaws.com/2021-07-16_IVCF-Iowa_Opinion.pdf

Intervarsity is one of several faith-based groups that organizes local chapters at colleges and universities around the country, holding worship services and conducting Bible studies. It had been a registered campus club at the U. of Iowa InterVarsity for over twenty-five years.

Unequal Application of Anti-Discrimination Laws and Policies.

As is often the case, people who are hostile to the Gospel use a facially-neutral anti-discrimination law as a vehicle for harassing Christian businesses, churches, and clubs. The people who serve on the government enforcement commissions are quite likely to share the same worldview as the people who file the complaints.

The Colorado Human Rights Commission has on multiple occasions pursued complaints against Jack of Masterpiece Cakes. Christians who filed similar complaints were summarily dismissed by the commission.

Intervarsity Becomes Collateral Damage.

Intervarsity became collateral damage in 2017, when a student filed a complaint against a different club, Business Leaders in Christ. He was denied a leadership role after refusing to affirm the group’s belief that same-sex relationships were against the Bible.

The University ruled in favor of the student and de-registered BLIC. BLIC filed for and received a preliminary injunction.

In response to the injunction, the University, through its Center for Student Involvement and Leadership, began a “Student Org Clean Up Proposal” and reviewed all student organization constitutions to bring them into compliance with the Human Rights Policy. several were deregistered for requiring their leaders to affirm statements of faith.

It appears from the language of the case that only Christian groups were deregistered.

Constitutional Law Summary.

This is from the final paragraph of the case:

“What the University did here was clearly unconstitutional. It targeted religious groups for differential treatment under the Human Rights Policy—while carving out exemptions and ignoring other violative groups with missions they presumably supported. The University and individual defendants turned a blind eye to decades of First Amendment jurisprudence or they proceeded full speed ahead knowing they were violating the law. Either way, qualified immunity provides no safe haven.”

Qualified Immunity.

According to Cornell Law School, “Qualified immunity is a type of legal immunity. Qualified immunity balances two important interests—the need to hold public officials accountable when they exercise power irresponsibly and the need to shield officials from harassment, distraction, and liability when they perform their duties reasonably”.

“Specifically, qualified immunity protects a government official from lawsuits alleging that the official violated a plaintiff‘s rights, only allowing suits where officials violated a clearly established” statutory or constitutional right.”

Conclusion.

If this reasoning applies in a religious liberty setting, might it also apply when government agents violate one’s Due Process and Equal Protection rights protected by the 5th & 14th Amendments? I’m thinking of all the business owners whose companies failed after government actors proclaimed them to be “non-essential.”

I asked a civil liberties lawyer about qualified immunity, and he replied: “The whole qualified immunity issue needs to be reviewed by the Supreme Court. Lower courts have been too aggressive with it in letting government actors off if there is not an exact rule on point.”

Thank you!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

The U.S. Supreme Court Rules 9-0 for a Catholic Adoption Agency over the City of Philadelphia.

SCOTUS Finds Philly’s Procedures Unduly Burden Agency’s Free Exercise of Religion.

Fulton v. City of Philadelphia https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-123_g3bi.pdf

(Today’s post uses several blocks of text from the Court’s syllabus of the Fulton case.)

“Philadelphia’s foster care system relies on cooperation between the City and private foster care agencies. The City enters standard annual contracts with the agencies to place children with foster families. One of the responsibilities of the agencies is certifying prospective foster families under state statutory criteria. Petitioner Catholic Social Services has contracted with the City to provide foster care services for over 50 years, continuing the centuries-old mission of the Catholic Church to serve Philadelphia’s needy children. CSS holds the religious belief that marriage is a sacred bond between a man and a woman. Because CSS believes that certification of prospective foster families is an endorsement of their relationships, it will not certify unmarried couples—regardless of their sexual orientation—or same-sex married couples.”

“The City ultimately informed CSS that unless it agreed to certify same-sex couples the City would no longer refer children to the agency or enter a full foster care contract with it in the future. The City explained that the refusal of CSS to certify same-sex married couples violated both a non-discrimination provision in the agency’s contract with the City as well as the non-discrimination requirements of the citywide Fair Practices Ordinance.”

“CSS and three affiliated foster parents filed suit seeking to enjoin the City’s referral freeze on the grounds that the City’s actions violated the Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses of the First Amendment.”

Holding.

“Held: The refusal of Philadelphia to contract with CSS for the provision of foster care services unless CSS agrees to certify same-sex couples as foster parents violates the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. The City’s actions burdened CSS’s religious exercise by forcing it either to curtail its mission or to certify same-sex couples as foster parents in violation of its religious beliefs. “

“A law is not generally applicable if it invites the government to consider the particular reasons for a person’s conduct by creating a mechanism for individualized exemptions. Where such a system of individual exemptions exists, the government may not refuse to extend that system to cases of religious hardship without a compelling reason.”

Analysis.

“The contractual non-discrimination requirement burdens CSS’s religious exercise and is not generally applicable, so it is subject to “the most rigorous of scrutiny.” A government policy can survive strict scrutiny only if it advances compelling interests and is narrowly tailored to achieve those interests.”

“The question is not whether the City has a compelling interest in enforcing its non-discrimination policies generally, but whether it has such an interest in denying an exception to CSS. Under the circumstances here, the City does not have a compelling interest in refusing to contract with CSS. CSS seeks only an accommodation that will allow it to continue serving the children of Philadelphia in a manner consistent with its religious beliefs; it does not seek to impose those beliefs on anyone else. The refusal of Philadelphia to contract with CSS for the provision of foster care services unless the agency agrees to certify same-sex couples as foster parents cannot survive strict scrutiny and violates the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.”

Conclusion.

I listened Monday, 6/21/21, to several Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys discussing this case. They think the ruling was 9-0 because the case was narrowly decided and didn’t overrule the case of Smith v. Employment Division. Many religious liberty lawyers believe Smith was wrongly decided and should be overruled.

Several of the justices have expressed a reluctance to overrule Smith unless there is a clear set of rules they can adopt at such time as they do overrule it.

Thank you!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

Ratio Christi – Mentoring Leaders for Eternal Impact

Mentoring Law Students for Success in the Temporal Realm.

I was blessed with the opportunity to serve as a part-time law professor at Western State University College of Law during the 2004 – 2007 timeframe.

I enjoyed teaching various business law classes, but I got the most satisfaction out of mentoring students during their internships. I also enjoyed mentoring students who sought leadership roles in a new business law association that my own mentor (Prof. Jim Hayes) had recently launched at the law school.

Mentoring Student Leaders for Eternal Impact.

I had a very exciting meeting last week with Dr. Bill Pubols, the Executive Director of the Biblical Studies Center across the street from Boise State. He welcomes Ratio Christi into the family of Christian student groups such as Cru and the Fellowship of Christian Athletes.

Bill has generously offered to host the Ratio Christi club meetings and events at the Center. He also offered an office for me to use there.

During our meeting, he said he could see the chapter directors of the other clubs encouraging some of their late-blooming leaders (my words, not his) to take leadership opportunities that will emerge as the Ratio Christi chapter gets going this Fall.

Students who develop into confident Evangelists will almost certainly lead more people to Christ than they would otherwise.

Conclusion.

Please continue to pray that every step I take will be Biblical!

Thank you.

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

Ratio Christi – Bootcamp Report

Engaging Others in the Ratio Christi Mission.

In my 5/17/21 post: Ratio Christi – Campus Apologetics + Evangelism I mentioned that I expected to learn how to engage others in the Ratio Christi mission.

I learned quite a bit. I think the most surprising thing I learned was that there is a Biblical basis for raising ministry support.

Old Testament Teaching.

In Numbers 18:24, God set aside the Levites for work in the Tabernacle, and the other tribes gave their tithes to these priests for their support.

In Nehemiah 1:1-11, Nehemiah the cupbearer to the Persian king prayed to God and prepared a request for substantial resources to rebuild the wall of Jerusalem. God caused the king to provide everything.

New Testament Teaching.

In Luke 8:2-3, Jesus accepted support from Joanna, Susanna, and many other others to full the needs of Jesus and His disciples.

In 1 Cor. 9:1-18, Paul explained that he had the right to be supported in his ministry work. See verses 9 and 10 (ESV):

9 For it is written in the Law of Moses, “You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain.” Is it for oxen that God is concerned? 10 Does he not speak entirely for our sake? It was written for our sake, because the plowman should plow in hope and the thresher thresh in hope of sharing in the crop.

Conclusion.

I found this surprising because it runs counter to my cultural upbringing. I have long believed that I was required to earn everything myself.

Please pray for me that every step I take will be Biblical!

Thank you.

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

Ratio Christi – Campus Apologetics + Evangelism

Equipping Students and Professors.

I am feeling called to help the church regain its prophetic voice in our culture. I believe the Holy Spirit has led me to join Ratio Christi. https://ratiochristi.org/

This statement on their website caught my eye last January. It is under the header Join us a Supported Missionary:

“Ratio Christi isn’t just another apologetics organization. We use our theological training to share the Gospel on college and university campuses across the globe. We reach the people that nobody else can – and we need your help.”

Boot Camp.

I will be attending an online support-raising “boot camp” later this week, in which I expect to learn how to engage others in the Ratio Christi mission.

Conclusion.

I plan to report back on this next week.

Thank you for your time and attention.

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

Sean McDowell’s Great Interview of Nancy Pearcey

Nancy Pearcey, a Resource for Campus-Based Apologetics.

Nancy Pearcey is a best-selling author and instructor. She is a professor and scholar-in-residence at Houston Baptist University.

I am currently reading her book Love Thy Body, at the suggestion of Aaron Marshall.

