7 Short But Excellent Christian Books I Have Read

0nhinhx

(This article was previously posted at Top Christian Books (TCB Media). This is the short version of it.) 

Forget those thick and bulky books that you consider an essential read for Christians. Here are short, 100 pages less but excellent books that you should read. Also I included links to “The Quota ble Round-Up” that features awesome quotes from these books.

1.) “Apologetics Made Simple” by Jason L. Petersen – Petersen presents 5 keys on which apologetics in this straight forward book. If the word “apologetics scares you, let this brief book bare the essentials that is easy to remember and easy to apply.   (Here are  some selected quotes from this book)

2.) “A Primer on Free Will” by John Gerstner – A short book but an excellent treatment of free will. John Gerstner doesn’t just bombard us with biblical jargons and verses but started this book by giving a great illustration that will really stoke you out. If you want to grasp free will this book is an excellent one. (Here are  some selected quotes from this book)

3.) “A Christian’s Pocket Guide to Good Works and Rewards” by Mark Jones – Mark Jones sets out the biblical view on good works and rewards which is sometimes sets confusion among Christians who don’t want to fall into legalism and antinomianism. (Here are  some selected quotes from this book)

4.)  “Church History for Modern Ministry” by Dayton Hartman – Is church history relevant to our modern day ministry? How will it help our Christian living or apologetics from people, places and events that are so detached to our times? This book will help you understand the importance of knowing our history.

5.) “Transgender” by Vaughn Roberts – A brief introduction on a very controversial subject. Vaughn Roberts delivers  important points enough for a Christian to consider this issue.

6.) “Discerning Truth” by Jason Lisle – This maybe a companion book to “Ultimate Proof of Creation” but it’s a great read and a standalone too. Much of the debate between atheist and Christians specifically on the origins, are sometimes based on faulty logical statements. Dr. Lisle list out logical fallacies and how can a Christian these statements in this short but powerful book. (Here are  some selected quotes from this book)

7.)  “Why Bother with Church?” by Sam Allberry – Church life is essential to the believer as part of his spiritual growth. Sam Allberry gives a believer reasons why church is important in this short but great book by answering common questions Christians always ask. (Here are  some selected quotes from this book)

Do you have your own list of favorite short books? Please share it on the comment section.

 

The Quotable Round-Up # 64

mjkth46
Photo by Nonsap Visuals on Unsplash

Hey people heres your favorite post. Hot and fresh quotes from the books “Kept for Jesus ” by  Sam Storms “Young, Restless and Reformed” by Collin Hansen and “Discerning Truth” by Dr. Jason Lisle . If you enjoyed these quotes, please buy the books at your nearest Christian bookstore or on Amazon. Feel free to share this post over your social media. God bless you and enjoy your week!

“Our security is ultimately dependent on God’s character and commitment, not on ours. People say, “If we change, we lose our salvation.” No. We can’t lose it, not because we can’t change, but because God can’t.” — Sam Storms

“To deny eternal security means the possibility exists that some who come to the Son will in fact be cast out. It means the possibility exists that the will of the Father and of the Son that all born-again believers be raised up on the last day will not, in fact, be fulfilled. It means that although Jesus is determined to ensure that every born-again Christian is fully and finally saved, the possibility exists that every born-again Christian might be fully and finally damned for eternity. Are you prepared to say that?”– Sam Storms

“It’s a fallacy that just shouldn’t happen — but it does all the time. The straw-man fallacy is when a person misrepresents his opponent’s position and then proceeds to refute that misrepresentation (i.e., the “straw man”) rather than what his opponent actually claims.” — Dr. Jason Lisle

“The key is to remember that an argument should be based on its merit, not on the alleged character defects or the circumstances of the person making the argument.”– Dr. Jason Lisle

