Summit Lecture Series

The Trinity
In a matter of 45 minutes, Dr. Michael Bauman of Hillsdale College tackles the doctrine of the Trinity and the process by which it was accepted into modern Christian faith. Beginning with the Council of Nicea in 325 AD and working his way to the Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD, Dr. Bauman delineates the problems the early church faced when attempting to understand how the God of the Old Testament is the same as the God of the New Testament. He specifically addresses the arguments brought forth by Arius, Usebius, Apollinarius, Nestorius, and Eutychus, but he quickly emphasizes that the methods the Bishops used to analyze such arguments were faulty and finite, therefore limiting their understanding of the nature of the God of the Bible. In so doing, he points students toward a more accurate and historically correct way of viewing God and His character, thereby allowing the idea of a triune God to be considered fairly and logically.

Context Relativism
Gregory Koukl (Stand to Reason and Biola University) unashamedly but tactfully addresses a controversial issue within the church today. Asking listeners to make a commitment to consider his argument, he opens by giving three examples of how Christians not only misapply what they read in the Scriptures, but more specifically how they misread the Bible altogether. He then gives copious Biblical support for this claim, showing how the ideas of Post-Modernism have subtly crept their way into the practices of Christians. But he doesn’t end there; he offers listeners tips on how to avoid this error. In order to make sure that the different methods are fully understood, he finishes by walking through multiple passages of Scripture, showing how to read the text the way it was originally intended to be read.

The Journal

2004-04 Summit Journal
Journal - April 2004

2003-12 Summit Journal
Journal - December 2003

Essays

Is Belief in Jesus Necessary? (via Equip)
Proponents of a view known as inclusivism argue that while no one is saved apart from the redemptive work of Jesus, it is not necessary either to know about the gospel or to believe in Jesus for salvation. Inclusivism eliminates the problem that those who haven’t heard the gospel will not be saved, but this feature does not mean that inclusivism is true or biblical. Paul, in fact, taught in Romans 1–3 that while general knowledge about a Creator is available to all through the light of creation, this knowledge does not bring about salvation. Only special revelation about God, sin, Jesus, and salvation that was given to the prophets and apostles and recorded in the Bible provides the information necessary for salvation. Inclusivists argue that the content of faith is not crucial and that the unevangelized may even be saved while practicing their non-Christian religions. Paul said in Romans 10:9–10, however, that knowledge of true information is part of saving faith. Paul also clearly said that neither he nor the unbelieving people to whom he preached were saved before believing in Jesus Christ. Inclusivists argue that if God saves infants and the mentally incompetent, who die never having come to faith in Jesus, then He can save the unevangelized. This view, however, ignores the fact that the unevangelized are accountable for their sin while infants and the mentally incompetent are not. Inclusivists also point to Old Testament believers as an example of saved people who did not know about Jesus, but just because they did not have explicit knowledge of Jesus does not mean they had no special revelation at all such as the unevangelized. The inclusivist view that those who have never heard the gospel will be saved has a serious, negative effect on Christian missions. In light of these and other problems, inclusivism should not be considered an acceptable option for Christians.

Is Jesus the Only Savior? (via Equip)
Historic Christianity says Jesus is the only Savior and belief in Him is the only hope for salvation (John 14:6). This exclusive view has been challenged in recent years by a view known as pluralism, which says there are many paths to God or Ultimate Reality. Pluralists such as John Hick, however, have put forth arguments that contain numerous difficulties for their own view. If, for example, God is all-loving, as pluralists have argued, then this means that religions that view God as nonpersonal are false, since to be loving is to be personal. If pluralists respond that we really can’t know what God is like, then this contradicts their claim to know that God is all-loving. Pluralists also accuse Christian exclusivists of being intolerant, but if intolerance means disagreeing with someone’s view, then pluralists are also intolerant since they disagree with exclusivists. Pluralism, furthermore, seeks to empty all religions of objective truth claims. Anyone who would embrace pluralism, therefore, will have to abandon basic tenets of his or her own faith. Pluralism has been a philosophical failure and, hence, should not be embraced.

How to Interpret Your Bible Correctly (Part 2) (via Equip)
Two factors affect how we interpret the Bible. They are our preunderstanding and presuppositions and the principles of communication and understanding. Our preunderstanding includes anything and everything we understand, believe, or assume before we study the Bible. Like a pair of glasses, we see everything through our preunderstanding, which does not mean that it is impossible to be objective. The universal aspects of our preunderstanding make objectivity possible, at least in principle. Because we have these universal aspects in common with the biblical authors, correct interpretation is also possible. We need to be aware of our preunderstandings, however, to guard against incorrect interpretation. We also need to submit our preunderstanding to biblical truth in order to let God’s Word correct any false ideas that are peculiar to us as individuals. n Two principles of communication and understanding that govern the way all people communicate are “the universal nature of truth” and “the unity of human nature.” The fact that truth is objective and the laws of logic are inescapable indicate that truth is the same for everyone — that is, truth is universal. The fact that humanity is one race with one kind of mind means that it is possible to understand universal truths written in biblical times, even though the cultural expressions of those truths may differ.

