Explore by Topic
Explore by Format
Search Results | 19 results found
Tim Barnett and Greg Koukl explain why the most natural reading of the full corpus of Scripture on Hell supports the church’s historical position of eternal conscious torment and not nonexistence.
We may not know the specific purpose of the suffering in our own lives and the lives of others, but here’s what we do know.
Conditionalists—those who hold to the annihilation of the wicked at the judgment—insist that Jesus’ and John’s descriptions be interpreted in light of other passages, texts they think give an entirely different picture. Fair enough. We’ll take a look at their arguments.
In recent years, opposition to the doctrine of endless punishment by those who are rethinking Hell has gained enough popular momentum that “conditional immortality”—also known as “annihilationism”—has begun to make significant inroads into mainstream Christianity. This trend must be answered and that's what Tim and Greg do in part one of this Solid Ground.
We’re called to love our LGBT neighbors—not a mere toleration of the person, but genuine, heartfelt love. But what does genuine love look like?
Christmas is about Jesus. But what is it about Jesus? How exactly is Jesus the reason for Christmas? The answer to this question lies in the reasons why Jesus came to this world.
Many people think Emperor Constantine invented the deity of Christ in the fourth century, but a look at quotes from the early church fathers shows this is not the case.
Most of us have answered a knock on our door, only to discover a smiling, well-dressed couple—Watchtower publication in hand—standing on the other side, waiting to talk with us about the gospel according to the Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Last month I was asked to speak at a church on the question “Should Christians Embrace Evolution?” The way you answer this question depends entirely on what you mean by evolution. Broadly speaking, evolution can be divided into two categories: microevolution and macroevolution. Microevolution, or small-scale biological change, is obviously true and is virtually accepted by everyone. Macroevolution, on the other hand, is much more controversial.
I recently had the opportunity to speak to a group of youth at a homeschool conference. I am always impressed at the high level of questions I get from homeschoolers, and this event was no exception. After my talk titled “The Truth about Truth,” a young girl asked me why I didn’t use the term “absolute” when describing truth. How could I give a 45-minute talk on truth and not once use the word absolute?