Atheism is Dead: Dan Barker - Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications, part 1 of 14

I'm gearing up for James White's debate against atheist Dan Barker. I am certain that it will be interesting and awesome. I want people to hear the Gospel out of the event. I'm sure that God will use Dr James White in such a mighty way that many people will hear the truth who would have not heard it.

I've been listening to a lot of debates recently in which Barker has ineptly defended atheism, (It's not all his fault, atheism has no defense.) and I have often thought about deconstructing one of his favorite arguments against Christianity: "Bible contradictions" - an oxymoron for sure but Barker thinks its a big gun. It's more like an annoyance. However one of my brothers in Christ, Mariano, has beat me to doing such a series on his blog. Find the link below:

Atheism is Dead: Dan Barker - Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications, part 1 of 14

I heartily recommend everyone read his blog and this series of articles he's writing. It's awesome. The introduction is thoughtful and so well-written. One of the things I learned from reading his introduction is that Barker has a so-called "Bible Quiz" people can take, get a score and get his answers. I scored 38 out of 50. I'm so unimpressed and even offended at how her twisted the bible to make God look as "bad" as possible to the modern unregenerate American mind. He has personal hostility against God. Pathetic. One day, I may try to cover some of those problems he brings up here. In the mean time, get him, Mariano.

Pastor Stewart's Closing Remarks from 03-29-09

Here is a test of posting a part of our church service. It was taken on my cell phone. It's only a test, but the message given is far too important to be ignored


Audio

Pastor_Stewart_Clo...

Guess Who?

Who is this passage talking about:



He grew up before him like a tender shoot,
and like a root out of dry ground.
He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him,
nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.

He was despised and rejected by men,
a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering.
Like one from whom men hide their faces
he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

Surely he took up our infirmities
and carried our sorrows,
yet we considered him stricken by God,
smitten by him, and afflicted.

But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon him,
and by his wounds we are healed.

We all, like sheep, have gone astray,
each of us has turned to his own way;
and the LORD has laid on him
the iniquity of us all.

He was oppressed and afflicted,
yet he did not open his mouth;
he was led like a lamb to the slaughter,
and as a sheep before her shearers is silent,
so he did not open his mouth.

By oppression and judgment he was taken away.
And who can speak of his descendants?
For he was cut off from the land of the living;
for the transgression of my people he was stricken.

He was assigned a grave with the wicked,
and with the rich in his death,
though he had done no violence,
nor was any deceit in his mouth.

Yet it was the LORD's will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the LORD makes his life a guilt offering,
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand.

After the suffering of his soul,
he will see the light of life and be satisfied;
by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many,
and he will bear their iniquities.

Therefore I will give him a portion among the great,
and he will divide the spoils with the strong,
because he poured out his life unto death,
and was numbered with the transgressors.
For he bore the sin of many,
and made intercession for the transgressors.

Who is this? Who is the Passage Referring to? Moses Muhammad Jesus Krishna view results

Where is it? Is the above quoted from the Old Testament and New Testament? Old Testament New Testament view results

Mathematics and Theology - the Age of the Earth

Most science books who accept macro evolution teach that the earth is something like 4-5 Billion years old. Scientist typically arrive at this number using geologic dating of rocks and fossils on earth. Did you know that physics actually has a calculation that requires no more than simple algebra to arrive at a similar number for the age of the earth. The calculation depends on comparing on the relative concentration of Uranium isotopes in the earth's crust. The isotopes we used in my sophomore Physics class were U₂₃₈ and U₂₃₅. Both of these flavors or Uranium are radioactive. U₂₃₅ is used in simple nuclear weapons like the bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima in 1945. U₂₃₈ is used in our nuclear reactors. If we know about how many atoms of Uranium 235 and 238 are in the earth crust today and we know the half-life of both Isotopes then we should be able to figure out how old the earth is. The half-life of radioactive material is defined as the amount of time it takes for 1/2 of the material to decay into another kind of element. The equation we use to define the number of atoms (N) after time t, where is the half-life and N_i is the initial number of atoms:





So let's apply this idea for ration of U₂₃₅ to U₂₃₈. Remember that:


N_U235 is the number of U₂₃₅ atoms currently.
N_U238 is the number of U₂₃₈ atoms currently.
N_iU235 is the number of U₂₃₅ atoms initially.
N_iU238 is the number of U₂₃₈ atoms initially.
_U235 is the half-life of U₂₃₅ atoms. = years
_U238 is the half-life of U₂₃₈ atoms. = years




When I first got this problem in a problem set back in school I tripped out because they told me what the current ratio of U₂₃₅ to U₂₃₈ is: 0.0072516316. And I also had the numbers for the half-life. I knew I wanted to find t - the time it took for both isotopes to decay to the current ratio. So I tripped out. Got scared because I didn't know how much of each uranium isotope was in the earth's crust at the time the earth formed until I realized that I was supposed to assume that the earth had the same amount of each kind of Uranium in the beginning! what this means is that N_iU235 = 0.0072516316 N_iU238 and that means that you don't need to know the initial amounts of Uranium because those numbers cancel out - old algebra trick. When I plugged in all the numbers and solved the equation for t, I got 4 and half billion years back then.















Using the numbers I found off Wikipedia which slightly differ from the numbers I used in college and the scientific calculator add-on for Firefox I now get


years or years


4.18 Billion is close to 4.5 Billion (four-and-a-half) that I'm certain that I did the calculation accurately. Thank God!

A lot of people look at that and go...see the earth is as old as macro evolution shows that it should be. End of story. But this calculation depends on several assumptions that I never got proof that we should assume. I was just taught that the following assumptions were reasonable.

a. That the amounts of U₂₃₅ and U₂₃₈ were equal when the earth first formed. I mean other than it makes the math work out, I don't see why we need to assume that.
b. That half-life of U₂₃₅ and U₂₃₈ have always been constant. This one I'm willing to let them have as reasonable.
c. How did they determine that the ratio of U₂₃₅ to U₂₃₈ is 0.0072516316 in the earth's crust? How do we know it's the correct estimate?

I think that assumption "b" is reasonable, but "a" and "c" happen to seem convenient and I will need to do more research to really decide if they are reasonable. The best I can say is that it makes the math work out. When I was in school, I took their word for it and no proof was offered. Now, I think I would like to find out how they came up with their assumptions.

Mathematics and Theology - the Resurection

I remember often in my pre-college education, while sitting in mathematics courses, wondering what was the use of spending all that time wading through theoretical mathematics. Of course during college and through my professional career I have learned that theoretical mathematics becomes practical very quickly. Who knew? A good example is that it becomes useful even in the field of apologetics and there isn't any need to get real deeper than algebra. William Lane Craig argued for the resurrection of Jesus again Bart Ehrman very effectively using the probablistic calculus. You can read his argument in it's entirety on one of my previous posts and a you can watch the video here. I really like the argument he used.

Let X equal the probability that Jesus supernaturally was raised from the dead.
Let Y equal the probability that there are naturalistic explanations for what happened to explain the historical facts that although Jesus was crucified, that the tomb was empty 3 days later and people claimed to have seen him alive later, following religion based on His teachings and person.

The total probability that Christianity is correct can be mathematically represented as the following equation.

P(X,Y) = X /(X + Y)

Dr. William Lane Craig then pointed out that as Y becomes smaller and smaller, the probability function becomes closer and closer to being equal to 1. A probability of 1 means that its a certainty and most definitely true. Craig in the debate argued that the Biblical conclusion is most probable because it most adequately answers:

a. Why the Tomb was empty?
b. Why did Jesus' brothers and disciples start claiming Jesus was alive again and that He is God when before the Crucifixion and the aftermath his brothers didn't believe at all and his closest followers lost faith?

Ehrman tried to argue that there are other explanations without appealing to the idea that Jesus was supernaturally raised from the dead. He failed. Craig quoted the above mathematics from a leading mathematician, Richard Swineberg from Oxford University, and even more amazing gave the exact place for more research because X and Y can actually be numerically evaluated. The name of the book is The Resurrection of God Incarnate. If you plug in the numbers you get a number: 0.97; in math and physics a probability of 0.97 means more than likely. It means that it's a proven conclusion! Look at Ehrman's reaction. Research it for yourself!

Siku is back!

I have just heard that Siku has published a manga called Manga Jesus Volume 1. I have not read it yet, But I can't read it yet. I read the previous Manga Bible. I loved it. I wrote a post about it a long time ago: http://mmcelhaney.blogspot.com/2008/08/manga-bible-review.html and I can't wait to read the book. Here is a video from National Geographic.




Here is an interview from NPR

Another Reason To Get A PS3

I've found another reason why I should buy a PS3 as soon as God enables me to get one:
Ninja Gaiden Sigma 2

Athanatos - Apologetics Education

I have just found out about online Christian courses that are being offered at Athanatos in Apologetics. Some of the classes are being taught by world famous scholars such as Dr. Gary Habermas. Gary Habermas is an expert on explaining and resurrection the historicity of the Resurrection. There are many different classes being offered for free to about $30. On of Habermas' classes is The Problem of Pain and Suffering. He is perhaps one of the best people to teach this class. You see, Habermas was one of the scholars who was interviewed in Lee Strobel's The Case for Christ and he said that when he lost his wife to cancer, leaving him to care for their two young children alone, it was the truth of the Resurrection that carried her through her illness and he through the pain and suffering of loosing her.

Oops. I apologize. I forgot to define apologetics. It has nothing to do with apologizing but the woards are related. Apologetics comes from the word apologea in kione Greek. It means "make a defense". It's the same word translated "answer" used in 1 Peter 3:15 (NIV)

But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,

It's also the same word translated "excuse" used in Romans 1: 18-20

The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse

Therefore, Paul is saying that there is no defense - no reason - deny the existence of God.
One more point I've go to bring up is that the Greek word "athanatos" is a great name for an Apologetics class. It means "God-breathed". This is the word used by Paul to define what scripture is in 2 Timothy 3:16 which says:

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,

Proposition 8 "PSA"

Jimmy Kimmel's show aired a mock Public Service Announcement where Portia De Rossi apologizes for selfishly marrying Ellen.They make it sound as if gay marriage really does not not hurt anyone and unfortunately that is a lie. Here is the PSA.



Rather than rehash some of the points I've made in previous posts, I think James White's blog at his Alpha Omega Ministries provided the most succinct answers to this.

http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?amount=0&blogid=1&query=homosexual+marriage

Review Lee Strobel's "The Case for Christ"

I've recently completed reading Lee Strobel's book: The Case For Christ. It is a great book. Today, Lee Strobel is a famous Christian evangelist and apologist but 30 years ago he was an atheist and a journalist covering criminal law cases in Chicago. He was completely anti-christian. What changed? His wife came to Christ and Strobel noticed her complete change in character and improvement to her own happiness and how she related to him and their children. He decided to apply his professional expertise to research the evidence for what Christians believe about Jesus and prove that it was all wrong. That it could not possible be true. He studied, interviewed scholars and historians, checked out all the evidence using all the 20th century knowledge and resources at his disposal for two years. In the end, he realized that he could not hold on to his atheism because the evidence would not support it. He then discussed how coming to Christ change him. He became a better man. A better husband. A better father.

Strobel wrote The Case For Christ to show the people the journey he took. He interviewed Phychologists, Archeologists, Theologians, Historians, Physiologists, Textual Critics, and scholars who could share any kind of insight as to any information on Jesus. He posed to them the same kinds of questions that unbelievers would ask and showed that there are great resonable answers. I'm glad I read the book because it helped clear up a few things for me. I have read that 1st Corinthians 15:3-11 could be dated 3-5 years from the resurrection but I had never heard anyone explain how until I read the argument on page 35. Let's look at the passage before I give the argument:

For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.

For I am the least of the apostles and do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me was not without effect. No, I worked harder than all of them—yet not I, but the grace of God that was with me. Whether, then, it was I or they, this is what we preach, and this is what you believed.

The passage clearly describes the gospel of the early church in a creedal statement.

that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve.

