Ligon Duncan on the Non-Negotiables of the Gospel

Christian Skepticism endorses:

This site contains some of the most valuable God-centered resources a Christian Skeptic could ever want. Whether you peruse the copious free items or purchase something from their excellent online store, your worldview will never be the same!

Start Here to become a Christian Skeptic

We wanted to highlight this compilation by Paul Manata - The Philosophy of the
Christian Religion
- an excellent online resource for the development of the
well-considered Christian worldview.

Skeptical Insights

Good Blogroll (from Pyromaniacs)

  • Colin Adams
  • Charlie Albright
  • Aletheuo
  • Scott Aniol
  • Tom Ascol
  • Derek Ashton (TheoParadox)
  • Zachary Bartels
  • Tim and David Bayly
  • Rick Beckman
  • Tyler Bennicke
  • Bible Geek
  • Big Orange Truck
  • Andy Bird
  • John Bird
  • Bob Bixby
  • Timmy Brister
  • Fred Butler
  • Calvin and Calvinism (Classic and moderate Calvinism)
  • Bret Capranica
  • Nathan Casebolt
  • Lane Chaplin
  • Tim ("The World's Most Famous Christian Blogger"®) Challies
  • The Conservative Intelligencer
  • The Contemporary Calvinist
  • The Conventicle
  • Craig's Blog
  • Deliver Detroit
  • Daniel (Doulogos)
  • William Dicks
  • The Doulos' Den
  • Martin Downes
  • Connie Dugas
  • Doug Eaton
  • Nicholas Edinger
  • Brother Eugene
  • Eusebeia
  • Stefan Ewing
  • Eddie Exposito
  • Expository Thoughts
  • Faces Like Flint
  • Reid Ferguson
  • Peter Farrell
  • Bill Fickett
  • Fide-o
  • Foolish Things
  • Chris Freeland
  • Travis Gilbert
  • Ron Gleason
  • Go Share Your Faith!
  • God is My Constant
  • Phil Gons
  • Joel Griffith (Solameanie)
  • Matt Gumm
  • Gregg Hanke
  • Jacob Hantla
  • Chris Harwood
  • J. D. Hatfield
  • Michael Haykin
  • Tony Hayling (Agonizomai)
  • Steve Hays and the amazing "Triablogue" team
  • Scott Head
  • Patrick Heaviside (Paths of Old)
  • Marc Heinrich's Purgatorio
  • Sean Higgins
  • Illumination (Rich Barcellos and Sam Waldron)
  • Inverted Planet
  • Tim Jack
  • Jackhammer
  • Craig Johnson
  • Alex Jordan
  • The Journeymen
  • Justified
  • Lane Keister (Green Baggins)
  • John Killian
  • David Kjos
  • Ted Kluck
  • Patrick Lacson
  • A Little Leaven (Museum of Idolatry)
  • Janet Lee
  • Let My Lifesong Sing
  • Libbie, the English Muffin
  • Light and Heat
  • Greg Linscott
  • Bryan Maes
  • Brian McDaris
  • Doug McMasters
  • Allen Mickle
  • The incomparable Al Mohler
  • Jonathan Moorhead
  • Ryan Moran
  • Stephen Newell
  • Dean Olive
  • Dan Paden
  • Paleoevangelical
  • A Peculiar Pilgrim
  • Jim Pemberton
  • The Persecution Times
  • Bill Pershing
  • Kevin Pierpont
  • Matt Plett
  • Wes Porter
  • Postmortemism
  • The Red and Black Redneck
  • Reformata
  • Reformation 21
  • Reformation Theology (sponsored by Monergism.Com)
  • Reformed Evangelist
  • Remonstrans
  • Carla Rolfe
  • Tony Rose
  • Andrew Roycroft
  • Eric Rung
  • Said at Southern Seminary
  • Seeing Clearly
  • Sharper Iron
  • Kim Shay
  • Neil Shay
  • Brian Shealy
  • Ken Silva
  • Tom Slawson's "Tom in the Box"
  • Tom Slawson's other blog
  • Doug Smith
  • Richard Snoddy
  • Social Hazard
  • SolaFire
  • Rebecca Stark
  • Kevin Stilley
  • Cindy Swanson
  • Talking Out Of Turn
  • Justin Taylor's "Between Two Worlds"
  • Robert Tewart (StreetFishing)
  • TheoJunkie's Thoughts on Theology
  • Theology Bites
  • Through the Veil
  • Three Times a Mom
  • Voice of the Shepherd
  • Jared Wall
  • Adrian Warnock
  • David Wayne
  • Jeremy Weaver
  • Steve Weaver
  • Über-apologist James White's legendary "Pros Apologian" blog
  • Brad Williams
  • Doug Wilson
  • Writing and Living
  • Ryan Wood
  • Todd Young
  • Thursday, February 07, 2008

    Skeptical of “The Third Jesus”

    "...unless you believe that I am he you will die in your sins." (John 8:24)

    A new "spiritual" book called “The Third Jesus: The Christ We Cannot Ignore”, written by new age mystic Deepak Chopra, is set to be released on February 19. According to the book description, the purpose of The Third Jesus is to provide “a challenge to current systems of belief and a fresh perspective on what Jesus can teach us all, regardless of our religious background.” In short, this novel is just another false revelation of the modern religion of pluralism.

    This fact is further exemplified in the description of the third Jesus in contrast to the first two.

    “First, there is the historical Jesus, the man who lived more than two thousand years ago and whose teachings are the foundation of Christian theology and thought. Next there is Jesus the Son of God, who has come to embody an institutional religion with specific dogma, a priesthood, and devout believers. And finally, there is the third Jesus, the cosmic Christ, the spiritual guide whose teaching embraces all humanity, not just the church built in his name. He speaks to the individual who wants to find God as a personal experience, to attain what some might call grace, or God-consciousness, or enlightenment.”