“In the abusive ad hominem, the critic attacks his opponent’s character or insults him in an attempt to discredit him in the eyes of the audience. This tactic is common in politics, and it may psychologically sway people. However, it is logically fallacious because a person’s character (or lack thereof) is logically irrelevant to the validity of his argument. Even if the critic’s negative claims about his opponent are true (e.g., he really is a draft-dodger, or he really did spend time in jail), this has no bearing on the position he is advocating.” — Dr. Jason Lisle

“There is a place for emotional language. After all, language has other purposes than to make logical arguments. It can be used to inform, to question, to command, and to evoke. However, when people try to evoke an emotional response to persuade others of a point that is logically questionable, the fallacy of the question-begging epithet is committed.”– Dr. Jason Lisle

“The evidence speaks for itself.” This expression is quite common, but when used as part of an argument, it is the fallacy of reification. Evidence does not speak at all. Evidence is a concept: the name we give to a body of facts that we believe to be consistent with a particular point of view. People draw conclusions about evidence and verbalize their thoughts. But evidence itself does not have thoughts to verbalize.”  — Dr. Jason Lisle

The Quotable Round-Up #56

paper_zpshrjhwlqwHere are some of the quotes from the book “The Ultimate Proof of Creation” by Dr. Jason Lisle. If you enjoy these quotes, please buy the book at your nearest Christian bookstore or on Amazon. Feel free to share this post over your social media. God bless you and enjoy your week!

“Imagine an evolutionist responding to the Christian’s claim that God is the basis for morality by saying, “I say we don’t need God to know right from wrong. You have every right to follow your own standard! Don’t let others tell you what to do. It is your right as an American to think for yourself!” Such a speech might be followed by thunderous applause — even though it is logically absurd and self-refuting. (How could we possibly obey the instruction to not let others tell us what to do?) But by invoking powerful emotions like patriotism and the desire to feel autonomous, the arguer may sway many people with this fallacious speech.”

“Special pleading is the fallacy of applying a double standard. That is, the arguer has applied a standard to his opponent that he does not apply to himself. The duplicity may be subtle and due only to a choice of words: “I’m firm, but you are just stubborn.” Or it may be more obvious. “You can’t tell other people what not to do!” is a clear case of special pleading since the arguer obviously does not apply this standard to himself.”

“Fallacies of ambiguity are arguments that are faulty because they use words or phrases that are unclear or have more than one meaning. There are six common fallacies that are usually listed under this category: equivocation, amphiboly, accent, reification, composition, and division.”

“It should also be pointed out that the relativist cannot possibly live according to his own professed worldview. He may profess a fairy-tale land where truth is subjective and contradictions are acceptable, but he must live in God’s universe and must abide by God’s absolute objective truth if he is to function. Remember, even the most ardent relativist looks both ways before he crosses the street. Moreover, he expects the motorist to abide by the same laws he does — to stop at the stop sign, for example. Just like all of us, the relativist knows in his heart of hearts the biblical God.”

“Worldviews are a bit like kidneys. Everyone has them — you can’t live or function without them. Yet, most people are unaware of their own …until something goes wrong with them. To force the unbeliever to think through his worldview, we want to give him the intellectual equivalent of a kidney stone (for his own benefit!). We remind him of information that he already knows to be true but which he has not carefully considered — information that his worldview cannot process. Like a kidney stone, this procedure may be very painful for the evolutionist; he’s not going to be happy about it. But his erroneous worldview must be exposed for the folly it is if he is ever going to come to the knowledge of the truth.”

“If evolution were true, science and reasoning would not be possible: there would be no basis for logic, nor would there be any basis for uniformity in nature. So if evolutionists were consistent with their worldview, they would not be able to reason or do science. Yet evolutionists are able to reason and to do science. Thus it follows that evolutionists do not consistently rely upon their own worldview. They rely upon creationist presuppositions!”

“Presuppositions are assumed at the outset, before any investigation of evidence; they are pre-supposed and control our interpretation of evidence. We are often not aware of our presuppositions, but they are always present. Just as we are always breathing, even though we are not often conscious of it until we stop and think about it, likewise, our presuppositions are constantly guiding our understanding of our experiences.”