Co-Heirs With Jesus - What Does it Mean? J. Dan Gill J. Dan Gill, Chief Editor of 21st [...]
About J. Dan GillJ. Dan Gill is Editor in Chief and a contributor to 21st Century Reformation Online. He is a frequent speaker, has written many theological articles and presented a variety of papers on Christian issues and biblical subjects. J. Dan Gill is the author of “The One – In Defense of God” a book which makes the case for non-trinitarian “absolute monotheism” as being the theology not only of Jews but of Jesus and original Christians. He argues that the one God of the Bible is the Father alone and that Jesus is the Christ – God’s Messiah. Dan Gill is the producer and co-host with Sir Anthony Buzzard of 21st Century Reformation’s popular video commentary series on the New Testament writings of the Apostle Paul and the Book of Hebrews. J. Dan Gill is a graduate of the University of Tennessee and his academic studies have focused particularly on the history of Christian doctrine, early church history, the Reformation and restoration movements.
Joseph Priestley - The American One God Connection J. Dan Gill J. Dan Gill presents an overview of [...]
The Book of James New Testament Wisdom Literature J. Dan Gill https://www.youtube.com/embed?listType=playlist&list=PLQRcmjUC9-SyXSznKn3wGg03OzNTrXhXZ&v=9vrQVmVNuo8&layout=gallery J. Dan Gill, [...]
New Testament Wisdom Literature The Book of James https://www.youtube.com/embed?listType=playlist&list=PLQRcmjUC9-SyXSznKn3wGg03OzNTrXhXZ&v=9vrQVmVNuo8&layout=gallery J. Dan Gill, chief editor [...]
The reason I disavow that notion of pluralism is that I believe it often has much the same effect as “forced faith.” Though it comes from a different direction, the end result is often the same. True debate is stifled, not by political force, but rather by a new kind of social pressure, a pressure that says that to be an enlightened, kind or caring person, one would never say that someone else’s faith is wrong. If we cannot say that there is any view that is wrong, then by the exact same logic, neither can we say that anything is right. This is a reductio ad surdum. How can this ever be thought to be an enlightened approach? It rather fosters a cold status quo “for all” that can never really benefit people or truth.