by Dr. Jason Lisle | Oct 23, 2026 | Theology
In Genesis 6:1-4, we read that the sons of God took wives from the daughters of men. The offspring were called Nephilim and became mighty men of renown. In the previous article, we searched the Scriptures to see what they say about the “sons of God” and found that this term almost always refers to believers: human beings who trust in God for salvation and have been adopted into His family (e.g., Deuteronomy 14:1; Galatians 3:23; Ephesians 1:5). Thus, we infer that the sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 were believing men who married unbelieving women and whose children fell away from the faith. However, some people have suggested that the “sons of God” in Genesis 6:1-4 were fallen angels. Let us examine this view.
by Dr. Jason Lisle | Oct 9, 2026 | Theology
There is an intriguing account in Genesis 6:1-4 of “sons of God” marrying “daughters of men” and having children called Nephilim who became “mighty men” of renown. This event took place shortly before the global Flood. Some English versions translate the word Nephilim as “giants.” Who were these mighty men? And who were the sons of God? These four little verses have resulted in a lot of controversy. And Christians continue to debate what they mean. Can we discover the identity of the sons of God and the Nephilim?
by Dr. Jason Lisle | Sep 11, 2026 | Theology
The term “gospel” means “good news.” However, the good news can only be properly understood in light of the bad news. The bad news is found in the history recorded in the book of Genesis – a history that many people now reject because they have been taught that neo-Darwinian evolution is the way life came about, contrary to the Genesis record. We will see that such a belief is not compatible with the good news of Christ. Thus, Christians must be prepared to expose the absurdity of particle-to-people evolution so that people can embrace true history and make sense of the Gospel.
by Dr. Jason Lisle | Jan 9, 2026 | Theology
We have been critiquing Phillip Dennis’s claims that the one-way speed of light must be c in all directions. Einstein claimed that the one-way speed of light was merely a humanly stipulated convention, something that we get to choose in order to define what constitutes simultaneous events that are separated by some distance. Dennis disagrees but has been unable to construct a cogent argument for his claim that doesn’t beg the question. Why does Dennis disagree with Einstein on this issue? I suggested in my previous response to Dennis that it may stem from Dennis’s philosophy of presentism. But what is presentism? Is it a self-consistent, logical philosophy? Is presentism compatible with Scripture?
by Dr. Jason Lisle | Mar 7, 2025 | Apologetics, Refuting the Critics, Theology
We have been examining the claims of Liam, who denies the Trinity in general and who, in particular, denies that Jesus is God. This ultimately is not an intellectual exercise but a spiritual one. It is only by the power of the Holy Spirit that a person can declare with conviction that Jesus is Yahweh – the Lord. 1 Corinthians 12:3b states, “And no one can say, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ except by the Holy Spirit.” Furthermore, confessing Jesus as Lord is a requirement for salvation (Romans 10:9-13), for there is no Savior besides the one and only Yahweh (Isaiah 43:11). Therefore, if Jesus is not Yahweh, then neither can He be your Savior.
by Dr. Jason Lisle | Feb 21, 2025 | Refuting the Critics, Theology
Our feedback this week comes from someone we’ll call “Liam.” He rejects the Trinity and specifically rejects that Jesus is God and that the Holy Spirit is a Person of the triune God. The interesting thing about Liam’s response is that most of his arguments were already refuted in the very articles he’s criticizing. It always seems strange to me when a person responds to a refutation of their argument by simply repeating the argument. For example, there is the fallacy of claiming that the Holy Spirit isn’t a Person of the Trinity because in many instances only the Father and Son are mentioned in a greeting. That is the fallacy of the argument from silence as I demonstrated earlier. But there were a couple of new arguments that will be addressed here and in the next article.
