That Unique Christmas Star

That Unique Christmas Star

Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI

Biblical Authority Ministries, December 11, 2025 (Donate)

Introduction

It’s that time of year again when people start asking questions about the unique star that guided the wise men to Christ around 2000 years ago. The Star of Bethlehem was a real, historical, supernatural sign created by God and not an ordinary astronomical event. The star behaved in ways no natural celestial object can replicate, pointing to its miraculous uniqueness.

Real, but Not Natural

The Christmas Star described in Matthew 2 was a real phenomenon but not a normal astronomical object such as:

·        A conjunction or alignment of planets (such as Jupiter and Saturn)

·        A supernova or nova

·        A comet

·        A meteor

·        A regular star or wandering star

Natural celestial bodies cannot move in a purposeful way, guide travelers along a specific route, or stop directly over a single house as the text describes.

Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)

Matthew records that the star “went before” the Magi and then “stood over” the place where the young Child was, which means there was intentional movement and standing positions different from normal heavenly bodies that move as the earth rotates. The star first guided them from the East all the way to the Jerusalem area—and then shifted to a southern direction to lead the Magi from Jerusalem to Bethlehem. This cannot be explained by planetary motion.

Wise ancient astronomers and sky watchers, without today's light pollution and nightly distractions, were skilled enough to not have mistaken this for a routine planetary alignment. But they would see that something unique is definitely at hand. Natural objects follow predictable orbital paths and cannot behave in the uniquely directed manner that Matthew depicts of the Christmas Star.

Because of these factors, the star was a special, unique light or star provided by God. When looking back over the Scriptures, we read that God caused similar manifestations. Consider the pillar of fire and cloud that guided Israel in the wilderness (Exodus 13:21-22; Exodus 14:19-20) or other Old Testament instances where God’s glory appeared as a localized, brilliant light (1 Kings 8:10-11). Even in the New Testament Paul was surrounded by light at his conversion (Acts 22:6).

The star’s ability to guide the Magi step by step and pinpoint a specific home is like these earlier examples of the Shekinah glory (2 Chronicles 5:13-14). The use of the word “star” fits ancient terminology, which often referred to any bright light in the sky as a star, whether natural or supernatural (as well as meteors, comets, planets, etc.).

Night Sky Objects; Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)

Theological Knowledge

The Magi still needed divine revelation to understand its meaning though. God had to reveal that this sign announced the birth of the Messiah and that the Magi should travel to Judea to honor Him.

The Magi may have inherited knowledge of Messianic prophecy from Daniel’s earlier influence in Babylon since he was the legendary leader of them after he saved them from destruction. Recall that some of Daniel’s prophecies were sealed up. Were these Magi familiar with them as they were passed down? Possibly. Then there is the prophecy of the Star in the book of Numbers (Numbers 24:17; Matthew 2).

Conclusion

The Magi were truly wise men—even their gifts are of great significance—gold, frankincense and myrrh. God is a kingly gift, frankincense is a priestly gift (used in the Temple) and myrrh was medicinal and often used on bodies of the dead—which sadly, far too many prophets were put to death in Isreal. Thus, it was a fitting gift to representing the office of the prophets. Jesus fulfilled all three offices of Prophet, Priest, and King.

Gold, Frankincense and Myrrh; Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)

The Christmas Star was not a natural event like a planetary conjunction or comet. Instead, it was a supernatural, God-directed light—likely the Shekinah glory—that moved purposefully, guided the Magi tot eh exact place they needed to go—the Christ child.  

□

Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist since 1998 helping out in various churches and running an apologetics website. He spent 21 years working at Answers in Genesis as a speaker, writer, and researcher as well as a founding news anchor for Answers News. He was also head of the Oversight Council.  

Bodie launched Biblical Authority Ministries in 2015 as a personal website and it was organized officially in 2025 as a 501(c)(3). He has spoken on multiple continents and hosts of US states in churches, colleges, and universities. He is married with four children. 