Aaron is with Ratio Christi, a campus-based Evangelism and Apologetics ministry that seeks to equip both students and professors to make a reasoned defense of the Gospel. Aaron is the Ratio Christi campus director at the University of Utah. He is also the Utah and Idaho area director for Ratio Christi.

Sean McDowell, Apologetics Instructor and Podcaster.

Sean is a professor in the highly regarded Apologetics program at Biola University. He is also a regular instructor in the Cross-examined Instructor Academy (“CIA”), led by Frank Turek. Sean was one of my CIA instructors.

Sean also hosts a podcast: https://seanmcdowell.org/podcasts

Sean Interviews Nancy.

I subscribe to the YouTube channels of several Apologists, including Sean’s. The app on my phone recently served up the 3/25/2021 issue: Behind the Scenes with Nancy Pearcey: People, Books, and Life Experiences. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bIJ25Snz04

The interview is a delightful, wide-ranging conversation. I learned a lot about Francis Schaeffer, the fact-value divide, and Cultural Apologetics.

Conclusion.

Near the end of the interview, Sean calls Love Thy Body one of the top five books he recommends to students, including high school students. He says it is a roadmap for helping the reader gain clarity on dealing with LGBTQ issues.

I recommend the interview to everyone who is interested in campus ministries. It is well worth the one hour and two minutes.

I plan on writing a book review of Love Thy Body. Watch for it in a future post.

Thank you!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

A Fundamental Right to Breathe Freely?

Resource for Civil Rights Litigation and Advanced Homeschool Civics Study.

Attorney Daniel Horowitz has offered up a lot of information for the express purpose that it be used in a civil rights lawsuit challenging the legitimacy of mask mandates and lockdowns.

I think the same information could become an outline for an advanced-level homeschool course in American History and Civics.

Constitutional Attorney Daniel Horowitz Makes the Case for the Right to be Unmasked.

Daniel Horowitz is a lawyer who is the purveyor of the Conservative Review, by Daniel Horowitz. He is also the host of the CR Podcast.

In Episode 851, on 4/12/2021, he spells out: The Constitutional Case Against Mask Mandates.

https://www.theblaze.com/podcasts/daniel-horowitz-podcast

Daniel has a conversational style that is suited to the general (i.e., non-lawyer) audience. He takes the time to explain several concepts, including the natural rights that we in the U.S. inherited with the English Common Law.

Bodily Autonomy Means the Government Can’t Force Mask-Wearing Without Due Process.

Daniel cites several U.S. Supreme Court cases, including the very recent _____ v. Newsom, standing for the proposition that the government can’t merely assert that freedom of movement creates an unacceptable health risk. Government can’t infringe our fundamental rights without showing they have a compelling interest (public health) and that they are using the least intrusive means necessary.

Daniel explains how a number of Supreme Court cases, including Roe v. Wade, were based on an expansive reading of our rights to privacy. He makes a persuasive (in my opinion) case that the right to breathe and freedom of movement are more compelling.

Conclusion.

I encourage everyone who has asked “where are the civil liberties lawyers on lockdowns and mask mandates?” to listen to the podcast and share it widely.

Thank you!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

May a State College Compel Professor’s Speech? No, Says U.S. Sixth Circuit.

Shawnee State University Can’t Force Professor to Use Speech with Which He Disagrees.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled unanimously that Shawnee State could not discipline a professor for failing to engage in speech with which he strongly disagrees.

The ruling in the case, Meriwether v. Hartop, was issued March 26,2021.https://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/21a0071p-06.pdf

Nicholas Meriwether, a philosophy professor and a Christian, sued Shawnee State, claiming that its mandate to use terms that conflict with biology infringed on his religious beliefs.

Excerpts from the Decision.

(I have copied below several key paragraphs from the decision. I have omitted most of the case citations to reduce the word count. You’re welcome!)

Traditionally, American universities have been beacons of intellectual diversity and academic freedom. They have prided themselves on being forums where controversial ideas are discussed and debated. And they have tried not to stifle debate by picking sides. But Shawnee State chose a different route: It punished a professor for his speech on a hotly contested issue. And it did so despite the constitutional protections afforded by the First Amendment.

Professor Meriwether is also a devout Christian. And, like many people of faith, his religious convictions influence how he thinks about “human nature, marriage, gender, sexuality, morality, politics, and social issues.” Meriwether believes that “God created human beings as either male or female, that this sex is fixed in each person from the moment of conception, and that it cannot be changed, regardless of an individual’s feelings or desires.” He also believes that he cannot “affirm as true ideas and concepts that are not true.”

Freedom of Speech Includes Freedom from Compelled Speech.

“Universities have historically been fierce guardians of intellectual debate and free speech.” But here, Meriwether alleges that Shawnee State’s application of its gender-identity policy violated the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. The district court rejected this argument and held that a professor’s speech in the classroom is never protected by the First Amendment. We disagree: Under controlling Supreme Court and Sixth Circuit precedent, the First Amendment protects the academic speech of university professors. (italics added).

The First Amendment protects “the right to speak freely and the right to refrain from speaking at all.”. Thus, the government “may not compel affirmance of a belief with which the speaker disagrees.” When the government tries to do so anyway, it violates this “cardinal constitutional command.”

Courts have often recognized that the Free Speech Clause applies at public universities. Thus, the state may not act as though professors or students “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the [university] gate.” Government officials violate the First Amendment whenever they try to “prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion,” and when they “force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein.”.

Together, Sweezy and Keyishian establish that the First Amendment protects the free-speech rights of professors when they are teaching. As a result, our court has rejected as “totally unpersuasive” “the argument that teachers have no First Amendment rights when teaching, or that the government can censor teacher speech without restriction.” And we have recognized that “a professor’s rights to academic freedom and freedom of expression are paramount in the academic setting.” Simply put, professors at public universities retain First Amendment protections at least when engaged in core academic functions, such as teaching and scholarship.

By forbidding Meriwether from describing his views on gender identity even in his syllabus, Shawnee State silenced a viewpoint that could have catalyzed a robust and insightful in-class discussion. Under the First Amendment, “the mere dissemination of ideas . . . on a state university campus may not be shut off in the name alone of ‘conventions of decency.’”. Rather, the lesson of Pickering and the Court’s academic-freedom decisions is that the state may do so only when its interest in restricting a professor’s in-class speech outweighs his interest in speaking.

Start with Meriwether’s interests. We begin with “the robust tradition of academic freedom in our nation’s post-secondary schools.” That tradition alone offers a strong reason to protect Professor Meriwether’s speech. After all, academic freedom is “a special concern of the First Amendment, which does not tolerate laws that cast a pall of orthodoxy over the classroom.”. And the First Amendment interests are especially strong here because Meriwether’s speech also relates to his core religious and philosophical beliefs. Finally, this case implicates an additional element: potentially compelled speech on a matter of public concern. And “[w]hen speech is compelled . . . additional damage is done.”

Free Exercise of Religion

Meriwether next argues that as a public university, Shawnee State violated the Free Exercise Clause when it disciplined him for not following the university’s pronoun policy. We agree. The Constitution requires that the government commit “itself to religious tolerance.” Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colo. Civ. Rights Comm’n. Thus, laws that burden religious exercise are presumptively unconstitutional unless they are both neutral and generally applicable. To determine whether a law is neutral, courts must look beyond the text and scrutinize the history, context, and application of a challenged law. In this way, the Free Exercise Clause guards against “even subtle departures from neutrality on matters of religion.”

The Bottom Line of the Ruling.

Prof. Merriweather’s lawsuit now returns to the federal district court for a trial on the merits. Over 90% of civil suits settle prior to trial, so the odds are that this will as well.

On the other hand – Shawnee State may ask the U.S. Supreme Court to take up the matter. If the Court does, then justice (from my point of view, in any event) will again be denied by being delayed.

Thank you!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

Start typing here…

There’s More Than One Way to “Trust the Science”

Frank Turek – Excellent Online Resource for Apologists.

There are several people who are, in my opinion, excellent resources for Apologists, including Frank Turek of Cross-Examined.org.

I visited Frank’s Twitter feed yesterday and found a link to a 5/16/2020 guest post by a Mr. Bob Perry. The post is titled: There’s More Than One Way to “Trust the Science.”

Why do Some Believe that Science and Faith are not Compatible?

Near the end of the post, Mr. Perry discusses Theology and explains how the materialist worldview resulted in Theology’s being deposed from its once-lofty perch.

“They used to call Theology the “Queen of the Sciences” for a reason. Theology identifies the Creator and sustainer of all things. But it does more than that. It makes the case that the mind of God is the basis for truth and reason. And that means His character undergirds every other scientific discipline.

How so?

All matter, mind, power, and morality have their foundation in the nature of God. And we are made in His image. So, it follows that our ability to reason and create are reflections of God’s character. Knowing that changes the way we understand everything else. In the doctrine of the Trinity and the eternal relationship between the Persons of the Godhead, we have the basis for love itself. It’s the model for all human relationships. And that means it is foundational to how we understand community, sacrifice, and cooperation.

If you want to have a robust view of chemistry, biology, anatomy, anthropology, psychology, sociology — you name the discipline — you must understand that theology ties them all together.

Today it sounds absurd to call theology a “science.” But that’s not because we’ve found something wrong with theology. It’s because we have accepted a corrupted and truncated view of science itself. We’ve limited it to matter, energy, space, and time. But we’ve lost our souls and spirits in the process.”

Conclusion.

I particularly appreciate the author’s phrase: “…a corrupted and truncated view of science itself.”

I strongly encourage everyone to read the entire post, found here:

https://crossexamined.org/theres-more-than-one-way-to-trust-the-science/

Thank you!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

The U.S. Supreme Court Agrees with the ACLU and the ADF in a Religious Liberty Case.

SCOTUS Rules 8-1 for the ADF’s Clients Chike Uzuegbunam and Joseph Bradford.

I wrote on January 14, 2021 in The ACLU Sides with the ADF in a Religious Liberty Case – Yes, Really! about the religious liberty case of Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski.

In the span of just seven weeks (lightning speed for a SCOTUS case), the Court ruled for Chike and Joseph. The Court ordered the 11^th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and the Federal District Court to allow Chike and Joseph to finish the original trial.

The ruling was 8-1, with only Chief Justice John Roberts dissenting.

I think there is an excellent chance the parties will now find it mutually beneficial to negotiate a final settlement of all the issues.

The Bottom Line of the Ruling.

“Applying this principle here is straightforward. For purposes of this appeal, it is undisputed that Uzuegbunam experienced a completed violation of his constitutional rights when respondents enforced their speech policies against him. Because “every violation [of a right] imports damage,” Webb, 29 F. Cas., at 509, nominal damages can redress Uzuegbunam’s injury even if he cannot or chooses not to quantify that harm in economic terms.

The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

Conclusion – Why This Matters.

If SCOTUS had upheld the 11^th Circuit’s dismissal of the case, it would have sent a message to colleges that they could violate a student’s fundamental rights with impunity, simply by (as the college here did) giving in at the last minute and changing a policy that it should be willing to change as soon as it learns of the policy’s problems.

This rule bolsters the Alliance Defending Freedom, the American Civil Liberties Union, and other defenders of the weak against the strong.

Thank you!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

SCOTUS to the 9th Circuit – Read Our Lips!

Religious Gatherings Require Equal Protection, Part Two.

The Supreme Court on February 26, 2021 ordered the 9^th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to grant a petition ordering Santa Clara County, California to lift its ban on indoor church services.

In Gateway City Church, et., al, v Newsom, https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/022621zr_1bo2.pdf the Court stated that “This outcome is clearly dictated” by its earlier ruling in South Bay United Pentecostal Church v. Newsom.

South Bay United Pentecostal is the case in which the Court lifted California’s unconstitutional ban on indoor religious services.

Strict Scrutiny of Government Restrictions.

The county argued that its ban was allowed because it did not single out religious gatherings.

The 6-3 SCOTUS majority appears unimpressed by the County’s argument that it can completely deprive worshippers of their Free Exercise rights as long as they are treating other establishments equally badly.

Government restrictions on our fundamental Constitutional rights such as freedom of speech and free exercise of religion must be in furtherance of a compelling state interest and must use the least restrictive means necessary. That is what is called Strict Scrutiny test.

The county might have achieved a passing grade on the first part of the test, but they clearly flunked the second part.

Conclusion.

I’ll continue to keep you posted as the Supreme Court finishes out the second half of its 2020 – 2021 docket.

Thank you!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

Apologists Help Us Process Ravi Zacharias’ Betrayal

Ravi Zacharias’ Double Life.

Ravi Zacharias was a gifted speaker and Apologist. He used those gifts to build Ravi Zacharias International Ministries (“RZIM”) into a large platform for Apologetics writers and speakers.

The world recently learned that he was also sexual predator who led a double life. RZIM’s Board of Directors commissioned an outside law firm to conduct an independent investigation into some disturbing allegations about him. The Board publicly released the report, whose conclusions were even worse than the accusations would lead one to believe.

Apologetics Instructors Who Can Help Us Think Through the Damage.

Frank Turek, podcaster and author of the book I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist, provides a good role model for how to respond to accusations against any public figure. He resisted the demand to give an off-the-cuff response when the accusations first surfaced and waited until there were enough facts from which to make reasonable conclusions.

Please listen to his analysis of the evidence on his 2/19/21 45-minute podcast: https://crossexamined.org/the-ravi-zacharias-scandal-and-the-truth-of-christianity/

Pastor Mike Winger of www.biblethinker.org live-streamed about this on his YouTube channel on 2/15/21. Mike is a pastor and a certified domestic violence counselor, which makes him uniquely qualified to help us understand how to evaluate the credibility of the anonymous witnesses to Ravi’s conduct. It is 90 minutes and well worth your time.

It is titled What Ravi did and Where we go From Here.

Other Apologists who have recorded helpful conversations about it are Alisa Childers of the Alisa Childers podcast https://www.alisachilders.com/ and Cameron Bertucci of the Capturing Christianity podcast https://capturingchristianity.com/

Conclusion.

I provided these links to help anyone who might doubt the truth of Christianity because of Ravi Zacharias’ betrayal.

Christianity is true, regardless of the flawed, broken sinners who don’t adhere to the words of Jesus’ that they taught.

Two plus two equals four, regardless of how flawed a math teacher might be.

Thank you!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

Religious Gatherings Require Equal Protection

Governments Can’t Use Emergencies as an Excuse to Discriminate Against Religion.

The Alliance Defending Freedom, in Alice Chao’s blog post on 2/15/21, said this:

https://www.adflegal.org/blog/what-justice-gorsuch-had-say-about-californias-covid-ban-indoor-church-services

Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court released a decision lifting California’s unconstitutional ban on indoor religious services.

The Court voted 6-3 in favor of two California churches challenging Governor Gavin Newsom’s complete ban of indoor worship services while the government continues to grapple with handling COVID-19.

Justice Neil Gorsuch had strong words for California officials who violated the First Amendment.

“Even in times of crisis—perhaps especially in times of crisis—we have a duty to hold governments to the Constitution,” wrote Justice Gorsuch in his concurrence, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

Gorsuch continued, observing: “As this crisis enters its second year—and hovers over a second Lent, a second Passover, and a second Ramadan—it is too late for the State to defend extreme measures with claims of temporary exigency, if it ever could.”

SCOTUS Seems to be Warming to the Task.

The Supreme Court of the United States, known colloquially as SCOTUS, is finally forcing state governments to protect our God-given rights to life, liberty, and property.

Their pre-Thanksgiving case prohibited NY Governor Cuomo from enforcing Covid restrictions that treated houses of worship less favorably than secular establishments. Please see my 1/5/21 blog post for more details.

I’ve read about federal district court cases in which judges have reminded governors that these rights are held by each individual. The rulings require the government to show that each person is entitled to keep his or her liberties unless the government can show they have probable cause to believe that person poses a serious threat.

Governors and other public officials have declared entire categories of human beings to be a threat to the public health without having to make the legally-required probable cause showings.

I would be thrilled if SCOTUS used one of those cases to strike down the lockdowns and take us back to the good old days of 2019 where we were presumed innocent, not the other way around.

Conclusion.

I’ll keep you posted as the Supreme Court finishes out the second half of its 2020 – 2021 docket.

Thank you!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

Do You Know MLK’s Biblical Basis for his Civil Disobedience?

MLK’s “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” Makes a Powerful Biblical Case for Disobeying an Unjust Law.

Monday, January 18, 2021, was our country’s annual celebration of the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. The Gospel Coalition published an annotated version (by Justin Taylor) of his heart-rending Letter from a Birmingham Jail.

You can read Justin’s post here: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/evangelical-history/an-annotated-guide-to-martin-luther-kings-letter-from-birmingham-jail/

MLK was a Christian First.

Martin Luther King Jr. was above all things a Christian. People who are hostile to Gospel are quick to call him “Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.” but go to great lengths to omit his title of Reverend. Nevertheless, the Southern Christian Leadership Conference was instrumental in the success of the Civil Rights movement in this country.

This success was all made possible, in my opinion, because they were not at all confused about the source of their claim to justice.

The Religious Reason for MLK’s Actions.

Below are the 8^th and 9^th paragraphs of the letter, along with the annotation shown in bold italics (emphasis in the original article):

“[Religious reason]

But more basically, I am in Birmingham because injustice is here.

Just as the prophets of the eighth century B.C. left their villages and carried their “thus saith the Lord” far beyond the boundaries of their home towns, and just as the Apostle Paul left his village of Tarsus and carried the gospel of Jesus Christ to the far corners of the Greco Roman world, so am I compelled to carry the gospel of freedom beyond my own home town. Like Paul, I must constantly respond to the Macedonian call for aid.”

Conclusion.

I am keeping this post brief so you can more quickly go read the (very long!) annotated Letter.

Thank you!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

Theological Liberalism – What Could Possibly Go Wrong?

Apologists are Sounding the Alarm About Theological Liberalism.

Neil Shenvi and Alisa Childers are two of the Apologists I follow.

Neil’s website proclaims:

“Christian apologetics from a homeschooling theoretical chemist.”

https://shenviapologetics.com/

Alisa’s website says this about her:

A lifelong church-goer, follower of Jesus, and former CCM recording artist with the Dove award-winning group ZOEgirl, I experienced a period of profound doubt about my faith in my mid-thirties. … I began to investigate my faith intellectually—I took seminary classes and read everything I could get my hands on. This began my journey from unreasoned doubt into a vibrant, rational, and informed faith.

https://www.alisachilders.com/

The Danger of Theological Liberalism.

“I’m increasingly convinced that the most pressing apologetics need is not equipping Christians to defend the truth of Christianity, but protecting Christians against the advance of theological liberalism.”

Neil Shenvi, posted on Twitter 12/30/2020.

What is Theological Liberalism?

Theological Liberalism, also known as Progressive Christianity, is:

“… a growing movement in the church that seeks to re-interpret the Bible, re-assess historic doctrines, and re-define core tenets of the faith. All the while, this movement identifies itself as “Christian,” claims to follow Jesus, and boasts a high view of Scripture. But as we’ll see in this series, they are leading many unsuspecting Christians astray, and confusing the body of Christ about what the Bible is, what Jesus accomplished on the cross, and what the good news of the gospel proclaims.”

