The conversion of Paul is one of the most demanding pieces of evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus. But is the Resurrection hypothesis the only valid explanation?
If the idea of a physical resurrection was a strictly Jewish belief, were they expecting a risen messiah or something else entirely?
From where did the belief in a physical Resurrection come from? Could we trace its origin to pagan roots or was it unlike anything else in antiquity?
Some critics have raised the objection that Jesus’ appearance to the apostle Paul on Damascus Road was purely spiritual or visionary in nature. Does this mean Christ’s Resurrection appearances in the Gospels were spiritual also?
In 1 Corinthians 15 is Paul teaching a spiritual, non-physical Resurrection? If so, does that mean the Gospel accounts are products or later, legendary embellishment?
The Resurrection of Jesus Christ is the centrepiece of Christianity. We can posit, with a number of arguments, that a god can theoretically exist, but the Resurrection of Jesus is what takes us to Christianity. Can the Resurrection be historically proven beyond a reasonable doubt, or is our faith nothing more than baseless superstition? Let’s begin our look into the most important historical investigation of all-time.
The right way to evangelize is a rightly oft-discussed topic but, in hopes of finding the right answer, we’ve made more than a few grievous mistakes along the way. One of the more alarming misunderstandings derives from Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 9:19. Is Paul giving us a licence to compromise in order to save the lost?
We’ve examined and defended many of the divine claims made by Jesus Christ in the Gospel accounts and now it’s time to put them into context. Why did Jesus Christ come to earth and what did He come to accomplish?
They say the Christian life is a life filled with joy. But what about when we don’t feel joy?
The heart of Christian theology centers around the person of Jesus Christ. John 3:16 says that if we would confess and believe that Jesus Christ is Lord, died on the cross for our atonement, and rose from the grave, we would be saved. However, before we can begin to defend the truth of the Christian faith we need to first ask if Jesus really was who He and His followers said He was.
If the laws of the OT have been superseded in Jesus Christ, does it follow that God changed His mind about which laws should be followed? How we do reconcile the changing of the law if God is the same yesterday, today, and forever?
Do modern translations of the Bible remove verses that teach about the blood of Christ?
Closing our series on the harmonization of the Old Testament law we take a look at a common objection by the critics. If the Bible isn’t relevant to us today, does that mean it isn’t the Word of God?