 

 

The Doctrine Of Textual Criticism (and Preservation)

The Doctrine Of Textual Criticism (and Preservation)

Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI

Biblical Authority Ministries, December 10, 2025 (Donate)

The Doctrine of Textual Criticism is a good thing. Some confuse it with “higher criticism”, which is an 1800s attack on the Bible, but textual criticism is something that is done to honor the text of Scripture and systematically study its manuscripts.

What Is Textual Criticism?

Textual criticism of the Bible (specifically the New Testament) is the scholarly process of comparing all available manuscript copies to determine the earliest and most accurate form of the biblical text.

Just to give you an idea, there are over 24,000 ancient copies and fragments of the New Testament and over 86,000 quotes of the Bible in church fathers’ writing in the first 200 years alone. How do we assess these and study all these? It is through textual criticism that it is done.

Paul (and his colleagues) were authors of several New Testament original-autograph books; Photo of a discontinued exhibit in the Creation Museum by Bodie Hodge

Because the original autographs of specific Bible books, by apostles for example, no longer exist, scholars examine thousands of handwritten manuscripts, early translations, and quotations from church fathers to identify where small differences (variants) occur and which readings best reflect the original wording.

The method works by analyzing external evidence and internal evidence. External evidence considers the age, geographical distribution, and textual family of the manuscripts. Earlier manuscripts and those found across different regions often carry greater weight.

Internal evidence evaluates what the author is most likely to have written and what scribes were likely to have changed, whether accidentally or intentionally (e.g., cultic groups or enemies infiltration for instance). Scholars consider context, grammar, style, and which reading best explains how the others could have arisen.

Most variants are trivial, such as spelling differences (as languages change) or word order changes that do not affect meaning—keep in mind that many later copies of Koine Greek New Testament were made by people who were not fluent in it—the language was a dead language by around AD 400. So spotting a misspelling was more difficult and copying mistakes were more prone.

Even so, only a small fraction of variants are meaningful enough to warrant deeper study, and none undermine essential Christian doctrines. With the massive number of manuscripts available, especially for the New Testament, scholars can cross-check readings rather easily.

Through this comparison process, scholars using textual criticism identifies the reading that makes the most sense in the context based on manuscript evidence. Modern Bible translations use this research to present a text as close as possible to the original.

Overall, textual criticism works by carefully sifting the manuscript evidence, weighing the text in context, and reconstructing the earliest attainable form of the biblical text (often called “standard texts”. Most Bible translations today come from standard texts like the (1) Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece, (2) United Bible Societies Greek New Testament, and (3) [for Hebrew] Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia text. The result is that believers can rest assured the Bible has been preserved.

Erasmus and Early Textual Criticism

Erasmus (Desiderius Erasmus Roterodamus) produced the first printed Greek New Testament (1516) using only a small handful of manuscripts, mostly late Byzantine copies (I discuss this text family in a later section). His textual criticism relied on collation and comparison: he placed his manuscripts side by side, noted differences, and selected the reading he believed was original, usually favoring the majority or clearest reading.

Erasmus, AD 1500s, Public Domain

Because he lacked complete manuscripts for some sections (such as the ending of Revelation), he back-translated from the Latin Vulgate into Greek to fill gaps. Erasmus also consulted earlier editions of the Latin to judge which Greek readings seemed most authentic.

His work was rushed for publication, yet subsequent editions refined his choices as he attainted more manuscripts. Over time, later printers incorporated marginal notes and corrections until this adjusted printed text became known as the Textus Receptus, the “received text,” which shaped Tyndale’s Bible Translation, the Geneva Bible and the King James Version.

Despite limited resources, Erasmus sought to restore the New Testament’s earliest attainable form. As more manuscripts became available it was time to look at them in a systematic way.

Discussion On Textual Criticism

Dr. Ron Rhodes, a well-known evangelical scholar and apologist, affirms the value of textual criticism as a necessary and God-ordained tool for preserving and understanding the biblical text. His position is broadly in line with conservative evangelical scholarship. The reliability of Scripture and the usefulness of textual analysis is a great confirmation of that reliability.