How to Interpret Your Bible Correctly (Part 1) (via Equip)
As a student of the Bible you have probably encountered someone who disagrees with your interpretation of a passage. That person may be a cultist, a member of another Christian denomination, or even another member of your own church or family. When a debate over the meaning of a passage can’t be settled, often someone says, “That’s just your interpretation,” or, “No one really knows what this means, so let’s just agree to disagree.” It is true that we should hold our interpretations with humility, but we must not settle for anything less than the correct interpretation of the Bible, since it is the very Word of God. In principle, it is possible to have a correct interpretation of the Bible (to argue otherwise is self-defeating), but this doesn’t guarantee that we will discover it. In practice, we must use sound principles of interpretation in order to know what the Bible means. These sound principles of interpretation are known as the grammatical-historical method. This simply means that we understand the meaning of the words and sentences of the Bible according to the way they were normally used by the speakers of the language, and in their historical context. To do this we must interpret the Bible in light of five factors: its original languages, its historical/cultural setting, its kinds of literature, the principles of communication and understanding, and our own preunderstandings and presuppositions. Each of these factors plays a significant role in good Bible study. By learning how to apply the basic principles of interpretation we can understand and interpret the Bible correctly.

Playing with FIre (Part 4) (via Boundless)
I was staring into the open grave of my son Christopher. It was an unspeakably painful moment. The nightmare all parents dread had become my life. Had I been physically able to muster more tears, I would have been weeping uncontrollably. As I watched four men struggle to lower a steel lid over the grave vault holding Christopher’s miniature white casket, I realized I would see his little smiling face no more, and run my fingers through his beautiful blond hair never again. We would never snuggle together or touch one another again. Our time together was over. As I stood there, looking into what felt like an abyss, I realized that I was in the most despairing, skeptical, and faithless state I had ever been in. I felt like cursing God for the rest of my life. I was on the edge of the dark, bottomless pit of hell...

Playing with FIre (Part 3) (via Boundless)
“Never Read a Bible Verse!” That’s the title of a little booklet my friend and Christian radio personality, Gregory Koukl, has written to help people read the Bible well. What great advice. “That’s right, never read a Bible verse. Instead, always read a paragraph — at least.” But the current is flowing the other way in our popular sound-bite culture. Not to be left out (or left behind!), the Church has its own version of sound-bite culture: verse-bite culture. In verse-bite culture we take a sentence or sentence-fragment from a biblical paragraph, memorize it out of context, write it on a little card, put it on a billboard, a plaque, a rock, etc. Somehow we think that just because this little chunk of Scripture has a verse number in front of it, it was meant to be a free-standing unit of thought. Nothing could be further from the truth...

Playing with FIre (Part 2) (via Boundless)
“INDIANS SLAY TIGERS!” — the newspaper headline virtually screams out at you. The thought of something being slain is repulsive. You’re gripped by a mental image of southern India’s Bengal tiger. You imagine its beautiful face, its stripes and piercing eyes. Then your image is shattered by the sudden blast of a high-powered rifle. You see the exquisite creature writhe in pain, fall gracelessly in its tracks and die. Having read no further than the headline, you feel sick, as if you’ve witnessed something tragic. But should you feel this way? The slaughter of an endangered species — especially one as magnificent as the Bengal tiger — is horrifying, no doubt. But suppose you failed to notice that...

Playing with FIre (Part 1) (via Boundless)
As she worked her way toward the front of the room, I could tell the young woman was really angry at me. Her eyes were blazing and her jaw was set. This was surprising because the setting was fairly benign: speaking to a large evangelical church’s singles group on “How to Interpret the Bible.” At the beginning of my two times with them, however, I was already offending the troops! I braced myself...

A Biblical Guide to Orthodoxy and Heresy (Part 2) (via CRI)
How do we discern truth from error, sound doctrine from unsound doctrine, orthodoxy from heresy? How do we discern when a doctrine is fully heretical and when it is only aberrational? In Part One of this two-part article I presented a case for doctrinal discernment as a necessary ongoing task of the church. In this concluding part I will suggest some guidelines for carrying out this task in a way that is faithful to Scripture...

A Biblical Guide to Orthodoxy and Heresy (Part 1) (via CRI)
For most Christians today, the challenge of learning how to discern orthodox from heretical doctrine has apparently not been faced. Either they treat doctrine as minimally important and so regard charges of "heresy" as rude and unloving, or they treat doctrine as all-important and so regard anyone who disagrees with them in the slightest as a heretic. In short, most believers seem to think either that there are almost no heretics or that almost everybody outside their own little group is a heretic.The cause of doctrinal discernment, then, is in serious jeopardy. Although anticult and discernment ministries are mushrooming everywhere, many of them operate on the basis of an excessively narrow understanding of orthodoxy. Consequently, such groups are charged deservedly with...

