User Menu Search
Close

Who were the responsible parties for the mock trial and condemnation of Jesus?

by Nathan McLatcher, Junior at UM Dearborn

In Jesus’s crucifixion, there is more than enough blame to go around. The Jewish religious leaders plotted against Jesus, seeing him as a heretic and a threat to their power. Pilate believed Jesus was innocent yet had him crucified in a cowardly effort to retain his grip on power. But there’s still blame left to share. When the Jewish crowd accepts condemnation for Jesus’ death, they place the blame on not just themselves, but on all humanity. The various actors in the trial serve not just as characters in a supernatural drama, but as archetypes, showing us the various ways in which the world is blind to Jesus’ message. These include the Romans, the Jews, and everybody. 

  • 8 April 2020
  • Author: Guest Blogger
  • Number of views: 492
  • Comments: 0

Why the Fatherhood of God is Essential to His Nature

by Adam Simnowitz— 

According to the genealogy in Luke 3:38, God was Adam’s Father.  In the Bible, one of the main purposes of genealogies is to show a direct connection to someone who was great such as Abraham or the founder of a tribe such as the twelve sons of Jacob.  In the case of Adam, he had an even greater honor than any of these men (not to mention the rest of humanity) because he did not come from any human but directly from God Himself, the Creator of the heavens and the earth!  The Bible’s teaching about the Fatherhood of God, therefore, is implicit in the creation of Adam. The terms “son” and “Father,” in reference to Adam and God respectively, cannot refer to physical procreation.  Adam had no human parents and God is not human, yet the very Word of God, inspired by the Holy Spirit, uses these terms.  This helps us realize that “son” in reference to Adam – as well as Jesus, which point will be addressed below – and “Father” in reference to God means something other than a biological son and a biological father.  Further, these terms are not metaphors drawn from any son born of a father and mother nor any human father. 

  • 17 February 2020
  • Author: Guest Blogger
  • Number of views: 710
  • Comments: 2

A Brief Perspective on the Third Gospel in the New Testament

by Shane Rife

From the very beginning of his Gospel, Luke communicates a very professional demeanor. He was out to collect facts to thoroughly establish just what went down during the time Jesus was among us. Also, there are reasons to believe that Luke intended to aim his work at all people groups, with more than just a traditional Jewish audience in mind[1]. But beyond that, his Gospel is almost cinematic, communicating feelings through action. Luke communicates the powerful drama of the stories through establishing the scene, then depicting the vivid body language and memorable dialogue of the characters.    


 

            

  • 13 January 2020
  • Author: Guest Blogger
  • Number of views: 619
  • Comments: 1

The legal system should return to the reasonableness of biblical standards.

by Jen Foster

In law, the relationship between criminal intent and culpability is convoluted and inconsistent because the justice system has chosen dubious psychological assumptions to undergird its precedents and statutes. A new framework, scientism, has emerged which attempts to standardize these sometimes contradictory judicial laws through breakthroughs in neuroscience. But rather than justifying the psychological assumptions, comprehensive neuroscience actually requires the justice system to adopt a more biblical framework for culpability in criminal intent.  Psychology has always suffered in the eyes of the law from a lack of hard science. As scientism has emerged as society’s new favorite idol, neuroscience offers psychology a much-needed justification for diminished moral culpability. Unfortunately for psychology, it is only by misrepresenting and twisting facts that they gain scientific strength for their position.
  • 3 October 2019
  • Author: Guest Blogger
  • Number of views: 1236
  • Comments: 1

An academic understanding of scripture falls short with this and other important doctrines.

by Marty Smithhart

When I became a Christian in my 30s, one of the questions I used to ask myself was, "Is the Bible really that confusing? There is no doubt that there are all kinds of views on Christianity, who God is, Islam’s view of God (Allah) and Judaism’s view of Hashem, etc. One thing that really captivated me when I first began to compare and contrast Christianity (the scriptures) with modern Judaism is this point: The scriptures, both Old and New Testament, were written before the Talmudic sages wrote. The Christian texts were written before Talmudic Judaism began codification. Therefore, if you want to know what the Bible says from its earliest point of view, before Talmudic Judaism and its sages, you must use the Christian New Testament. 

  • 15 July 2019
  • Author: Guest Blogger
  • Number of views: 1512
  • Comments: 1
RSS

Article Search

Terms Of UsePrivacy StatementCopyright 2020 by Tao and Tawheed
Back To Top