    As we can see, the “third Jesus” is quite a bit different than the other two (which are one and the same). This newer model is more inclusive and tolerant, embracing “all humanity, not just the church built in his name”. The “third” Jesus doesn’t care what you believe or how you live, he wants you to simply have some sort of personal spiritual experience (not to mention that anyone who confuses “grace” and “enlightenment” is either dishonest or intellectually challenged in world religions.)

    “Ultimately, Chopra argues, Christianity needs to overcome its tendency to be exclusionary and refocus on being a religion of personal insight and spiritual growth. In this way Jesus can be seen for the universal teacher he truly is–someone whose teachings of compassion, tolerance, and understanding can embrace and be embraced by all of us”.

    Clearly, this speaks volumes about Chopra’s real theology of religious pluralism. Pluralism is simply the theology of unbelief. We are never told what the source of this “third Jesus” is in the book summary. Perhaps the book itself will tell us, but I doubt it. Therefore, I’ll take the liberty of doing so. The “third Jesus” is a vain invention of human neurons. Chopra created this Jesus out of necessity, for he knows nothing of the first Jesus, and obviously doesn’t think too highly of the second.


    swordbearer said...

    I googled the author and read his bio. You are right on track!

    Omid said...

    Hey dipshits, either read the book or don't talk about it like you actually have even the slightest idea of what you're commenting on. Haha. Seriously though, wtf? Do you have any grounds to stand on in your argument? I'm just saying that if somebody talked shit on the bible as a whole, but hadn't even taken the time to read more than an introduction someone else wrote for it, wouldn't you tell them what I'm telling you? You're lying if you say otherwise, and a book is a book any way you look at it; some more credible than others, but quit spreading/supporting the continuation of ignorance in society. I'm not saying one book is more or less important than the other, I'm just saying do you're homework before you decide to comment on things.

    Puritan Lad said...


    I know the author and I can see his own description of the book above. What else is needed?

    I would read the whole book and comment if...

    1.) I thought it necessary to clear up anything I didn't know about Chopra, and

    2.) Someone lent me a copy, since I have better things to spend my money on.

    Omid said...

    Look, I'm sorry for saying dipshits earlier, but this is the reason the world is the way it is. No one thinks for themselves anymore and the least you can do is not comment on things that you know nothing about from personal experience. You're polluting in a very real way; it's better to have no information and go find out for yourself than to hear another person's COMPLETELY UNINFORMED opinion on something and somehow incorporate that into your own pool of knowledge. You really can't see what I mean? I'm just as disgusted when people do this with anything, I'm not personally attacking you. If someone gives an opinion on something (and other people are going to be reading it on some public forum), then they should know what they're talking about. I honestly get just as upset when people do that with the bible, the qu'ran, politics, the economy, moral decisions, etc. Anything of importance to the course history will take from here. If you don' know the whole story then quit throwing half-assed opinions into the world so people are forced to actually take the time and make the effort to think for know?

    Puritan Lad said...


    With all due respect, you need to take your own advice. I can think for myself. I can red what Chopra says about Jesus and compare it to what Jesus said Himself. Then I can decide who knows more about Jesus: Chopra or Jesus? I think we all know the answer to that question.

    swordbearer said...
    This comment has been removed by the author.
    swordbearer said...



    We get your point and recognize that it's always better to read something for yourself especially if you're going to comment; HOWEVER, those familiar with blogs and debate not only recognize and accept the limitations (of time, etc.) associated with posting, but also learn to detect and discern to what degree of exposure and authority the poster seeks to communicate when making claims. PL has been forthright in stating where his information comes from, and the basis and dependence) on which he makes his claims. Most readers familiar with blogs of this nature, which not only address critical issues but provide resources and point people in particular directions, understand these factors and should not have a problem with PL's post, especially given his statement of familiarity/knowledge of the author and the widespread knowlede of Chopra's positions and unorthodoxy.

    ... This being said, I wonder if your participation here has more to do with your own spiritual search (and/or deficiencies).

    From your own writing (which I've read), I see the following:

    1. Your language reveals a lack of sanctification. Apparently, there's a shamelessness associated with it as you do not hesitate to spread it publicly.

    2. Your statement (...especially after all you have written) that you are "not personally attacking" us ....reminds me of those who claim to be "tolerant" of all, but prove to be "intolerant" when it comes to the gospel. (Seems you want to attack, but then say "I'm not personally attacking", perhaps either to claim moral excellence or so as to not have your own thoughts come under attack?). We see through that...and encourage you not only to avoid duplicity but to be able to give an answer and stand behind the statements you make.

    3. Your lack of commitment (i.e., 'I'm not saying one book is more or less important than the other') while suggesting we "quit spreading the continuation of ignorance in society" ... reveals that while you may seek to elevate yourself to the place of wisdom (i.e., by judging PL's claim to be ignorance), you lack either judgment or confidence necessary to hold or defend your position.

    4. The fact that you are reading a blog dealing with issues of a spiritual nature suggests at least some measure of interest if not questions in this area. Tell us, yourself, who Jesus is.... or if the novel teaches something other than another "false revelation of the modern religion of pluralism" tell us what it says concerning Jesus. (Surely, one who goes to the point of accusing us of spreading ignorance... is not simply making a point about the manner in which the information was drawn, but must know something more about the matter itself). We would like to hear your beliefs and position on Jesus, and on what it means too have a personal experience with God and to know his righteousness.

    Please tell us...

    I'll take the time to read and listen to what you say.