Follow Us

Call Us

Divinity of Jesus Difficulties | NY Minute

New York Minute

We’re using the “Handbook of Apologetics” by Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli to go over the arguments for the existence of God.  Today, we will be covering the above referenced subject in relation to the existence of God. Dr. Kreeft teaches logic in two major universities, so his arguments tend to be clear, concise and very helpful.

The Difficulty of Understanding Who Jesus Is

Christians ought to realize how difficult, how scandalous, how objectionable, how apparently unbelievable and absurd this doctrine is bound to appear to others. They ought to realize this for two reasons: for apologetic purposes to understand the state of mind of prospective converts; and for purposes of appreciating their own belief in all its astounding character— something that dulls with familiarity.

The difficulty is a double one. First, there is the immediate, instinctive, intuitive shock. Everyone who met Jesus was shocked. No one understood him—his disciples, his enemies, Jews, Gentiles, Greeks, Romans, Sadducees, Pharisees, the pious, the impious, the learned, the unlearned, liberals, conservatives—no one. No one had ever met anyone like Jesus before. “Never has anyone spoken like this” (Jn 7:46).

Second, on the reflective, rational level his claim seems patently absurd. It is the claim of a man who came from a woman’s womb, grew from a baby, got hungry and tired and angry, suffered and died—to be divine! It is not only intuitively shocking, it seems logically self-contradictory. Humans by essence are temporal, finite, fallible and mortal; God by essence is eternal, infinite, infallible and immortal. How can one person have two opposite essences simultaneously? It sounds like a round square.

The Answer

The answer to this latter question required many centuries and many church councils, and can hardly be adequately explained here. But we note that it is not a simple self-contradiction to say that one person can have two natures, though it is a simple self-contradiction to say that that person is both one person and two persons, or one nature and two natures, at the same time. There is even something of an analogy in ourselves—we are both material and immaterial, spatial and nonspatial, visible and invisible—for we are both body and soul.

Our argument for the truth of this doctrine consists of two steps. The first step is preliminary and consists of six clues. These clues merely show the possibility of God becoming man. The second step attempts to demonstrate that this actually happened in Jesus. In other words, the second step will be so unfashionably ambitious as to attempt to demonstrate that Jesus is indeed God and do so by rational, logical, philosophical argument.

Share This:
Evolution: Science Fable, or fact?

Evolution: Science Fable, or fact?

This hilarious video on evolution illustrates the absurdity of the Theory of Evolution and the consequences that follow.  On evolution, you have no significant value or meaning.


Science Fiction

Science Fiction, Animated Version, by Douglas Wilson. Illustrations and Animations by Mark Beauchamp Edited and compiled by Daniel Foucachon (Roman Roads Media)

Share This:
Think God started Evolution?  Think again!

Think God started Evolution? Think again!

The idea of theistic evolution has come under fire recently and rightfully so.  Several scientists and theologians have worked together to address the idea in a new book called “Theistic Evolution”.  In it, they explain that the storyline of scripture, and scientific facts, are incompatible with evolution for several reasons.  They also explain what the implications of holding this view are.

In the article by Wayne Grudem below, he states the following:

Theistic evolution is a viewpoint that God created matter and after that, God didn’t guide, intervene, or act directly to cause any empirically detectable change in the natural behavior of matter until all living things had evolved by purely natural processes.


But, what that belief implies is that there are actually twelve details in Genesis 1-3 that simply didn’t happen. If you hold to theistic evolution (in the most common form in which it is held today), you would say:


  1. Adam and Eve were not the first human beings, and perhaps Adam and Eve never even existed.
  2. Adam and Eve were born from human parents.
  3. God didn’t act directly or specially to create Adam out of dust from the ground.
  4. God didn’t act directly to create Eve from a rib taken from Adam’s side.
  5. Adam and Eve were never sinless human beings.
  6. Adam and Eve did not commit the first human sins because human beings were doing morally evil things long before Adam and Eve existed.
  7. Human death did not begin as a result of Adam’s sin because human beings existed long before Adam and Eve and they were always subject to death.
  8. Not all human beings have descended from Adam and Eve for there were thousands of other human beings on the earth at the time that God chose two of them and called them Adam and Eve.
  9. God did not directly act in the natural world to create different kinds of fish, birds, and land animals.
  10. God did not rest from his work of creation or stop any special creative activity after plants, animals, and human beings appeared on the earth.
  11. God never created an originally very good natural world—a safe environment, free of thorns, thistles, and other harmful things.
  12. After Adam and Eve sinned, God did not place any curse on the world that changed the workings of the natural world, making it more hostile to mankind.