Rhodes points out that the Bible we possess today is trustworthy, even though it has been transmitted through thousands of manuscripts. He stresses that textual variants do exist, but the vast majority are minor issues such as:

·       Spelling differences

·       Word order changes

·       Stylistic variations that do not alter essential doctrine.

The existence of variants is expected because these copies were being done by fallible people. This actually shows the transparency and honesty of biblical scholarship.

Textual criticism is the primary means by which God has ensured the preservation of His Word (more on this in the next section). The New Testament manuscripts are exceptionally numerous (tens of thousands) and very early compared to other ancient texts (many in the first and second century).  

Christians should reject skeptical or liberal approaches to textual criticism that assume the biblical text is fundamentally corrupt or that reconstructing the original autographs is impossible. This violates God’s Word where He promised to preserve His Word. Textual criticism shows a continuity with the original text and confirms Christian doctrines rather than threatens them.

No essential Christian doctrine hangs on any of the alleged disputed textual variants. While acknowledging a handful of passages discussed in scholarly literature (for example, the ending of Mark is debated in variants), Rhodes rightly points out that these do not affect the core message of Scripture—since all things at the end of Mark match with other Gospel accounts. Christians should understand the basics of textual criticism and be informed, not fearful of it.

What Does Textual Criticism Look Like?

Dr. Ron Rhodes give a nice example of what textual criticism looks like in practice. Once you see it, it is difficult not to understand. The process is rather easy to grasp. Rhodes brilliantly explains:

“Let us suppose we have five manuscript copies of an original document that no longer exists. Each of the manuscript copies are different. Our goal is to compare the manuscript copies and ascertain what the original must have said. Here are the five copies:

Manuscript #1: Jesus Christ is the Savior of the whole worl.

Manuscript #2: Christ Jesus is the Savior of the whole world.

Manuscript #3: Jesus Christ s the Savior of the whole world.

Manuscript #4: Jesus Christ is th Savior of the whle world.

Manuscript #5: Jesus Christ is the Savor of the whole wrld.

Could you, by comparing the manuscript copies, ascertain what the original document said with a high degree of certainty that you are correct? Of course you could.

This illustration may be extremely simplistic, but a great majority of the 150,000 variants are solved by the above methodology.

By comparing the various manuscripts, all of which contain very minor differences like the above, it becomes fairly clear what the original must have said.”[1]

Of course, when you look at families of manuscripts (copies of copies from the same text tradition), you tend to get the copy variants. For example, there are two primary families of text—the Alexandrian and the Byzantine.

Alexandrian Text Family

Alexandria was a Greek city in Egypt. It was very influential and a hub for Christianity for about 600 years. Many manuscripts came from this area. The Alexandrian text family consists of Greek manuscripts that are earlier and generally considered closer to the original wording by most scholars—because of their age. They come mainly from Egypt and include Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus.

The obvious reason this text family ceased being copied after some time was due to the Muslim invasions and the imposition of their false religion by the sword which stifled the copying process in these lands.

Byzantine Text Family

The Byzantine text family represents the later, majority of Greek manuscripts which had wider use in the Greek-speaking early church. This family of texts is what Erasmus used to generate the Textus Receptus and many other Western texts. With a thousand more years of copying—there are a lot more in this text family.

There are other text families as well. But even with all these variants, it is rather easily to see using all these texts to largely see what was clearly written in the original autographs of Scriptures. Having more copies actually helps.

Modes of Preservation

God promised to preserve His Word. This task is easy for an all-powerful God. Consider some of the Scriptures relating to preservation:

1. Psalm 12:6–7 (NKJV) “The words of the Lord are pure words, like silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. You shall keep them, O Lord, You shall preserve them from this generation forever.”

2. Psalm 119:89 (NKJV) “Forever, O Lord, Your word is settled in heaven.”

3. Isaiah 40:8 (NKJV) “The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God stands forever.”

4. Matthew 24:35 (NKJV) “Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away.”

Peter, in 1 Peter 1:23–25, explicitly cites Isaiah 40:8 and applies it to the preached Word of God showing that it is enduring and incorruptible. However, Christians have generally appealed to two very different models of how God preserved Scripture.