Seven Tactical Errors Inerrantists Commit
As some see it, the theological foundation of evangelical unity is the fact that the Bible is an inspired book, inerrant in the autographs. Our commitment to the authority and accuracy of the Bible is a belief we value highly, one we desire to share with those outside our circle, and one concerning which we repeatedly endeavor to convince them. Yet, despite our long-term and massive commitment in that direction, despite our meticulous historical , theological and exegetical treatments of the data the yield in number of "converts" to our position remains abysmally meager. In fact, if personal impressions can be trusted, it seems that more defections occur in their direction than in ours. Some of these defections we knowingly and willingly support by official decision. Some we do not. Of the former I shall not speak. But why after we have expended so much effort getting them in the fold — and after getting them there, keeping them there — why do they reject us? "What's wrong with those noninerrantists?" we ask ourselves. "Can't they recognize truth? Don't they know compelling arguments when they see them?"

The Gnostic Gospels (via Equip)
In the first installment of this two-part series, I outlined the stark contrasts between the gnostic Jesus and "the Word become flesh." These respective views of Jesus are lodged within mutually exclusive world views concerning claims about God, the universe, humanity, and salvation. But our next line of inquiry is to be historical. Do we have a clue as to what Jesus, the Man from Nazareth, actually did and said as a player in space-time history? Should such gnostic documents as the Gospel of Thomas capture our attention as a reliable report of the mind of Jesus, or does the Son of Man of the biblical Gospels speak with the authentic voice? Or must we remain in utter agnosticism about the historical Jesus?

Was The New Testament Influenced by Pagan Religions? (via Equip)
uring the first half of the twentieth century, a number of liberal authors and professors claimed that the New Testament teaching about Jesus’ death and resurrection, the New Birth, and the Christian practices of baptism and the Lord’s Supper were derived from the pagan mystery religions. Of major concern in all this is the charge that the New Testament doctrine of salvation parallels themes commonly found in the mystery religions: a savior-god dies violently for those he will eventually deliver, after which that god is restored to life. Was the New Testament influenced by the pagan religions of the first century A.D.?

Was The New Testament Influenced by Pagan Philosophy? (via Equip)
Many college students still encounter outdated charges that first century Christianity and the New Testament were heavily influenced by pagan philosophical systems. Prominent among such claims are the following: (1) elements of Plato's philosophy appear in the New Testament; (2) the New Testament reflects the influence of Stoicism; and (3) the ancient Jewish philosopher Philo was a source of John's use of the Greek word logos as a description of Jesus. Each of these claims may be easily answered, a fact which challenges the badly outdated scholarship that continues to circulate these allegations in books and lectures.

Defending the New Testament Jesus (via Equip)
The historic picture of Jesus is under an intellectual onslaught from radical scholars, popular historians, television documentaries, feature films, bestselling authors, Internet bloggers, Muslim debaters, and atheist think tanks. They are capturing the public’s imagination with a radical new portrait of Jesus that bears scant resemblance to the picture historically embraced by the church; but how persuasive is this new image of Jesus?

The Jesus Seminar (via Equip)
The Jesus Seminar is a group of New Testament scholars who have been meeting periodically since 1985. The initial two hundred has now dwindled to about seventy-four active members. They initially focused on the sayings of Jesus within the four Gospels to determine the probability of His actually having said the things attributed to Him in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Each scholar offered his/her opinion on each "Jesus" statement by voting with...

The Impossible Faith (via Tekton)
Over the years we have collected literally reams of information in defense of the Christian faith. In that time we have dealt with, and made use of, numerous sources informing of the social, literary, and other background of the NT world. Now the time has come to piece together some of these in a general defense of the faith. We have subtitled our piece, "How Not to Start an Ancient Religion." The background here is certain Skeptical claims that Christianity was a movement born of the adage that a sucker is born every minute, and Christianity collected about a year's worth of suckers to start with...

Evidence for the Resurrection (via Leadership U)
For centuries many of the world's distinguished philosophers have assaulted Christianity as being irrational, superstitious and absurd. Many have chosen simply to ignore the central issue of the resurrection. Others have tried to explain it away through various theories. But the historical evidence just can't be discounted. A student at the University of Uruguay said to me. "Professor McDowell, why can't you refute Christianity?" "For a very simple reason," I answered. "I am not able to explain away an event in history--the resurrection of Jesus Christ."

