In his letter to the Christians in Rome, Paul describes a certain level of human activity as “inexcusable” (Rom. 1:20). Does this imply that some conduct, even that which is bad, is “excusable”?

When does one’s expressions of belief become “politically incorrect”? Cartoonist, Johnny Hart, had to answer this question when his recent “B.C.” “Easter” comic strip portrayed an extinguished menorah turning into a cross.

Alan Dershowitz praised Jesus very highly as an enlightened Jewish rabbi, then added: “He’s just not my Messiah.”

Was Jesus of Nazareth the “suffering servant” of whom the prophet Isaiah spoke in Chapter 53 of his book? The modern Jews says, “No.” Rather, it frequently is argued that the Jewish people in general are in view. What are the facts of this matter?

What role does the nation of Israel play — past and present — in the plan of God? Does their illustrious past have any relevance today or in the future?

It Christ’s genealogy important in establishing his identity as Messiah? Consider the evidence.

In the course of Jesus’ exchange with the woman at the well, Jesus actually violated three cultural traditions of His day. In so doing, however, the Lord demonstrated the encompassing interest of Heaven in lost humanity.

Many dismiss the authority of Paul as an apostle by accusing him of injecting cultural norms of the first century into his instructions to the churches? Is this a legitimate argument against his apostolic authority?

Though the age of miracles has passed, God is not silent in the activities of mankind, but orchestrates his will on earth—through providence. The Old Testament account of Esther provides a thrilling view of how God works in this way.

This article examines archaeological evidence confirming facts presented in the Bible.

In a letter to the church at Corinth, Paul affirmed that “the natural man does not receive the things of God.” Some allege that this text suggests that one cannot understand the Scriptures without direct guidance from the Holy Spirit. But, as Wayne Jackson demonstrates in this article, this view reflects a misunderstanding of the apostle’s argument.

This article addresses a sectarian argument that attempts to justify sprinkling as a substitute for immersion.

The interesting land of Israel plays a prominent role in the coming of Christ.

Many fail to appreciate the mysterious operation of divine providence. Paul was quite aware of it.

One of the most controversial contexts in the book of Acts has to do with Paul’s activity in the Jerusalem temple, as recorded in Acts 21. Did the apostle violate the law of God in “purifying” himself in that ritual? Some so claim, but is this a necessary conclusion?

Christianity is viewed by promoters of hate and bigotry as an obstacle. Atheism, however, is not.

Some argue that John the Baptist’s teaching – that it was not lawful for Herod to have his brother’s wife (Mk. 6:18) – establishes a New Testament example of how someone today may be required to leave his wife.

On his way to Golgotha, Christ addressed a group of Jerusalem’s weeping women, and asked: “For if they do these things in a green tree, what shall be done in the dry?” What is the meaning of this mysterious “green tree” saying?

In the spring of A.D. 30, three men were crucified just outside the city of Jerusalem. A consideration of the historical facts associated with each is rewarding indeed.

Sincere Roman Catholics, and some Protestants, allege that Paul uttered a prayer on behalf of a deceased brother in Christ. Is there merit in this allegation. There is not. Study this with us.