Theistic Evolution

Theistic Evolution: J. P. MorelandStephen C. MeyerChristopher ShawAnn K. GaugerWayne Grudem

This volume of more than two dozen essays written by highly credentialed scientists, philosophers, and theologians from Europe and North America provides the most comprehensive critique of theistic evolution yet produced, opening the door to scientific and theological alternatives.

 Those are twelve events in Genesis 1-3 that the Bible records as historically accurate, truthful events, but that are denied by advocates of theistic evolution.
You can watch it explained here:


No Description

Share This:
Gospel contradictions as a source of confidence?

Gospel contradictions as a source of confidence?

Can multiple eyewitness accounts be the key to getting the truth?

As you watch the video below, ask yourself these questions:

If many people are eyewitnesses to an event, does that mean that their stories must be identical?  Do their stories have to match verbatim?

I would emphatically say no.  Now, their stories can’t contradict themselves and be true, but they can vary in what they focus on.


Why, or why not?

Just to let you know, this happens everyday and you don’t think twice about it!  And, this is why there are many different newspapers that cover a single event.  Each reporter is watching and listening to the same event, yet each article they write is somewhat different than the other reporter. 

There are many sports reporters that watch and report on professional football, yet each one sees the game from his own perspective.  One may concentrate on how the offense was dominant, another might describe the defense as being weak, but neither view is a contradictory account.

Each differing view actually adds helps us understand what actually happened.  If all we had was one account, we would have a much less robust understanding of what actually took place.  The more accounts you have, the more pieces of the puzzle you can assemble to complete the picture.  In fact, it is better to have more eyewitnesses than less.  More eyewitnesses lead to more confidence.

And so it is with the gospels.  They are factual accounts of events that happened two thousand years ago from each writer’s different perspective.

Don't the Gospels contradict?

Former homicide detective J. Warner Wallace discusses how the contradictions that may be found in the Gospel accounts only strengthens their reliability rather than decreases it.

Share This:
The Difficulty of Jesus’ Divinity | NY Minute

The Difficulty of Jesus’ Divinity | NY Minute

New York Minute

We’re using the “Handbook of Apologetics” by Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli to go over the arguments for the existence of God.  Today, we will be covering the above referenced subject in relation to the existence of God. Dr. Kreeft teaches logic in two major universities, so his arguments tend to be clear, concise and very helpful.

The divinity of Jesus is crucially important for at least six reasons.


1. The divinity of Christ is the most distinctively Christian doctrine of all. A Christian is most essentially defined as one who believes this. And no other religion has a doctrine that is even similar. Buddhists do not believe that Buddha was God. Muslims do not believe that Muhammad was God: “There is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is his prophet.”


2. The essential difference between orthodox, traditional, biblical, apostolic, historic, creedal Christianity and revisionist, modernist, liberal Christianity is right here. The essential modernist revision is to see Christ simply as the ideal man, or “the man for others”; as a prophet, rabbi, philosopher, teacher, social worker, psychologist, psychiatrist, reformer, sage or magician—but not God in the flesh.

3. The doctrine works like a skeleton key, unlocking all the other doctrinal doors of Christianity. Christians believe each of their many doctrines not because they have reasoned their own way to them as conclusions from a theological inquiry or as results of some mystical experiences, but on the divine authority of the One who taught them, as recorded in the Bible and transmitted by the church.

If Christ was only human, he could have made mistakes.

Thus, anyone who wants to dissent from any of Christ’s unpopular teachings will want to deny his divinity. And there are bound to be things in his teachings that each of us finds offensive—if we look at the totality of those teachings rather than confining ourselves to comfortable and familiar ones.

4. If Christ is divine, then the incarnation, or “enfleshing” of God, is the most important event in history. It is the hinge of history. It changes everything. If Christ is God, then when he died on the cross, heaven’s gate, closed by sin, opened up to us for the first time since Eden. No event in history could be more important to every person on earth than that.