Recent Perspectives on the Reliability of the Gospels (via Equip)
The usual attempts to defend the historical reliability of the New Testament are often fairly general in nature. These arguments are typically based on the quantity, quality, and early date of the available New Testament manuscripts; the traditional authorship of the books; extrabiblical confirmation; and a few archaeological discoveries. This evidence for the trustworthiness of the New Testament is often contrasted with ancient classical Greek and Roman writings, which do not exhibit the same wealth of data. Lesser known among conservative scholars, however, are several, more recent and specific approaches that critical scholars apply to the Gospel texts. One of these approaches involves applying certain critical criteria of authenticity to particular texts, namely, to events and sayings that are reported in the four gospels. These contemporary techniques have mined many gems that indicate the historical richness of the Gospel accounts, while illuminating many aspects of Jesus’ life.

Biblical History (via Equip)
The new criticism of the scriptural record is corrosive and categorical from beginning to end. It claims, for example, that there is no evidence that any such person as Abraham ever lived or even could have lived in its new version of ancient Israelite origins. There was no migration from Mesopotamia to any “Promised Land.” Stories about the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, it argues, were cobbled together out of various bits of early local lore. Moses was no more historically real than Abraham, for there was no Israelite sojourn in Egypt and the Exodus was a fiction; nor did Joshua conquer the “Promised Land,” since the ancient Israelites were an indigenous culture already living in that land. What about the monarchs Saul, David, and Solomon and their regional empires? Surely they were historical, weren’t they? No. According to this revisionism, Jerusalem priests in the eighth and seventh centuries BC probably invented them. In the words of Lazare, if David is historical, he was...

Biblical Archaeology (via Equip)
A Common Flood Story. Not just the Hebrews (Gen. 6–8), but Mesopotamians, Egyptians, and Greeks all report a flood in primordial times. A Sumerian king list from c. 2100 BC divides itself into two categories: those kings who ruled before a great flood and those who ruled after it. One of the earliest examples of Sumero-Akkadian-Babylonian literature, the Gilgamesh Epic, describes a great flood sent as punishment by...

Pro-gay Revisionist Theology (via Focus)
Major denominations ordaining homosexuals, priests and clergy presiding over same-sex weddings, sanctuaries invaded by boisterous gay activists, debates over homosexuality ripping congregations apart, who would have guessed we’d ever reach such a point in church history?

That Which Is Unnatural (via Equip)
The gay rights movement does not just want the right to privacy and to be left alone. Attempting to promote their cause as a civil rights instead of as a moral issue, they want special legal protection for, and cultural acceptance of, their lifestyle. Even many Christian churches have condoned or are sympathetic to homosexuality, ignoring the Bible's teachings concerning our sexuality. In the Old Testament we find heterosexuality to be proclaimed as God's natural order of creation, a teaching Jesus upheld in the New Testament. Biblically, homosexuality is described as both an "abomination" and "unnatural." God calls us to reject sin, but to love and value all people.

Truth & Consequences

Grave Lessons about Application
I was staring into the open grave of my son Christopher. It was an unspeakably painful moment. The nightmare all parents dread had become my life. Had I been physically able to muster more tears, I would have been weeping uncontrollably. As I watched four men struggle to lower a steel lid over the grave vault holding Christopher’s miniature white casket, I realized I would see his little smiling face no more, and run my fingers through his beautiful blond hair never again. We would never snuggle together or touch one another again. Our time together was over. As I stood there, looking into what felt like an abyss, I realized that I was in the most despairing, skeptical, and faithless state I had ever been in. I felt like cursing God for the rest of my life. I was on the edge of the dark, bottomless pit of hell...

Overcoming a Verse Bite-Culture
"Never Read a Bible Verse!" That's the title of a little booklet my friend and Christian radio personality, Gregory Koukl, has written to help people read the Bible well. What great advice. "That's right, never read a Bible verse. Instead, always read...

The Hazards of Reading on a Battlefield
As she worked her way toward the front of the room, I could tell the young woman was really angry at me. Her eyes were blazing and her jaw was set. This was surprising because the setting was fairly benign: speaking to a large evangelical church's singles group on "How to Interpret the Bible." At the beginning of my two times with them, however, I was already offending the troops! I braced myself...

‘Indians Slay Tigers’ and Braking for Genres
"INDIANS SLAY TIGERS!" — the newspaper headline virtually screams out at you. The thought of something being slain is repulsive. You're gripped by a mental image of southern India's Bengal tiger. You imagine its beautiful face, its stripes and piercing eyes. Then your image is shattered by the sudden blast of a high-powered rifle. You see the exquisite creature writhe in pain, fall gracelessly in its tracks and die. Having read no further than the headline, you feel sick, as if you've witnessed something tragic. But should you feel this way? The slaughter of an endangered species — especially one as magnificent as the Bengal tiger — is horrifying, no doubt. But suppose you failed to notice...

Fact Sheets

History & Scripture