One Inerrant Copy Model

The “one inerrant copy” view teaches that God kept a single, perfect, error-free manuscript line intact through history. Some say this is done for each language as well. According to this model, a particular copy or printed edition (often associated with the Textus Receptus (TR)—although the TR was developed by 6 copies—none of which were complete). Adherents of this position suggest the TR, which all its updates over the years, uniquely represents God’s preserved Word without meaningful variation. Preservation is understood as perfect, continuous, and traceable through one providentially protected “stream”.

Body of Manuscripts Model

The “manuscript copies with textual criticism” view teaches that God preserved His Word through the entire body of manuscripts, not one perfect copy. Because Scripture was copied thousands of times, minor variations arose, but the abundance and geographical spread of manuscripts allow scholars to compare them and rather easily determine the earliest, original readings. Preservation is understood by the abundant copies that exist and through careful comparison.

Both methods still rely on textual criticism to a degree (Erasmus’ early form with only a few fragmented copies) versus the latter systematic form utilizing thousands of copies.

Conclusion

Textual criticism is a good thing. Having a multitude of copies and following their ever so slight variants spellings and word order show that what we have today is an accurate reflection of the original autographs of Scripture in the New Testament text.

□

Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist since 1998 helping out in various churches and running an apologetics website. He spent 21 years working at Answers in Genesis as a speaker, writer, and researcher as well as a founding news anchor for Answers News. He was also head of the Oversight Council.  

Bodie launched Biblical Authority Ministries in 2015 as a personal website and it was organized officially in 2025 as a 501(c)(3). He has spoken on multiple continents and hosts of US states in churches, colleges, and universities. He is married with four children. 

 

---

[1] Ron Rhodes, Manuscript Support for the Bible's Reliability, Accessed December 10, 2025,  https://www.gospeloutreach.net/manevbib.html.

The Modern Debate Over Founders

The Modern Debate Over Founders

Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI

Biblical Authority Ministries, December 9, 2025 (Donate)

For those who know, there is a debate over the beliefs of the Founding Fathers. This includes secular beliefs as well as varying understandings by David Barton and Gregg Fazer.

Barton Et Al

The debate surrounding David Barton et al centers on how to understand and represent the religious beliefs of the Founding Fathers of the United States. Barton and others in his camp argue that America was explicitly founded as a Christian nation, out of a Christian nation (Britain), and that most founders were sincere, orthodox Christians. He argues that their political philosophy flowed directly from the Bible.

Colonial Church; Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)

Barton points out extensive religious language in colonial charters, state constitutions, early laws, sermons, and the personal writings of a number of founders. They also point to public proclamations of prayer, thanksgiving, and fasting, as well as general references to Providence, the Creator and using the Bible in schools and recommended by Congress, as well as biblical morality.

I would lean in Barton’s direction (which was also Charlie Kirk’s position), but I understand that sometimes certain claims can be overstepped. But that doesn’t neglect the case. I would urge caution on this of course—I would rather be accurate and look at original documents in context and based on the cultural situations at hand.  

Critics, naturally playing on this, counter that Barton often overstates some claims by relying on selective quotations, or blur distinctions between personal belief, public rhetoric, and original documents’ purpose. However, going back and reading these documents and seeing the various Christian protestant churches represented where most of these men attended leans strongly for a Christian heritage.

Secular Objections

Secular humanistic historians who critique Barton argue that many founders were not orthodox Christians but held a spectrum of beliefs including Protestant Christianity, various degrees of deism, unitarianism, rational theism, and Enlightenment moral philosophy. But with a little research most founders were members of triune Protestant churches—with minor exceptions and remember that exceptions aren’t the rule.  

Secular humanists recognize that the founders lived in a predominantly Christian culture and frequently used religious language, attended Christian churches, and argued for Christian morality. But they want to argue that the nation’s founding documents (Declaration of Independence, Northwest Ordinance, Articles of Confederation, State Constitutions, etc.), especially the Constitution, intentionally avoided establishing a specific religion[1] and protected broad religious liberty. The founding documents all refer to God, the Lord, Creator, or Providence somewhere—even the Constitution.