Alisa Childers, 10/8/2020

https://www.alisachilders.com/blog/progressive-christianity-101-what-you-need-to-know

Conclusion – Sort of.

This is the first of what may be multiple posts on the topic of Theological Liberalism, as I follow where the Holy Spirit leads me.

Thank you!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

The ACLU Sides with the ADF in a Religious Liberty Case – Yes, Really!

A Broad Spectrum of Civil Rights Groups Linked Arms in a Recent Supreme Court Case.

Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski is a religious liberty case. It involves two college students who were deprived by a public college of their rights to share the Gospel while on campus.

The case has made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court (“SCOTUS”). I listened to the 1/12/21 live audio of the oral argument.

I also took the opportunity to listen in on “pre-game” and “post-game” analysis provided by attorneys with the Alliance Defending Freedom (“ADF”) and that included their clients, the two students.

The lead attorney for ADF stated that, to the best of her knowledge, this is the first time that the ADF and the American Civil Liberties Union (“ACLU”) were ever on the same side in a First Amendment case. Please see the Conclusion for the reasons driving this unusual alignment.

Places of Learning Are Often Ill-Informed About Their First Amendment Duties.

The ADF represented Chike Uzuegbunam and Joseph Bradford, two students attending Georgia Gwinnett College (“GGC”). The students shared similar religious beliefs and a desire to express those beliefs publicly.

Campus officials actively prevented Chike from using the campus’ “free speech zone” to share the Gospel, even though he was complying with campus speech procedures, because someone was offended by his words.

Joseph saw how Chike was treated, and chose to keep silent out of fear of similar mistreatment. This is the classic description of government action that had a chilling effect on one’s constitutional rights.

Public schools and colleges generally have a duty to remain neutral between students who hold different viewpoints. They aren’t permitted to favor a Christian’s viewpoint over an Atheist’s viewpoint (or vice-versa) on the same subject.

Sadly, the experience of ADF attorneys across the nation shows that approximately 90% of colleges have unconstitutional “speech codes” that are invariably used to discriminate against the religious point of view.

Why is This Case at SCOTUS?

Chike and Joseph approached the ADF for help recovering their rights. An ADF attorney sent a letter to GGC informing them of the ways in which the speech code violated the constitution, and offering to help GGC rewrite it. GGC rebuffed these attempts, leading ADF to file a First Amendment case in a Federal District Court in Georgia. After lengthy delays, GGC finally changed its speech code. GGC then filed a motion to dismiss the case, claiming that there was no longer any harm being done to the students.

Over ADF’s objections, the court dismissed the case. ADF filed an appeal with the 11^th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which upheld the dismissal.

According to ADF, the case should not have been dismissed in light of centuries of precedent that permit aggrieved persons to prove the deprivation of their rights and to recover attorneys’ fees from the government.

Conclusion – Why This Matters.

If the SCOTUS upholds the 11^th Circuit’s dismissal of the case, it will allow colleges to violate a student’s fundamental rights with impunity, simply by (as GGC did) giving in at the last minute and changing a policy that it should be willing to change as soon as it learns of the policy’s problems.

This case allied groups across the political spectrum who regularly seek to vindicate an individual’s rights against the government. The ACLU often sues over police misconduct. The ADF often sues over misconduct by schools, public libraries, and park districts.

What they have in common is helping the weak take on the strong.

Thank you!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

Religious Liberty is Protected from Arbitrary Government Action

Apologetics and the U.S. Constitution.

I’m feeling called to make Apologetics and the U.S. Constitution the theme of this blog for 2021.

I am still compiling a list of topics to cover, such as: Parental Rights to Direct a Child’s Upbringing, and Freedom from Compelled Speech.

Please send suggestions to me at michael@msochartered.com

Religious Liberty – Protected from Arbitrary Governmental Actions.

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects several of our God-given rights, including the free exercise of religion, freedom of speech, peaceable assembly, and freedom to petition government.

A recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court spells out the government’s duty to interfere as little as necessary with our rights.

Happy Thanksgiving from the U.S. Supreme Court to People of Faith!

Shortly before Thanksgiving, the U.S. Supreme Court prohibited NY Governor Cuomo from enforcing Covid restrictions that treated houses of worship less favorably than secular establishments. In Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo, The Court took issue with Governor Cuomo’s arbitrary and frequently-changing definitions of what constituted “essential” work. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20a87_4g15.pdf

Here are excerpts from the opinion:

The applicants have made a strong showing that the challenged restrictions violate “the minimum requirement of neutrality” to religion. The regulations cannot be viewed as neutral because they single out houses of worship for especially harsh treatment.

In a red zone, while a synagogue or church may not admit more than 10 persons, businesses categorized as “essential” may admit as many people as they wish. And the list of “essential” businesses includes things such as acupuncture facilities, camp grounds, garages, as well as many whose services are not limited to those that can be regarded as essential, such as all plants manufacturing chemicals and microelectronics and all transportation facilities.

These categorizations lead to troubling results. At the hearing in the District Court, a health department official testified about a large store in Brooklyn that could “literally have hundreds of people shopping there on any given day.”

Yet a nearby church or synagogue would be prohibited from allowing more than 10 or 25 people inside for a worship service. And the Governor has stated that factories and schools have contributed to the spread of COVID–19 but they are treated less harshly than the Diocese’s churches and Agudath Israel’s synagogues, which have admirable safety records.

Because the challenged restrictions are not “neutral” and of “general applicability,” they must satisfy “strict scrutiny,” and this means that they must be “narrowly tailored” to serve a “compelling” state interest.

Stemming the spread of COVID–19 is unquestionably a compelling interest, but it is hard to see how the challenged regulations can be regarded as “narrowly tailored.” They are far more restrictive than any COVID–related regulations that have previously come before the Court, much tighter than those adopted by many other jurisdictions hard-hit by the pandemic, and far more severe than has been shown to be required to prevent the spread of the virus at the applicants’ services.

Not only is there no evidence that the applicants have contributed to the spread of COVID–19 but there are many other less restrictive rules that could be adopted to minimize the risk to those attending religious services. Among other things, the maximum attendance at a religious service could be tied to the size of the church or synagogue.

It is hard to believe that admitting more than 10 people to a 1,000–seat church or 400–seat synagogue would create a more serious health risk than the many other activities that the State allows.

Conclusion.

It is great to see the Supreme Court get off the Covid sidelines and start protecting houses of worship!

Please send me your suggested topics for the Apologetics and the U.S. Constitution series.

Thank you!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

Parents – Here is Help for you to Push Back on School Indoctrination!

Parents and Students Retain Their Constitutional Rights in the Public Schools.

The U.S. Constitution spells out the agreement between the people of the United States to form a limited federal government. The specific purposes of the government are spelled out in the Constitution. Anything not specified in the Constitution is reserved to the people and to the states that ratified it.

The first ten amendments to the Constitution are called the Bill of Rights. Those amendments spell out fundamental rights (free exercise of religion, freedom of speech, peaceable assembly, etc.) of the people that government is supposed to protect.

Parents and students retain those rights when they participate in the public schools.

New Resource Guide by Focus on the Family Helps Parents Combat the Liberal Agenda in Schools.

I was fortunate to attend public schools in San Jose when they taught those lessons in Civics class and honored their duty to protect our Constitutional rights.

Sadly, many public schools today are failing in that vital duty. That is why Focus on the Family has produced a resource guide for parents of public-school students.

The Christian Post on 12/16/2020 published an article titled: Focus on the Family releases resource guide to help parents ‘push back’ against liberal indoctrination in schools.

https://www.christianpost.com/news/resource-guide-helps-parents-combat-liberal-agenda-at-schools.html

From the article:

“The socially conservative group Focus on the Family has released a new resource guide to help parents make informed decisions about their children’s education.

Back to School–for Parents, compiled by Focus on the Family and its partner organization Family Policy Alliance, was released Wednesday and is available to download for free. Its goal is to serve as a “busy parent’s guide to what’s happening in your children’s classrooms and practical steps you can take to protect them.”

The guide features information on what children across the United States are learning in school, including “comprehensive sex education” and mandated instruction on LGBT history. It also touches upon efforts to allow trans-identified students to enter bathrooms, locker rooms and showers designated for the opposite sex, in addition to allowing biological males who identify as females to compete in girls’ sports.

Conclusion.

I am a volunteer with two nonprofit organizations that help parents and students protect their God-given rights.

The Alliance Defending Freedom and the Pacific Justice institute each provide pro bono legal services. I encourage anyone whose Constitutional rights are being violated by the government to contact them directly.

Thank you!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

Looking for Homeschooling Resources? Here Are Some.

In my 4/20/20 post titled Homeschool Your Kids? The Left Wants to Stop You., I sounded the alarm about efforts to strip parents of their God-given rights to direct their children’s education.

In this post, I want to share some resources from people I trust to help parents find material that will help them educate their children in ways that honor God.

Answers in Genesis (AIG).

In these blog posts The Authority of Scripture, The Inerrancy of Scripture, and Thinking and Communicating Foundationally I have highlighted how AIG has shown a decades-long commitment to stand on God’s word. They have an impressive array of publications and videos on just about any topic one could name. Their materials are well- researched and professionally-produced, because they know there are people hostile to the Gospel who will amplify any perceived error.

Here is a link to the homeschool tab on their education page. It is one of over a dozen such tabs on that page.

Alison Morrow (Lee Strobel’s Daughter).

Lee Strobel is the well-known Chicago crime reporter who set out to prove that the Gospel is false, followed the evidence, and became a follower of Jesus. Lee’s story is told beautifully in the movie The Case for Christ. The move is (in my opinion) a faithful re-telling of Lee’s autobiographical book of the same name.

Lee posted this on his Twitter feed today (4/28/20):

Go beyond “crisis schooling” and genuinely home school your child this fall. My awesome daughter Alison is a former classroom teacher & homeschooling expert who can help you! Her workshop is May 4. Watch her video below: https://youtube.com/watch?v=ke6sbv0y2AI

There was also a link to Alison’s website, https://goodschooling.net/

I watched the video. I then visited the GoodSchooling website, clicked on the Help Me Homeschool and Register for “Launch Your Homeschool” Free Workshop tabs. I now have access to their impressive library of free resources and am looking forward to the 5/4/20 workshop.

I encourage parents, grandparents, and anyone else who cares about the next generation to do so as well.

Thank you!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

Homeschool Your Kids? The Left Wants to Stop You.

Homeschool Your Kids? The Left Wants to Stop You.

Is Homeschooling So Dangerous It Should be Banned?

A recent edition of the Harvard Magazine contained an article by Erin O’Donnell in which law professor Elizabeth Bartholet described homeschooling as something so harmful it should be presumptively banned. The article, titled “The Risks of Homeschooling,” can be found here: https://harvardmagazine.com/2020/05/right-now-risks-homeschooling

This is the second paragraph of the article:

Yet Elizabeth Bartholet, Wasserstein public interest professor of law and faculty director of the Law School’s Child Advocacy Program, sees risks for children—and society—in homeschooling, and recommends a presumptive ban on the practice. Homeschooling, she says, not only violates children’s right to a “meaningful education” and their right to be protected from potential child abuse, but may keep them from contributing positively to a democratic society.

Why Did I Write This Post?

I’m writing this to alert everyone who shares Thomas Jefferson’s view that we are all endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights, including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (emphasis mine).

Leftist governors such as Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan have displayed what I think can reasonably be described as a tyrannical impulse in the arbitrary restrictions contained in some of their shut-down orders. Forcing home improvement stores to rope off sections that the governor feels are “non-essential,” such as gardening, are hard to see as being genuinely necessary for public health.

Anyone who would abuse the power of government to ban “harmful” gardening will no doubt find a similar justification to ban homeschooling.

Four Excellent Organizations that can Help Us Defend Our Liberty.

Please make a note of the following organizations that provide pro bono legal advice in defense of our liberties:

Homeschool Legal Defense Association. hslda.org

Pacific Justice Institute. https://www.pacificjustice.org/

Alliance Defending Freedom. https://adflegal.org/

Center for American Liberty. https://libertycenter.org/

Stay Alert and Spread the Word.

If you or anyone you know is harassed by a government agent because you choose to homeschool, contact one of these public interest law firms for help defending your rights.

If you catch wind of legislation that smacks of a homeschooling ban, contact HSLDA.

HSLDA also has a variety of other resources for homeschooling families.

Please share this post with others who value liberty.

Thank you!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

Equipping the Next Generation, Update

In my post of 8/22/2018 on Equipping the Next Generation, I wrote about Natasha Crain and all the work she is doing to help equip churches to equip parents to equip their kids in the faith. Whew!

At that time, Natasha had written two books, titled Keeping Your Kids on God’s Side and Talking with Your Kids About God.

Natasha is about to release her third book: Talking with Your Kids About Jesus. It is set to release on March 31,2020. I encourage everyone to pre-order it.

Talking with Your Kids About Jesus differs from Talking with Your Kids About God in the following ways:

Talking with Your Kids About God focuses on evidence for God’s existence while Talking with Your Kids About Jesus focuses on Jesus’ identity, teachings, death, resurrection, and the difference that Jesus makes.

Thank you!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

Justification as a Tool for Racial Healing

For Racial Healing, Start with Scripture.

Steve Ham is the Senior Pastor at Hyde Park Baptist Church in Cincinnati, Ohio. He wrote an article titled Racial Discrimination Needs Justification More Than Justice on September 11, 2019. The article appeared on the Living Waters website.

Please see the full article, here:

https://www.livingwaters.com/racial-discrimination-needs-justification-more-than-justice/

I include here several large blocks of text that, in my opinion, spell out the opportunity the church has to employ the doctrine of Justification as a tool for racial healing:

“Understanding Justification

Justification is an important doctrine because it eliminates class distinction. Paul makes this very clear as he talks about it in the context of Jews and Gentiles. Of course, we know that there is a difference between Jews and Gentiles, and Paul even acknowledges it. “We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners” (Galatians 2:15). Paul and Peter were born as Jews under the Old Covenant law while Gentiles were not. Even so, Paul makes a striking statement that levels the playing field for everyone. “Yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified” (Galatians 2:16).

Do you see the leveling in this? Even though there is an outward difference by heritage and culture, Paul and Peter both know that there is no better class of Christian. Nobody is justified by works of the law.

We are all level in either being separated from God and under the condemnation of sin or being covered by the goodness of Christ who died on our behalf through having faith in him alone. Either way there is no class of goodness that any of us who are classified by the word “human” can claim of our own. Justification is a declaration by God upon sinners who otherwise by their own merits would stand condemned. Instead, through faith in Jesus Christ who paid the penalty for our sin, God looks at us through the righteousness of Christ and makes a glorious declaration of “not guilty.”

What Can the Church Do About the Racism Epidemic?

Because of the Great Commission, the church is already spread through nations, tribes and tongues in the world. We have individual believers everywhere in every setting who can live out the ramifications of justification and preach its hope.

None of us need a bigger voice than what we already have in our own individual context. We can speak and act in our own mission fields that we often categorize as vocations, families and neighborhoods. If we are living and speaking out the racially equalizing message of justification in our mission fields, can you imagine the impact of the church? It’s easy to forget that the church is so dynamic. There are Christians placed everywhere all over the world. Why should we underestimate what our voices and lives can do in our own settings? We are empowered in the Spirit to live out the equalizing effect of justification and preach its truth. Our power is in a message that brings equalizing force to racial discrimination with eternal gain for anyone who hears and believes. The voice of the church is everywhere if only we will all speak out in our own settings and point to justification in Christ as the greatest equalizing power in the world. There may be a cost for using that voice in our own settings, but Christ never said that people would accept us. In fact, he said we would be persecuted for the sake of his name.

I would rather mobilize every church member with the eternally equalizing message of justification in the commission that Christ has actually given us rather than having a priority of changing a social landscape that can never give people a real solution to their biggest problem. Not one of us needs to feel impotent when facing this massive cultural problem. We simply all need to be individually obedient to the commission Christ has already given us. Instead of pushing the ideas of social commentators in the hope that they might go viral and impact the culture, we need the Great Commission to go viral with the equalizing message of justification that brings everyone level at the foot of the cross.”

Conclusion

Let’s make use of the tools Scripture offers whenever we seek to solve a problem!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

The Church can Work to Eliminate Racism

How the Church can Work to Eliminate Racism

We, the Church, have an opportunity to work together to eliminate racism.

The Church (i.e., we who follow Jesus) can (1) proclaim the truth of Scripture that we are all one race; (2) expose the lies that enable racism; and (3) preach the Gospel as the ultimate cure for the sin of racism.

Racism is a Sin that Requires a Divine Cure

Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis thinks we would do away with racism if we all recognized that we are all brothers and sisters, and then treated each other accordingly.

“At the central core of racism, we find the sinful hearts of men living in a fallen world. This fundamental problem has no earthly cure. There is no speech that can be given, no law that can be passed, and no publicity campaign that can solve it. Only the truth of God’s Word combined with the strength of God’s Holy Spirit living within us can bring us victory over this sin.”

– Charles Ware; Ken Ham.
One Race One Blood, pp. 38

Yes, we are all One Race.

From the Evidence Bible’s daily post on 6/11/19:

“Science may have caught up with the Bible, which says that Adam and Eve are the ancestors of all humans alive today.”

Peter Underhill of Stanford University in California remarked on findings published in the November 2000 issue of the journal Nature Genetics…Geneticists have long agreed there is no genetic basis to race—only to ethnic and geographic groups. “People look at a very conspicuous trait like skin color and they say, ‘Well, this person’s so different’…but that’s only skin deep,” Underhill said. “When you look at the level of the Y chromosome you find that, gee, there is very little difference between them. And skin color differences are strictly a consequence of climate.”

“When the families scattered from Babel, they each took different combinations of genes with them. In such small populations, trivial differences (such as skin color) can arise quickly in only a few generations. Even evolutionists admit this is true. But different shades of skin and slightly different genetic traits are trivial and do not constitute different ‘races.’” Carl Kerby, Answers in Genesis

Acts 17:26 And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their pre-appointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings.”

See: We are all of the same race—the “human race.”

Here’s How to Treat Each Other as Brothers and Sisters:

Dr. Voddie Baucham, in his sermon title One Blood, explores how racism has roots in Evolutionary theory. He shows that it matters very much whether one accepts the One Blood hypothesis described in Genesis.

The basis of all the ethnic divisions we have seen is the denial of the One Blood, One Race hypothesis.

The solution, he says, is in taking literally what God’s Word says in Genesis. Adam and Eve were literal, not symbolic, people. Noah was a literal person from whom all humans are descended. The flood was a literal flood. It was through the sons of Noah that we derived the various types of people.

If we accept what the Bible says, what does that mean for how we (the Church) act?

We celebrate all are one in Adam and in Noah.

Also, we celebrate that we are one in Christ.

We refuse to allow faulty thinking about race to divide and separate us.

We recognize that all racism is a sin, even in ourselves.

We stop using race as a category. We can talk about ethnicity instead, and then use that point to open up opportunities to get into the Gospel.

We can acknowledge our culture but advance the Kingdom.

One Lord, one faith, one baptism. If we believe that, it should impact how we communicate “out there,” treat people “out there,” and what we expect from people “out there.”

– Dr. Voddie Baucham – One Blood – Sermon Library – 9/30/17

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZ5JZ9MUfKA

Conclusion

We have an opportunity to impact the culture. Let’s seize it!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

Thinking and Communicating Foundationally

I wrote in The Authority of Scripture, that it matters what Christians believe about Genesis.

Genesis Chapters 1 – 11: God’s Eyewitness Account is our sure Foundation.

It also matters that we have a clear understanding of the foundation that Genesis chapters 1-11 provides for the Gospel, and indeed for all aspects of our faith.

Genesis 1:26-28 explains that God created human beings in His image, male & female. In

Genesis 2:20-25, God also defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

Genesis 3:1-24 illustrates how sin and death entered the world, and that we need a Savior to spare us from the consequences of our sins.

Genesis 6:9 – 8:22 narrates the events of the worldwide flood, which explains the existence of the worldwide fossil record.

Genesis 9:18-19 and 10:1-32 show that there is only one race – the human race. We all came from Noah’s sons and daughters-in-law. The modern science of Genetics, via the Human Genome Project, affirms the Bible’s teaching on that.

Genesis 11:1-9 records that all the different people groups were scattered across the earth away from the Tower of Babel, where climate factors such as heat and cold led to the variations in skin tone and other surface characteristics we now observe.

Communicating Between the Competing Foundations.

Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis demonstrated the importance of understanding one’s own Biblical foundation, and of recognizing the different foundation that dominates our culture. He described how to have a calm discussion over some often-heated issues.

Ken gave a speech at the University of Central Oklahoma in front of an audience that included many who were hostile to Ken and his message. Ken took the time gently to explain what he believes and why he believes it. He then acknowledged that people who have the foundation of man’s word instead of God’s word will understandably come to different conclusions about issues such as gender, marriage, and abortion.

He then stressed our common humanity, stating: we are all related. The audience actually applauded that observation!

See: The Relevance of Genesis in a Secular World with Ken Ham for all the details.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPOiy4xtUPM

Teaching the Generations to Think Foundationally

We live in a culture that constantly reinforces the “man’s word” foundation. Our schools, universities, government agencies, public libraries, TV, movies, and social media operate from those assumptions. The culture is openly hostile to God’s word.

We must remain vigilant to spot the atheistic assumptions that are presented as scientific fact, such as Darwinian evolution. We also need to be diligent to teach our kids and grandkids the skeptics’ common objections and the Biblical answers to them. People walk away from the faith when the skeptical objections go unanswered. If the objections go unanswered, they must be true, right?

We need to learn the common objections such as: “Science has proven there is no God;” and “a loving God wouldn’t allow so much evil and suffering.” We also need to learn the Biblically sound answers to those objections. Finally, we need to train our kids and grandkids in how to recognize and respond to the objections.

Conclusion

Our marching orders as Apologists come from 1 Peter 3:15-16, where we are instructed always to be ready with an answer for anyone who asks for the hope we have, and to do so with gentleness and respect.

I think Ken gives us a great example to follow.

Thank you!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

The Inerrancy of Scripture

It matters what Christians Believe About the Inerrancy of Scripture.

John MacArthur of Ligonier Ministries answers the question: “What would you say to a Christian who denies the inerrancy of Scripture?”

See this 9:30 video produced by Genesis Apologetics on the Reliability of Scripture.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAH_-Du2428

MacArthur comes in at roughly the 6:57 mark. He spells out the serious consequences that flow from believing that the Bible is not inerrant:

You are denying God’s own claims for the Bible

You are denying what the Holy Spirit, the author of Scripture, says about Scripture (that all Scripture is given by the inspiration of God; that every word is pure; that Scripture is God-breathed.)

You are denying every time in Scripture that it says “thus says The Lord…”

You are denying the overall superintending power of God over His Revelation.

It says that you are the judge of Scripture. You just made yourself the authority over the Bible. You’re the one we have to trust to tell us what’s true and not true in the Bible.

The only reason you deny inerrancy is because there is something in the Bible you don’t like. You’ve then said that “what the Bible says can’t be true.”

Once you’ve broken a link in the chain of Scripture, how do we know that anything in it is true? When the Bible claims inspiration for all of it, and you break that, what do you do? How do you trust any of it?

You could say you don’t believe in the Biblical account of Creation, that you believe in evolution instead. Evolution isn’t in Genesis. the question then becomes If that’s not true, what else isn’t, and who is the person who will tell us what is and isn’t true?

You literally unravel the Scripture if you Deny it’s inerrancy.

What is Biblical Inerrancy?

According to https://www.theopedia.com/inerrancy:

“Inerrancy is the view that when all the facts become known, they will demonstrate that the Bible in its original autographs and correctly interpreted is entirely true and never false in all it affirms, whether that relates to doctrines or ethics or to the social, physical, or life sciences.”[1] The conservative evangelical stance on inerrancy was most recently and thoroughly articulated in 1978 in the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy.

For a longer exploration of Biblical inspiration and inerrancy, see:

https://answersingenesis.org/is-the-bible-true/why-should-we-believe-in-the-inerrancy-of-scripture/

Conclusion

As Apologists, we are called on always to be ready with an answer (1 Pet. 3:15). I think readiness includes having a firm grasp on why we have the confidence that we have in God’s Word.

Thank you!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

The Authority of Scripture

It matters what Christians believe about Genesis.

Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis (A.I.G.) has helped me understand why it matters whether or not Christians believe what Genesis says about the creation of the heavens and the earth.

Do we accept God’s eyewitness testimony about His creation, or do we allow man’s interpretation to rule instead?

The Devil led Adam and Eve to sin by questioning God’s word. “Did God really say…?”

The Devil is still using what Ken calls a Genesis 3 attack on God’s word. Now he is getting us to question whether God really created the world in six 24-hour days.

He is very cleverly using the words of scientists to intimidate us with the false dichotomy of “God or Science.” Nobody wants to be branded as “anti-science.”

Our schools have adopted the religion of atheistic naturalism. Darwinian macro-evolution is taught as if were scientifically proven. The Bible is characterized as mythology. These factors no doubt contribute to the 60%+ attrition rate of our young people abandoning the faith.

If Christians accept the Darwinian assertion that the earth is millions of years old, we are telling our children that we don’t trust God’s word on the subject of the creation. We should not be surprised that they have stopped trusting the rest of scripture.

Answers in Genesis has answers to the skeptics’ questions about creation.

We need to equip our kids with answers to the questions asked by those who are hostile to God.

According to the A.I.G. website https://answersingenesis.org/

“Answers in Genesis is an apologetics (i.e., Christianity-defending) ministry, dedicated to enabling Christians to defend their faith and to proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ effectively. We focus particularly on providing answers to questions surrounding the book of Genesis, as it is the most-attacked book of the Bible. We also desire to train others to develop a biblical worldview, and seek to expose the bankruptcy of evolutionary ideas, and its bedfellow, a “millions of years old” earth (and even older universe).”

A.I.G. produces and disseminates comprehensive research. It employs or otherwise collaborates with a wide range of scientists, including Dr. Georgia Purdom (PhD in molecular genetics – Ohio State University) Dr. Gabriela Haynes (Ph.D. in Geology/Paleontology – Federal University of Ceará State in Brazil), and Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson (PhD in cell and developmental biology -Harvard University).

Please check out Ken’s presentation: “Communicating the Christian Message in a Secularized Culture,” where he gives a succinct explanation of the new obstacles our culture poses to preaching the Gospel in it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GiRcY08hMg0&t=1483s

Conclusion

There are scores of Godly men and women toiling in the Apologetics vineyard. A.I.G. is tending one of the rows that, in my opinion, has been somewhat neglected.

I encourage you to add their ministry to your list of resources.

Thank you!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

Christmas Myths Old and New

Mike Winger of BibleThinker.org is doing yeoman work combatting myths about Christmas.

Old Myths that Will Not Die

Here’s his YouTube video in which he takes on “the usual suspects,” i.e., those myths that we have to refute every year:

Is Christmas PAGAN? In defense of Christmas.

“Is Jesus just a rehashed pagan deity? Is December 25th the birthday of pagan gods? Christmas trees are pagan? Where did Santa come from? Is there anything wrong with celebrating Christmas? What is the REAL threat to Christmas today?”

Mike provides accurate information about Mithras and Horus and Dionysus, pagan deities that some Atheists claim were the model for Jesus. Unlike the New Testament documentary evidence for Jesus, there are no actual ancient sources for these myths.

Even the specific claims about these deities show they don’t parallel the virgin birth of Jesus.

December 25^th is not the Roman celebration of Saturnalia. Saturnalia isn’t remotely like the celebration of Christmas, for that matter.

No, the Bible doesn’t forbid us from celebrating feasts/holidays beyond the ones specifically mentioned in the Old Testament.

Christmas trees are not pagan.

A New Myth

Here’s his video posted on 12/17/18 in which he takes on a more recent myth, namely, that Christmas Trees are frowned upon all the way back in the book of Jeremiah:

Christmas Trees Are Not in The Bible:

“When we read Jeremiah 10 in context it is obvious that it is not about Christmas trees or anything like it.”

Mike says that the context of Jeremiah 10 is clearly about the practice of idolatry. The ideas of Christmas trees didn’t exist back in the times of Jeremiah. Mike notes that the people pushing this idea are trying to take a modern idea and force-fit it back into the Old Testament.

Timeless Wisdom

Pastor Greg Laurie said it well: “Text without context can be a dangerous pretext.”

I encourage you to check out each video and then discuss them with family and friends. Doing so can help prevent the Grinch from messing with your Christmas joy!

I also encourage everyone to subscribe to Mike Winger’s YouTube channel, Bible thinker – Clearly Teaching and Defending Biblical Truth.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7u2HaYBKDaLPcWmldxgGEA

Merry Christmas!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

Objective Morality? Not Without God!

Many Atheists are also moral relativists who believe there is no objective standard of morality, i.e., right and wrong. There is a strong, logical case for the existence of objective morality. Once an Atheist recognizes that there is objective morality, he then grasps at any possible reason to continue denying God’s existence.

One argument they try is that the objective morality simply evolved in our DNA as humans themselves evolved.

Apologists Discuss the Atheistic Views About Objective Morality

I was prompted to ask some other Apologists about the validity of Atheists’ arguments.

Below is a thread from a private discussion group for graduates of the Cross-examined Instructors Academy on December 7 & 8, 2018, between Vada Hedgeman and yours truly.

1. (My first post): My son Ryan is an Apologist. He enjoys talking with his fellow Millennials who are Atheists. He gets push-back on his argument that the existence of the Moral Law is necessarily proof of God. What are some strong replies to the assertion that the Moral Law that is in each of us could have gotten there via evolution?

2. Vada Hedgeman (a fellow group member who lives in L.A.) replied: Well, in those topics I tend to listen to the Atheist’s position (whether they claim evolution or something else) because none of their answers explain why it’s not just a matter of opinion.

Every argument that I’ve ever heard, even the really good ones still leave me with this question “but why is it wrong if I were to disagree with that view and kill anyway? It’s still just a matter of opinion, correct?”

And it always is…. I was reading an article from an Atheist this week on this topic and it was pretty good but it just didn’t answer all of the questions. At the end of the day, it’s all just a matter of opinion in the Atheist view. Even if they say the strongest argument ever – it’s just their opinion at the end of the day unless we have a lawmaker who is telling us that murder/rape etc. is wrong.

Our very own Frank Turek (President of Cross-Examined) had a good interaction on this topic with Christopher Hitchens:

Here are a couple concise articles…. I got it from cross-examined because I like the way they concisely approach this topic

https://crossexamined.org/objections-objective-morality/

https://crossexamined.org/312/

3. (My reply to Vada): Thank you for your very thoughtful reply! Here’s a different objection from the Atheist: “OK, I agree there is a moral law that is part of our DNA. I just think that the moral law component of our DNA simply evolved and wasn’t put there by God.”

4. (From Vada): Well, my response would be that I didn’t say its part of our DNA… what makes them believe that moral law is part of our DNA?

Show me some proof of evidence that morality comes from DNA. And I’d hate to keep sending CrossExamined articles, but it just so happens I got a lot of info on this particular subject from CrossExamined. This article response to that exact objection, brother:

https://crossexamined.org/does-our-morality-come-from…/

5. (My reply to Vada) that DNA article was spot on! I think it will give Ryan exactly the response he needs. Bless you, my brother!

Can our Morality Come from Material (Our DNA)?

The article Vada sent to me was written by Neil Mammen, a circuit design engineer who lives in Silicon Valley. It does a good job of dismantling the argument that the moral law inherent in everyone could have come from material, i.e., our DNA. Here’s the coup de grace:

But here’s the problem I see with the DNA theory: If DNA is the source of our morality then can anyone really say that something is ACTUALLY wrong? Why is slavery wrong? After all, for most of the history of the human race, the majority of the human race and human cultures have felt and believed that slavery was acceptable (as long as THEY weren’t the slaves).

Please go read the full article.

Michael Oswald
michael@msochartered.com
http://www.msochartered.com
Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

Equipping the Next Generation

I attended the Cross-Examined Instructors Academy 2018 (“CIA”) in Dallas last week. Frank Turek and his team really know how to put on a high-impact event!

Let’s All Help Equip Parents to Equip Their Kids.

I came away with crystal clarity that the highest Return On Investment for Apologists is for us to equip parents to equip their children to learn the Bible and confidently explain the reasons for the faith. This will go a long way toward reversing the heart-breaking trend of 60%+ of Christian kids leaving the faith after high school.

Natasha Crain’s Solution.

Natasha Crain, http://christianmomthoughts.com/, focuses on Christian Parenting. She told her story of starting a blog six years ago. She didn’t even know what Apologetics was at that time, but after getting hostile posts from several skeptics, she learned!

Natasha explained how our failure to learn Apologetics and teach it to our kids has resulted in the above-mentioned loss of 60%+ of our kids. If we don’t teach them the truth and teach them how to spot the lies that skeptics use, we leave them vulnerable. We need to prepare them in advance for the attacks that are coming.

Now, she helps parents bridge the gap between what Apologetics is, why it is important, and how to teach their kids. She helps parents respond to the challenges from skeptics. She observed that intellectual-sounding questions from skeptics cause kids to leave Christianity if they aren’t equipped to respond.

She has developed a 5-step method for parents to use in equipping their kids:

Commit to continually deepening their own understanding of Christianity and other world views such as Atheism.

Use teachable moments that come along AND create teachable moments of their own. Doing more of Step #1 creates more moments. Set aside 30 minutes each week to grow together as a family.

Study the Bible with their kids.

Regularly ask their kids what questions they have about Christianity. Parents needn’t fear questions, because Christianity is true!

Ask their kids the tough questions they aren’t asking the parents.

Proliferating the Solution.

Natasha just announced the Grassroots Apologetics for Parents (GAP) ministry she and her team are launching this fall. they have 40 chapters of GAP rolling out internationally in the pilot.

See here for more information: https://www.womeninapologetics.com/gap-program-kicks-off-this-fall/

How Can You Help Equip the Next Generation?

Please share this blog post with your networks of fellow Christ-followers.

Please also share news of other efforts that are focused on equipping parents to equip their kids.

Thank you!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

What Would You Like me to Learn at Apologetics Training?

I am looking forward to participating in the upcoming Cross-Examined Instructors Academy 2018 (“CIA”). https://crossexamined.org/what-is-cia/

I will have the opportunity to train under the guidance of Frank Turek, J. Warner Wallace, Natasha Crain, Sean McDowell, and other top Apologists.

If you had the chance to ask any or all of them some questions on the subject of Apologetics, what would you ask?

What are the challenges from skeptics that you would most like help answering?

I will write one or more articles about this after I get back from Dallas.

Please send your questions and challenges to me at michael@msochartered.com.

Thank you!

Michael Oswald

michael@msochartered.com

www.msochartered.com

Michael Oswald is a follower of Jesus who lives in Boise, Idaho. Unless otherwise specified, the opinions expressed in this article are his own.

How do we Know Christianity is True?

Why the Truth of Christianity Matters.

Parents, do you know how to keep your kids from becoming Atheists when they go off to college? Start training them early on about all the reasons to believe Christianity is true.

Proverbs 22:6 tells us we are to “Train up a child in the way he should go, even when he is old he will not depart from it.”

Training is different from teaching, as J. Warner Wallace wrote in his book Forensic Faith. He used the illustration of preparing for a boxing match. If you are only interested in learning about boxing, you can read a book on the subject. However, once a boxing match has been placed on the calendar, the boxer immediately starts getting into physical and mental condition to win the match.

Think of your child’s first year of college as boxing match. She is going to be in an environment that is openly hostile to the Christian faith. She needs to go through a long process of learning all the reasons to believe that Christianity is true. She also needs to practice the art of responding effectively to things that Atheists often say.

The popular culture is dominated by people who hold the Materialist world view. Entertainment, education, and government all teach that faith is hostile to science and should not be allowed in the public square. They define faith as “blind faith,” or “faith in spite of the evidence.”

Many of the people she will encounter will parrot things they hear popular Atheists such as Prof. Richard Dawkins say. Dawkins (among others) claims that faith is hostile to science. By respectfully asking (1) what do you mean by that? And (2) how did you come to that conclusion? It is possible to get them to realize that Atheism doesn’t have a very solid foundation. See the book Tactics by Greg Koukl for more on using what he calls The Columbo Tactic.

How Can We Know Christianity is True?

Frank Turek is co-author of the book I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist. He says you only have to answer four questions in the affirmative to know that Christianity is True:

Does Truth Exist?

Post-modernists say there is no truth, while making the claim that post-modernism is true.

If someone says there is no such thing as truth, ask them: “Is that a true statement?”

If there is no truth, then anything written by an Atheist can’t be true.

You can’t get away from truth. It is objective and absolute.

Does God Exist?

There is a lot of evidence God exists, including scientific, historical, and logical evidence.

The scientific evidence known as the Big Bang shows that time, space, and matter all had a beginning. There was nothing, and then the entire space-time continuum leapt into existence out of nothing. (In the words of Aristotle, “Nothing is what rocks dream about.”)

Even Atheists admit that time, space, and matter had a beginning. Logic and reason tell you that anything which comes into existence must have a cause (or a creator). Nothing can cause itself to come into being. Therefore, whatever caused time, space and matter to exist must be timeless, space-less, and immaterial. It must also be personal, in order to make the choice to create something. It must also be incredibly intelligent and incredibly powerful to be able to create everything out of nothing.

Are Miracles Possible?

The greatest miracle of all is in the first verse of the Bible – in the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. If this is true, anything else that is not logically impossible is at least possible. Walking on water is easy for God – He created the water! God created life from non-life. He can raise someone from the dead.

Is the New Testament True?

Here is a summary of the reasons we can trust that the New Testament writers were telling the truth. The testimony was:

Eyewitness (the writers were either apostles of Jesus or people who spoke to the apostles and to others who knew Jesus);

Early (written while many other witnesses were available to refute any lies or errors);

Embarrassing (containing unflattering details the authors would not have invented);

Excruciating (some writers were tortured and killed for refusing to recant what they knew to be true about Jesus), and

Expected (the Old Testament contained many prophesies about the Messiah – see Isaiah Chapter 53).

If you are ready to sink your teeth into the evidence for the truth of Christianity, read the book I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist.

Do All Religions Teach the Same Things?

A common myth permeating the secular culture is that all religions basically teach the same things, so Christianity isn’t really the only way to God (or to heaven, or to know the truth).

It is important to know that the different religions do NOT agree with that assertion. The basic beliefs of Pantheism, Islam, (and Materialism, for that matter) differ wildly from the Judeo-Christian worldview.

Further, only Christianity teaches salvation by grace and not by works.

Christian Apologist Ravi Zacharias (a former Hindu who grew up in India) is a master at helping separate fact from fiction in this regard.

I encourage everyone to view this brief (11:46) video with the unfortunate title “Ravi SCHOOLS a Skeptic at Yale University Q&A”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNuYJw_T350&t=134s

This title was selected by the person who posted the clip. It was not one chosen by Ravi or his team at RZIM. I say the title is unfortunate because it is unnecessarily combative. We are called to be winsome Apologists (please see my January 17, 2018 post on that very topic).

In response to the question of “What entitles us to believe that the Christian Faith is the exclusive means to truth?” Ravi first defines truth and what it means to know the truth.

Starting at the 4:15 mark, he explains what makes Jesus unique.

The Gospel meta-narrative is unique. Everything is designed to show that the problem with humanity is not outside ourselves, but inside ourselves. We have lost the purpose for which we were created, namely, to be in relationship with God. Jesus said that the greatest commandment is to love the Lord with all your heart, soul, mind & strength, and love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commands hang all the law and the prophets (in other words, the entire Old Testament). That imperative is unavailable from any other world view. We are made in the imago dei and are of infinite worth. We are all creatures in need of forgiveness.

The four absolutes we look for (evil, justice, love, and forgiveness) are answered in the life, death, crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus. These attributes about Jesus were prophesied, predicted, and exactly fulfilled.

Why does this matter to Americans? Only the Judeo-Christian worldview supports the Declaration of Independence.” Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights”. Pantheism doesn’t say that. Materialism doesn’t say that. Not even Islam says that. Only the Judeo-Christian worldview offers each of us intrinsic worth. Read the Gospel of John for the full story of Jesus.

Atheistic Materialism when taken to its honest and logical outworking ends with all life being nothing more than accident and chance. Even according to Atheist Richard Dawkins we are the products of blind pitiless indifference, machines of accidental happenstance. This logically means that things like morality, self- sacrifice, and justice are made up by humans and are of no real consequence. We know intrinsically that truth can be felt much more deeply by looking honestly at the world around us. We are not accidents of molecules bumping into one another, we are created beings of immense value and are loved by our Creator. Either human life has value and morality is just as real as the air we breathe, or it’s not and it’s just a difference of opinion between those who murder and those who love.

Are Atheists Smarter Than Christians?

Some high-profile Atheists such as Richard (The God Delusion) Dawkins assert that Atheists are smarter than Christians. They start from the assumption that only unintelligent people would believe in a supernatural being. This assumption is rebutted by evidence such as the Christians who have won the Nobel Prize in Physics and Chemistry, led the Human Genome Project, etc., but it sounds plausible and is rarely challenged by journalists who interview Dawkins, et al.

In the latest Tru-ID podcast by Adam Coleman, Adam speaks with fellow Apologist Joel Furches. Starting at the 24:00 mark, Joel explains the importance of having Apologetics in the Churches. Among other things, he addresses studies purportedly linking intelligence in academics to Atheism.

Joel has a background in Psychology and Education. He describes how the education system is set up to reward those who are analytical and to discount those with other learning styles. Joel notes that people don’t think in just one way, so education should target all the ways people think. The people getting left in the dust are the intuiters. Joel notes that the average religious person tends to be more intuitive, while that average Atheist tends to be more analytical.

Joel noted that the higher one goes in education, the more one encounters hostility to religion. Joel asserts that the academy essentially manufactures Atheists.

Apologetics in the church gives the analytical thinkers (Christians and Atheists) something to chew on.

This is one of the most content-rich podcasts I’ve heard since I started paying attention to Apologetics. Joel also addresses the Problem of Evil, about which I will have more to say in my next post.

The podcast is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhSNeqs3yg0

The “Minimal Facts” Approach to the New Testament

How do you respond to a skeptic who asserts that Jesus never existed, or if He did, He certainly never rose from the dead?

Dr. Gary Habermas created an approach to help those skeptics at least be willing to consider that there is reliable historical evidence for the resurrection of Jesus. He dubbed it the “Minimal Facts” approach.

Dr. Habermas developed this method while doing research for his Ph.D. at Michigan State University. He noticed that there are five facts about the resurrection that Biblical scholars (including Atheists and Agnostics) accept as true:

Jesus died.
His disciples believed they saw the risen Jesus.
James the skeptical brother also believed.
Paul the persecutor also believed.
Jesus’s tomb was empty.

I urge you to invest just under an hour to watch him lay out the approach and how he derived it. I think he is a very entertaining and enlightening presenter!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMGLPR5X8MM Part 1 of 2 (29:57)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RISjr29gpaQ Part 2 of 2 (24:07)

Gary Habermas is the Distinguished Professor of Apologetics and Philosophy and chairman, Department of Philosophy and Theology, at Liberty University.

Biblical Justice

Sean McDowell and Thaddeus Williams are professors of Christian Apologetics and Theology, respectively, at Biola University. They recently discussed the vital question of how Christians should think about social justice. Below are the opening and closing portions of their conversation. Please join me in prayerfully considering how to apply this guidance in our daily lives.

(Bonus question: What does “Biola” mean? See the end of this post for the answer.)

“SEAN MCDOWELL: There has been significant focus on “social justice” within the Christian world over the past few years. What is the biblical call to justice?

THADDEUS WILLIAMS: If we take the Bible seriously then justice should be a big deal for us. God does not suggest, He commands that we “Do justice and righteousness, and deliver from the hand of the oppressor him who has been robbed” (Jer. 22:3). Jesus declared his mission to “proclaim good news to the poor… liberty to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed” (Luke 4:18, quoting Isa. 61:1, 2). “Seek justice” (Isa. 1:17) is a clarion call of Scripture, and those who box their ears to that call are simply not living by the Book.

MCDOWELL: When have you seen that lived out well in church history?

WILLIAMS: There is a long, beautiful history of Christians who lived out the biblical call to justice. The early church proclaimed the Gospel in a way that subverted the mutual racism between 1^st century Jews, Samaritans, and Gentiles. They brought reconciliation and real community where there had been hostility and division for centuries.

When Romans tossed their so called “blemished” babies away like garbage—often simply because they were female—our ancient brothers and sisters went to those human dumps, rescued, and raised society’s unwanted as their own cherished sons and daughters. They knew God had rescued and adopted them, so they did the same until the human dumps were no more.

When a plague ravaged the Roman Empire, most people ran for the hills away from the sick and dying. It was counterculture Christians who ran to the bedsides of the plagued (most of them non-Christians who didn’t abide by Christian ethics, sexual or otherwise) to treat them with dignity, getting sick and dying right along with them. (Contrast that with the church’s response to the AIDS crisis in the 1980s!) Then there was Wilberforce, John Newton and the Clapham sect in the UK, along with Fredrick Douglas, Harriet Tubman, and others is the US. Their own experiences of redemption from sin inspired them to abolish the dehumanizing slave-trade. Christians like Charles Octavius Boothe and Dietrich Bonhoeffer used good theology to combat white supremacy. You might not know it from today’s headlines, but this long and biblically propelled justice tradition continues today all over the world.”

“MCDOWELL: If we want to carry forward that biblical justice tradition, should we jump aboard the current “social justice” movement?

WILLIAMS: That’s a massively important question. Of course, it all comes down to what we mean by “social justice.” We should all seek a world forever purged of racism, where justice prevails and greed and tyranny are permanently replaced with compassion and love. But we have to be discerning. Not every movement waving the social justice banner promotes the kind of justice and shalom the Bible calls us to seek.

The problem is not with the quest for justice. The problem is what happens when that quest is undertaken from a framework that is not compatible with the Bible. And this is a very real problem, because the extent to which we unwittingly allow unbiblical worldview assumptions to shape our approach to justice is the extent to which we are inadvertently hurting the very people we seek to help.

A “culture war” model has taken over our culture. I see far more hope in the biblical insight that Jesus destroyed the wall of hostility between Jew and Gentile to make for Himself “one man,” uniting people from every tongue tribe, and nation and making them ambassadors of reconciliation. Family and reconciliation, not inter-group warfare, is the Bible’s model for justice. The church needs to step up and live that out in an obvious and compelling way, to show the watching world the beautiful alternative to mutual destruction.

If we really care about justice—which should be all of us who take the Bible seriously—then, no, we shouldn’t go along with ideologies that promise liberation and peace and only bring more bondage and strife. Instead we should love the oppressed (and love the God who loves the oppressed!) by carrying on the beautiful, biblical justice tradition of the Wilberforces and Tubmans and Boothes of history.”

Please read the whole interview here: http://seanmcdowell.org/blog/how-should-christians-think-about-social-justice

Answer: Bible Institute of Los Angeles. See https://www.biola.edu/about/history