Theology and Apologetics

Feb 18, 2016 by

Augustine

I spend a lot of my day reading and studying Apologetics and Christian Theology. There are a lot of reasons why I find the studies of these two subjects interesting. Theology helps me to better understand the concepts of God and the nature of religious ideas. The Bishop of Hippo, Augustine, defined theology as “reasoning or discussion concerning the Deity.”  Theologians use various forms of analysis and argument (philosophical, ethnographic, historical, spiritual and others) to help understand, explain, test, critique, defend or promote any of myriad religious topics.

I study Apologetics because the Bible commands that all believers:

Be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander. 1 Peter 3:15-16

Christianity is attacked, mocked, ridiculed, and challenged by many people in our society. Many have legitimate questions, while others just have a hatred of all religions, but especially Christianity. In posts to come on this blog, I will expound on these topics and more. I just wanted for now to leave you with a list of book that I am currently reading on Theology and Apologetics. I urge anyone who has questions about Christianity that they want answered honestly to read any one of these books.

Have a Blessed Day

  • What’s So Great About Christianity by Dinesh D’Souza
  • Truth Overruled by Ryan T. Anderson
  • Holy Fire by R.T. Kendall
  • Darwin’s Doubt by Stephen C. Meyer
  • The Moody Handbook of Theology 25th Anniversary Edition by Paul Enns
  • Augustine on the Christian Life by Gerald Bray

 

 

read more

Related Posts

Share This

Christianity once again under attack on college campus.

Apr 13, 2009 by

prayerTwo students were threatened with suspension at the College of Alameda after one of them prayed with an ailing teacher in a faculty office. The students, Kandy Kyriacou and Ojoma Omaga said college officials threatened to suspend them for “disruptive behavior”, holding disciplinary hearings and sending them letters warning that they would be punished if they prayed in the teacher’s office again.

The women sued, citing the violation of their freedom of speech, and a federal judge ruled that the two can go ahead and sue the college,  saying a college student has the right to pray in private outside a classroom.

While studying fashion design and merchandising at the two year college the two students took breaks from class to pray with each other and other students on a balcony. On two occasions the students prayed with teacher Sharon Bell at an office Bell shared with other teachers. The second time another teacher entered the office and told Kyriacou, “You can’t be doing that in here,” and the student stopped praying and left.

Ten days later Kyriacou and Omaga received suspension notices, being accused of praying disruptively in class, although the two never prayed in class or during class. In seeking dismissal of the suit, lawyers for the Peralta Community College District argued that the school was entitled to designate faculty offices as “places for teaching and learning and working,” and not for “protests, demonstrations, prayer or other activities” that would be disruptive.

The students countered that they were being punished for the content of their speech, not its disruptiveness. I do not see how you can lump prayer with demonstrations and protests. How is praying in a private office disruptive? Disruptive to who? The teacher who was praying did not complain and there were no other students in the office.

This is clearly a case of discrimination against Christians on campus. I will bet that Muslims are allowed to pray on campus where ever and whenever they want. Yet when two Christians get together to pray in a private office it is deemed “disruptive” by college officials. A two-faced spokesman for the college said its leaders “respect freedom of speech and the First Amendment.” But that respect obviously does not include Christians at the College of Alameda. I don’t think that one teacher bowing her head in prayer is an endorsement for a particular religion.

As Brad Dacus, president of the Pacific Justice Institute said,

It is alarming that a publicly funded college would seek to suspend and expel students for praying on campus, then dig in its heels to defend an untenable, unconstitutional position.

Amen to that.

read more

British Multicultural society does not include Christians.

Feb 27, 2009 by

taxi Under the guise of moving towards a secular state and a multicultural society, the Christian faith has come under increasing attack in Britain. Ordinary Christians are being discriminated against in the workplace and in public. Examples include a nurse who was suspended for offering to pray for a patient, a teen who was prohibited from wearing a chastity ring in school, a British Airways employee who was prohibited from wearing a cross and a university Christian group that was banned for requiring that members attest to their belief in God. Even former Prime Minister Tony Blair recently let slip that aides warned him to suppress any instinct to bring his faith into public view.

Christians are complaining that instead of a swing towards a secular and multicultural society other faiths are being treated more favorably, primarily Muslims. Some Christians have complained that it is a case of political correctness gone mad. While Muslims can wear a hijab, Christians cannot wear a cross. When Muslims are allowed to pray five times a day in the workplace, Christians cannot even have a simple cross in their prayer rooms. While foot baths for Muslims are being installed in public places, the government voices it’s concerns that the public domain should remain neutral. With Muslim taxi drivers being allowed to refuse fares with alcohol or seeing eye dogs and Muslim store clerks refusing to ring up pork and alcohol sales the government talks of multiculturalism and a secular state. I might add that must the same is taking place in the United States. It is not solely a problem in Britain.

If Britain truly wants a secular state, that is not achieved by bending over backwards for every Muslim demand while at the same time denying Christians the simple right to wear an expression of their faith in the workplace. Simon Barrow, co-director of the theological think tank Ekklesia said that Christians should also be mindful of how they would feel if roles were reversed. He asks, “How would a Christian feel if, for example, a nurse offered them an Islamic prayer?” As a Christian I can answer that by saying that I would be profoundly grateful to anyone who would offer me a prayer, whether it was Islamic or any other religion that believed in God.

I have nothing against Muslims being afforded rights in both the public and private sectors based on their religious beliefs.  But Christians and other religious groups should be afforded those same rights. I do not favor a secular society. Religion has much to offer and should not be shunned and frowned upon. People should not have to hide their religion in fear of offending someone.   Barrow goes on to state that, “People are nervous about overenthusiastic public expression of belief of any kind. There is a great desire for people not to tread on one another’s toes.” If desiring not to tread on one another’s toes results in suppression of peoples rights to express their religion, then I say it is not worth it. What ever happened to “live and let live?” I guess that has been replaced by “political correctness.”

read more