Supporters of Barton point out that modern secular historians often underplay the influence of Christianity because of contemporary secular biases—which should be obvious. They argue that the founders were deeply shaped by Scripture, the Protestant Reformation, and English common law which are based on biblical concepts.

They also note that all aspects of early American culture and education permeated with Christian beliefs, and that many founders did speak of Christian doctrines, not doctrines of other religions, and were active members in churches, and spoke favorably of the Bible’s authority. Critics need to be careful of creating an artificial divide between private faith and public philosophy which were intertwined in those days.

This controversy remains lively because of modern discussions on roles of church and state, religious liberty, and national identity. Consider for a moment that the government is trying to govern by leaving God and His Word out of it—yet God and His Word are the basis for morality, education, and even for law! In other words, law is a Christian concept.

Education is a Christian concept—to leave the Bible out of it, is to say that law and education don’t really exist (in their own professed worldviews if they were consistent). If one looks at our culture we see a breakdown of laws and education and morality—these are the natural consequences of trying to have those things without God and His Word being the authority over them.  

Theistic Rationalists

Trying to find middle ground, Gregg Frazer, in The Religious Beliefs of America’s Founders, argues that many key founders were neither orthodox Christians nor deists but belonged to a distinct category he invented and called theistic rationalists (e.g., unitarian, moralistic). According to Frazer, theistic rationalists believed in a rational, benevolent Creator who governed the world and expected moral behavior, but they reduced God's perfect, infallible Word to the fallible whims of imperfect human reason.

Certain founders agreed with Christian moral teachings yet rejected essential doctrines such as the Trinity, the deity of Christ, substitutionary atonement, and biblical inerrancy. For Frazer, theistic rationalism blended elements of Christianity, deism, and Enlightenment rationalism into a unique categorized belief system.

Frazer applies this framework to influential founders such as Jefferson, Adams, Franklin, and others. He argues that their writings show a consistent pattern: they praised Jesus primarily as a moral teacher, but then elevated reason above Scripture, denied key doctrines, and saw religion’s chief value in promoting public virtue rather than saving faith. Thus, Frazer concludes that America’s founding political philosophy was shaped more by theistic rationalism than by orthodox Christianity.

However, this may only be true for certain few founders—Jefferson and Franklin for example—but many others were not in their category—but openly Christian. Many founders would disagree with one another like Adams who was a blatant unitarian for instance. Recall, most were active church members who would have opted to rather be known by their local denominational name or simply Christian than the category of theistic rationalist.  

Frazer opposes both secularists and Christian-influenced position. He contends that secularists ignore the founders’ belief in a personal God, use of the Bible, and moral order, while those who argue for more Christian influence inaccurately portray the founders as orthodox Christians. Of course, not all were, but most were via their local denominational standing.

Frazer’s category of theistic rationalism tries to lump Christians, unitarians, and rationalists together into a single category as a precise historical description of the founders’ actual beliefs. When taken a little deeper, this would label most denominations of the day as being in opposition to orthodox Protestant beliefs which may be a stretch.

Conclusion

So further balance must be taken and we need to be careful lumping people, particularly Christians who were members of local churches, as something they themselves would have been opposed to be labelled as. The purpose of this short article is not to hash out all the positions and debate points but give a brief overview of basic talking points.

So please don’t get me wrong, there are aspect of Frazer’s position that I like and respect, but there are also aspects of Barton’s position where I think he nailed it. What I want you to know is that there is a debate over this and I want to encourage you learn these positions better.

□

Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist since 1998 helping out in various churches and running an apologetics website. He spent 21 years working at Answers in Genesis as a speaker, writer, and researcher as well as a founding news anchor for Answers News. He was also head of the Oversight Council.  

Bodie launched Biblical Authority Ministries in 2015 as a personal website and it was organized officially in 2025 as a 501(c)(3). He has spoken on multiple continents and hosts of US states in churches, colleges, and universities. He is married with four children. 