5. There is an unparalleled present existential bite to the doctrine. For if Christ is God, then, since he is omnipotent and present right now, he can transform you and your life right now as nothing and no one else possibly can. He alone can fulfill the psalmist’s desperate plea to “create in me a clean heart, O God” (Ps 51:10). Only God can create; there is even a special word in Hebrew for it (bara’).

6. And if Christ is divine, he has a right to our entire lives, including our inner life and our thoughts. If Christ is divine, our absolute obligation is to believe everything he says and obey everything he commands. If Christ is divine, the meaning of freedom becomes conformity to him.

Share This:
The Divinity of Jesus | NY Minute

The Divinity of Jesus | NY Minute

New York Minute

We’re using the “Handbook of Apologetics” by Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli to go over the arguments for the existence of God.  Today, we will be covering the above referenced subject in relation to the existence of God. Dr. Kreeft teaches logic in two major universities, so his arguments tend to be clear, concise and very helpful.

Huston Smith notes, in The World’s Religions, that only the people ever astounded their contemporaries so much that the question they evoked was not “Who is he?” but “What is he?” They were Jesus and Buddha. The answers these two gave were exactly opposite. Buddha said unequivocally that he was a mere man, not a god—almost as if he foresaw later attempts to worship him. Jesus, on the other hand, claimed in many ways to be divine.

The problem of Jesus’ identity emerges from the data. The data are the four Gospels, which inform us about the claims he made about himself and the claims others made about him. In all four Gospels the claim is shockingly strong. (See Some Scriptural Data For Christ’s Claim to Divinity.)

Jesus’ Claims

Jesus called himself the “Son of God”—that is, of the same nature as God. A son is of the same nature, the same species, the same essence, as his father. Jesus called God his Father: “I and the Father are one” (Jn 10:30) and “Whoever has seen me has seen the Father” (Jn 14:9).

He also claimed to be sinless: “Which of you can convict me of sin?” He claimed to forgive sins—all sins, against everyone. The Jews protested: “Who can forgive sins but God alone?” They were much more clear-thinking theologians than the modernists, who “nuance” this claim. The only one who has the right to forgive all sins is the only One who is offended in all sins, namely, God. I have a right to forgive you for your sins against me, but not for your sins against others.

Jesus claimed to save us from sin and death. He said, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will never die.” He said he had come from heaven, not just earth, and that he would return again from heaven at the end of the world to judge everyone. Meanwhile, he gave us his flesh to eat, and said that this would give us eternal life.

Jesus changed Simon’s name to Peter. For a Jew, changing names was something only God could do, for your name was not just a human, arbitrary label, but your real identity, which was given to you by God alone. In the Old Testament, only God changed names, and destinies—Abram became Abraham, Sarai became Sarah, Jacob became Israel. An orthodox Jew who got his name legally changed was excommunicated.

Jesus kept pointing people to himself, saying “Come unto me.” Buddha said, “Look not to me; look to my dharma (doctrine).” Buddha also said, “Be ye lamps unto yourselves.” Jesus said, “I am the light of the world.”

Buddha, Confucius, Muhammad and other religious founders performed no miracles and did not rise from the dead. Jesus offered his many miracles and his resurrection as evidence for his divinity.

The Conclusion

Most clearly and shockingly of all, he invited crucifixion (or stoning) by saying: “Very truly, I tell you [i.e., I am not exaggerating or speaking symbolically here; take this in all its force], before Abraham was, I am” (Jn 8:58). He spoke and claimed the sacred name that God revealed to Moses, the name God used to name himself (Ex 3:14). If he was not God, no one in history ever said anything more blasphemous than this; by Jewish law, no one ever deserved to be crucified more than Jesus.

Who then was Jesus, really?

You cannot even ask the question without implicitly choosing among answers. The very wording of the question, in the past tense (“Who was Jesus?”) or the present (“Who is Jesus?”), presupposes its own answer. For those who believe his claim do not say that he was divine, but is divine. Divinity does not change or die or disappear into the past. Furthermore, if he really rose from the dead, he still is, and is very much alive today.

Share This: