Justin Peters addresses interfaith dialog

I thought this video was important enough to share. Justin Peters has been unfairly drawn into the recent James White - Brannon Howse controversy. Regarding this unfortunate fiasco: I don't think things are as black and white as some people present them (no pun intended). There have been some worthy points on both sides.

I've disagreed with Dr White in the past re statements he's made about Islam, and I've mentioned Nabeel Qureshi in a previous post. But I thought the Janet Mefferd interview was woefully done. She threw too many questions at Dr White and didn't give him time to respond. It isn't White's style to be brief. Mefferd should have known this and allowed for it.

Many of us have been praying the whole thing goes away as it isn't edifying to the church. Some of the back and forth tweets and name calling have been shameful. Sadly, some "mature" Christians have indulged in gossip and character assassination, and Peters has been a victim.

Here is Justin Peters' response to various accusations:

Jesus is God

It seems that a lot of people have an extra-biblical opinion of who Jesus was, what His intentions were and His relationship to God. A few weeks back Reza Aslan regurgitated some old tiresome claims in his Zealot. Now Fox News' Bill O'Reilly (along with Martin Dugard) has obeyed his inner guidance and spun a book called Killing Jesus. This is the third installment of a "killing" series by the pair. To be fair I haven't read his book; however, there's been enough media attention that something can be said here.

O'Reilly made it a point to state that his book was not about "religion" and that it is a "historical" book" Yet a book about Jesus cannot divorce itself from who Jesus was, His purpose for coming to earth and His purpose for dying on the Cross. O'Reilly - born some 1900 yrs after the fact - felt it necessary to impose his own wisdom and logic onto the events presented in the gospels. He deemed that they needed correction here and there. In fact at one point he made the admission that he'd taken the Muslim view of Jesus into consideration. Why? Muhammad was born in 570 AD and died in 632 AD. There are very good reasons for believing that his Qur'an was impacted by something far more mundane than revelations from the angel Gabriel.

Ultimately, O'Reilly and Aslan are no different than the likes of Edgar Cayce, Paramahansa Yogananda and Deepak Chopra who preached a "safe", non-biblical Jesus. Ignoring the biblical Jesus will have dire eternal consequences. The other option will affect an individual's life in the here and now, as well as eternity.

A watered down Jesus is a far more comfortable option for this world. One can place that Jesus on a shelf and forget about Him when convenient. This latter Jesus appears to be the one the modern church is beginning to spin to the world, because that is what society is demanding.



Brannon Howse on Killing Jesus (Part 1) and (Part 2) Recommended!

Dr. Jason Lisle Answers Bill O'Reilly HERE

The Christ of the New Age Movement (Part 1)

Click Here to find Part 2 in the Articles List