 

 

---

[1] They were more than happy for  Christianity and the Bible, but not one denominational view should be imposed like they did in Britian with Anglicanism.

USA And The Gospel

USA And The Gospel

Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI

Biblical Authority Ministries, December 8, 2025 (Donate)

The Protestant USA Has Been Inundated With All Other Religions

This heading really speaks for itself. But let's unpack this a little more. 

The United States, which was at one point one of the most Christian nations on earth, has been inundated by all sorts of [false] religions—Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, sexual humanism, New Age, paganism, atheism, secular humanism and the like. Sadly, the United States was even the source of some new false religions like Scientology, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and Mormonism.

The fact is that all religions are false except God’s, which is based on the 66 books of the Bible. God and His Word are the very foundation for the concepts of truth and falsity or right and wrong—God defines it. Even the concept of truth comes from the Bible’s foundation.

Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)

Like other places in the world, people in the United States can be deceived to believe false religions. With religions like secularism and atheism (i.e., no God, big bang, evolutionism, naturalism, materialism, etc.) being freely taught in government schools, it’s easy to see how so many kids for generations have been led into false beliefs.

Furthermore, when people are taught religions like atheism, which are not defensible logically, they are easy targets for false religions to swoop in and steal their minds like sea gulls on a buffet line on a beach.

And yet, Christianity continues to grow and is defensible against all opposition. It is fastest growing religion on earth—particularly by conversions (by the power of the Holy Spirit!). In fact, there are more Christians alive today than there ever has been. Consider that we started with about 11 disciples (Judas hung himself and then his body was split open by rocks below).

Even groups that disagree with biblical teachings like Jehovah’s Witnesses (denial of Jesus deity), Mormons (polytheistic), and Muslims (denial of Jesus resurrection), they all agree the Bible is true—of course, they want to put their religious qualifications on it. Nevertheless, when tallied, this means that more than half of the world’s population is connected to the belief that the Bible is true.

In Hinduism, which is monistic (i.e., “all is one”), their supreme “god” who manifests into 3 gods (Vishnu, Shiva, and Brahma), and then millions of gods, is Brahman. Interestingly, pondering the oneness of Brahman and Bramha and doing a little research, reveals that he married Sarasvati and had of course there is another woman convoluted in the lore, Ghaggar.

One can’t help but see the how real people Abraham (Brahman/Brahma), Sarah (Sarasvati) and Haggar (Ghaggar) were elevated to a god-like status in this religion showing it is just a form of ancestor worship predicated on the Bible’s truth about Abraham. Whether Hindus realize it or not, their religion took from a godly man in the Bible and then warped and paganized him into a monism religion. If all is one then being logical and illogical are one and the same; therefore, everything is meaningless in that religion—if they were consistent and if they were not consistent!

On top of all these, Confucianism, Shinto, animism, Voodoo, witchcraft, veganism, wicca, Taoism, agnosticism, spiritism, and so many more religions have all made their way to the USA. The USA today is a melting pot of cultures…and religions. Sadly, many want to mix religions together—this is called syncretism or compromise.

Catholic Church building in Cusco, Peru; Photo by Bodie Hodge

I saw Catholicism in Peru mix (syncretize) with the local pagan gods. In the USA, people from Peru look at us and wondered why some Christian churches mix their Christianity with secular humanism (i.e., they add big bang and millions of years and evolution instead of six-day creation). Other churches mix a form of Christianity with sexual humanism (i.e., the sexual immorality movement (SIM) with LGBT).

When churches do this, they mock God’s Word by denying its clear teachings and accept tenets from false religions and elevate false beliefs to supersede what God says. Sadly, there are many in the United States (and the Western World) that need to get back to God’s Word from the first to the last verse. God is ultimate truth and it is by His Word that we will be judged on Judgment Day.

Of course, the Bible is true and the source of all truth that God, who is the truth, revealed to us. God promised to preserve His Word and He has done that—there are tens of thousands of manuscripts and fragments that show what we read today is the same that they read 2000 years ago.

The Bible’s Vital Teaching

So, what does the Bible teach? Let’s start with the good news, then let’s discuss the bad news, and then the Good News—yes, we capped it for a reason.

The “good news”

The good news is that God created everything perfect and very good. He tells us this in Genesis 1:31 and Deuteronomy 32:4. This is what was expected from a perfect God—a perfect world. There was no death or bloodshed or diseases or natural disasters. There were no cancers or heart attacks.

God is a God of life and the source or all life and all things. So the world was full of life and there was no death. God created Adam and Eve—the first two people and our direct ancestors. Your and my life came from them.

God made them unique from animals, plants, angles, and rocks. God made man in His eternal, ruling, intellectual, covenantal, image (Genesis 1:26-27). God gave us something to rule over (dominion) and had a covenant with Adam (e.g., Hosea 6:7), and made us in a way to have a covenant relationship with Him. Because we are made with a non-physical eternal aspect (our soul/spirit), this means it will go on forever.

The “bad news”

The bad news is that all people are sinners by nature and by choice. Ever since Adam’s (and Eve’s) rebellion in Genesis 3—which was basically high treason against God, mankind has inherited a sinful condition. This also means we are separated from a close relationship with God through spiritual death. We also have corruption and suffering to our bodies that will lead to physical death.

Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)

God is perfectly holy and just, so every sin must be punished. Scripture teaches that “the wages of sin is death,” meaning eternal separation from God under His righteous judgment (i.e., eternal conscious punishment in Hell). No human effort, good works, or religious acts can erase guilt or earn forgiveness—thus, all these false religions that try to “earn” a form of salvation are meaningless. Any war waged against an infinitely all-powerful God will easily lose. 

Left to ourselves, we stand condemned, unable to meet God’s perfect standard and wholly incapable of saving ourselves. The nature and punishment for sin has to do with the nature of God and His infinite power. God is infinite and eternal and so the just punishment from God would be an infinite punishment that would go on for eternity.

Having God’s infinite wrath on us for eternity is not something anyone would want for their sin! This is devastatingly bad news: mankind is stuck in a hopeless situation without divine intervention.

The “Good News”

The Good News is that the triune God Himself provided the solution in Jesus Christ. Out of love, God the Father sent His Son to take on human flesh, live a sinless life, and willingly bear the penalty for sin on the cross. Jesus willingly laid down His life (John 10:17) because He loved us (John 3:16-18).

Jesus died as the perfect infinite substitute, fully satisfying God’s infinite justice. His bodily resurrection on the third day proved His victory over sin and death and confirms that His eternal sacrifice, which was once for all, was accepted.

Salvation is a free gift of God’s grace and mercy, not earned but received through repentance and faith in Christ alone. Those who believe are forgiven and reconciled to God. We are seen as spotless and righteous before God because Christ’s perfect righteousness was transferred or “imputed” to us (Romans 4:23-5:1).  

Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)

Christ took our sin, and covered its full cost on the Cross and with His bodily resurrection gifted believers an eternal life. We too will follow our Lord in bodily resurrection. This is the Good News (also called the Gospel, which literally means, “good news”). We become new creations (2 Corinthians 5:17) passing from death to life (1 John 3:14), adopted as God’s children (Ephesians 1:5), and gifted the Holy Spirit who lives in us to walk in obedience and hope (Acts 2:38).

Regardless of what country you live—the USA or internationally—it is time for an important question: Have you received Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior? It doesn’t matter how bad you’ve been and how far from God you were or what false religion you have been entertaining, it is only one step back to Him.

□

Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist since 1998 helping out in various churches and running an apologetics website. He spent 21 years working at Answers in Genesis as a speaker, writer, and researcher as well as a founding news anchor for Answers News. He was also head of the Oversight Council.  

Bodie launched Biblical Authority Ministries in 2015 as a personal website and it was organized officially in 2025 as a 501(c)(3). He has spoken on multiple continents and hosts of US states in churches, colleges, and universities. He is married with four children.