We see that they believed that Jesus died for our sins, that He was bured, and then that He resurrected. In addition that people who were still alive at the time Paul wrote this letter saw the resurrected Christ. Dr. Craig Bloomberg dates the creed to with a couple of years of the crucifixion using the following argument. Many scholars agree that Jesus was crucified in 30 AD, placing Paul's conversion at 32 AD. This leads us to date Paul personally meeting the other apostles at about 35 AD. Sometime between 32 and 35 AD, Paul learned this creed. He didn't make it up. This what the church taught. This what the church teaches today (um should teach today.)

It's an excellent book and I think everyone should read it. If you already know Jesus, it will better help you give other people reasonable answers to their questions. If don't know Jesus, it will help you learn more about him. You have to do something with Him. You can't ignore Jesus or outright discount His claims. The evidence forces each one of us to decide was Jesus a liar? Was Jesus a lunatic? Or is Jesus Lord - worthy of your honor and worship? The evidence is conclusive: He's Lord. Go check it out for yourself. The Case for Christ is a great starting point!

Here is a video companion to the book:

Real Droids Are Available!

The only things missing from these robots is the movie versions' thrusters, artificial intelligence, and attitude!

Explore Mars With Google Earth

You can use Goggle Earth to explore Mars

What If I'm Wrong?

Over my life time I have heard many excuses as to why people choose one religion over another, or "decide" not to choose at all. Some say that because there is no way to be certain which religion is true that none of them can be true. And some atheists have "challenged" me with the question "What if I'm wrong in following the Bible and it is all wrong?" I laugh whenever I hear that question posed to a Christian. Of course I've considered that question! I have everything to gain and nothing to loose. Many times on this blog I have posted material to show that belief in the existence of God and that the revelations of the Bible are not only reasonable but inescapable. Setting that aside for a moment, let's take a look at a few of the major religions of the world and check to see if I am really missing anything by being a Christian. Following is the logic I use to explain my position.


What if I'm Wrong and...

Mormons are right
Mormonism is a "works" based religion. You work your way into heaven. And although doctrinally there a lot of major conflicts with historic, Biblical Christianity, there are a great many rituals and things that have no outside validation. This is why I'm certain that it's not true. The Book of Mormon has documented errors that have no reconciliation with the history.

Check out this video on Mormon Theology


Jehovah Witnesses are right
As far as a code of morality is concerned Christians and Jehovah Witnesses have much in common. The problems come up when discuss the nature of God and who Jesus truly is. However, ignoring that, then I'll just not be part of 144000 in heaven and will be on the new earth. I discount Jehovah Witness because the nature of God and the identity of Jesus are non-negotiable and must be defended.

Hear what Dr Walter Martin said about witnessing to Jehovah Witnesses

Witnessing to JW -...

Hindus are right
When I die, I will be reincarnated into a new human body. Can you really think of any better way to build up good Karma than to live the life the God of the Bible requires of us? But again, Hinduism must be discounted because it directly contradicts the Bible. They both can't be right. The Bible cannot be disproved and re-incarnation cannot be proven. I'll take my chances with the Bible.

Check out what Dr. Walter Martin said about re-incrnation

Walter Martin - Th...

Muslims are right
It depends on what Islamic sect you talk to when it comes down to what Muslims believe Allah will do Jews and Christians. The liberals seem to think that Allah will accept Jews and Christians and the Fundamentalists seem to think we are hell bound. Considering classic Christian doctrines are misrepresented and mangled almost beyond recognition in the Koran, I seriously doubt the Koran is true. Anyone who truly understands Islam and Christianity knows that there is no consensus. There can be no real reconciliation beyond live-and-let-live. They are so diametrically opposed that they both can't be right. My logic is that if Muhammad could have misunderstood the Trinitarian doctrine to think that it's God the Father, God the Son, and Mary. Not to mention the flagrant changes in the Old Testament narratives, or the part where Jesus speaks from the crib as a baby (from a late 2nd or 3rd gnostic source) or the numerous other contradictions with the Old and New Testaments, then I can't conclude that Christianity and Islam are compatible. Here is the kicker: The Koran says that Jesus was not crucified...while every historical evidence we have says that he was! Taking all of this together, leads me to the conclusion that I must discount Islam.

Look at this debate where William Lane Craig debates with a Muslim about the Resurretion


Atheists are right
If atheists are right then life has no meaning or purpose. There is nothing objective on which to base morality on. Meaningless existence. There is nothing to but oblivion and non-existence after we die. Let me grant, for a second, that atheism may be right. What does that mean for me as a Christian: nothing! No heaven or hell. But I get to live a moral life and leave the world in a better place than it was before I first got here. I'd argue that without God it's impossible to leave this world with such an epitaph. On the other hand if Christianity is true and Atheisim is false as I believe, then the atheist looses out on Heaven and being perfected. Imagine...finally to be complete and exactly what God purposed you to be without a single hindrance. To be able to see God as He truly is. Atheists has nothing to gain and everything to loose.

Video: D'Souza debates Dan Barker

Transformers Go Hollywood

Okay, I know I am showing my age with this one. But it is hilarious! You have to have been a child during the 1980's to appreciate this fully, but it's funny.



I don't like the way Optimus Prime is portrayed because he comes off as an absolute arrogant jerk who has let success in Hollywood go to his head. That being said...it was still funny. On top of that seeing Leader-1 from the Gobots waiting tables and trying to push a script like a has-been actor....was sooo funny!

Paul Maier - Jesus Really Existed

I recently came across a great interview with Paul Maier who is a Historian and an expert on First Century Roman Empire History. He has studied the early history of Christianity and is a recognized expert. He lays out his case for why we can faithfully believe that Jesus not only lived, but that He did the things the Bible says He did. It's awesome. I always enjoy him. I want to get his book In The Fullness of Time where he goes into greater detail.I really would like to see a debate between him and Bart Ehrman. In this interview Maier mentioned that he had debated Dan Barker, but I can't find that debate. If you know where I can score a copy please leave a comment as to where I can get it.

Apologetics-DidJes...

D'Souza vs Barker: Christianity Vs Atheism

I found this really cool debate at Apologetic 315.

Dinesh D'Souza is awesome. He always manages to come across as not just scholarly but very very articulate. He's a great spokesman for Jesus. He also manages to not seem condescending or mean to his opponent. No matter what stupid thing they say...case in point: Dan Barker!

Video:


Audio

dsouza-barker-deba...

Evangelist Temple's Pastor and Wife Appreciation 2009

We held our 15th Annual Appreciation for Pastor Frederick J. Stewart and his wife Melody Stewart! We held one service on Friday night March 13, 2009 at 7 pm and another service at March 15, 2009 at 4 pm. Both services were awesome. The children of the church sang "This Little Light of Mine" on Friday night. Here is a clip:



On Sunday, our speaker was Pastor Alfred Smith of Resurrection Power Evangelistic Center. Here is what I could get recorded:



Pastor Alfred Smith really preached a real good message. The main point I got was that we must do all we can to honor everyone...even if they have not done anything per se to deserve honor. We need to obey God. He says we need honor other people in each every relationship we find ourselves in. We need to pray and ask God to teach us how to honor other people. You have to see this sermon. I'm going to be doing a new series of blog entries where I post some of the sermons I have the honor of hearing.

Licona vs Barker Debate

A debate between Mike Licona and Dan Barker on April 14, 2003 at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. Very interesting! I found out about this debate from Apologetics 315. They're debating the Resurrection.

Video


Audio

debate-barker.mp3

I can't believe that Barker argued the way he did! I am amazed how silly he sounds. I've got to admit that he's playing fast and loose. I don't think agree with all his timelines and stuff but I will skip those. There is one part of his presentation that I have to write about. He claims that early Christians did not believe that Jesus was resurrected spiritually from the dead. I think he's wrong because he tries to use the information from Paul in 1 Corinthians 15 to say that Paul did not see Jesus' resurrection as physical. But in verses 12-34, Paul is making it clear that he believes that one day all believers will one day be raised bodily from the dead like our Lord and Master. Mike Licona answered his claims really well! I loved how he defended Peter by pointing out that yes, Peter denied Christ but Barker denied Christ and has yet to repent. Barker seems like the bigger liar.

Here are the verses I cited.

But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men.

But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For he "has put everything under his feet." Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.

Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them? And as for us, why do we endanger ourselves every hour? I die every day—I mean that, brothers—just as surely as I glory over you in Christ Jesus our Lord. If I fought wild beasts in Ephesus for merely human reasons, what have I gained? If the dead are not raised,
"Let us eat and drink,for tomorrow we die." Do not be misled: "Bad company corrupts good character." Come back to your senses as you ought, and stop sinning; for there are some who are ignorant of God—I say this to your shame.

Bart Ehrman vs Mike Licona Debate

A debate between Bart Ehrman and Mike Licona at Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary on February 28, 2008. Source The Debate Topic was: Can Historians Prove that Jesus Rose from the Dead? Licona argued "Yes" and Ehrman argued "No". I found out about this resource from Apologetics 315.

Here is the video:


Here is the audio:

licona-ehrman_deba...

Licona did a great job, especially given that he was loosing his voice. I think it takes a lot of courage to face the media darling of those who attack Christianity like Bart Ehrman. I've got to say that Ehrman's argument boiled down to the idea that Historians can't say for sure that Jesus was raised for the dead. He argues that Licona's three facts that show the Resurrection did happen.

1. Jesus was crucified.
2. People saw Jesus alive after the resurrection.
3. Paul's conversion because he saw Jesus after the resurrection.

Ehrman did his best to assert that History can't substantiate miracles because miracles are not probable. The problem is that history can't say that miracles have never happened. I think Ehrman dodged the question. He says that because history cannot prove miracles, it can say nothing about whether or not Jesus was resurrected from dead. He discounts the gospels as being reliable. He also does not believe that all 11 disciples were martyred. He did not have time to go into why he believes that. This explain why Ehrman rolled his eyes when James White said something about martyrs. I want to know why Ehrman has concluded that Jesus was not resurrected if he does not think history can say one way or another? I'd like to know why he thought that.

Ehrman tried to discount Licona's last 2 points by saying the disciples only saw Jesus because they really wanted to see him..alive...because they loved him so much. But Licona's right. They weren't expecting Jesus to show up. They thought their movement was over! And Paul...did Paul love Jesus before he saw Jesus? No Way! I think Licona won this.

I think another debate that would be useful to listen to on the resurrection can be found on two of my previous posts on William Lane Craig vs Bart Ehrman: video and audio.

Vote for Makayla!

Vote for Makayla at the following website!

https://www.greatamericanphotocontest.com/voter1/index_e.aspx?referid=EmailFriends&p=1184881&x=.jpg

Thanks!

Makayla Dancing in the Car 2008

I have definitely realized that children really watch everything we do. A few month ago, Makayla, was allowed to sit in the front seat of the car while we were parked. She is never allowed to be there alone. I wanted to see what she would do. Well, at first she did what she sees me do. Then she stood up and danced.

I'm a WII and I'm a PS3

This is funny!

Makayla Dancing At Home

Here is a video of my daughter Makayla dancing to one of her favorite songs. Funny thing is how I found out about how she liked that song. One Saturday, we were watching a bunch of DVDs. Then I happen to put the movie Sicko into the DVD player and this song was playing during the main menu! Makayla would not let me change it. She cried and through a fit if I picked up the remote. "No, Daddy, I want to dance!" is all she would say. So, I relented and let her dance. Funny thing is, I still haven't seen Sicko. Looks like I'll have to watch it when she sleeps. Not that I can't make her obey, just not worth the fight, especially given the way she light ups when she dances.

Nerd + Free Time = Awesome

Okay, I realize that many may think that I'm a nerd for being impressed by this, but you got to admit matching the elements with fictional characters has got to be a great way to remember them!



Nerd Free Time = Awesome

Posted using ShareThis

Compare to current periodic table


Here is a great online interactive periodic table!

Douglas Wilson vs Dan Barker Debate

This one is a keeper! Atheist Daniel Barker (right) debated Christian Douglas Wilson (left) August 8, 1997. It's really, really good! I really enjoyed it. The question under debate was "Does the Triune God Exists?" I thought the most interesting thing about the debate was seeing atheism being argued against from a reformed position. While neither the doctrines of grace, predestination, nor Calvinism was mentioned but you can still see the reformed position very ably defended. For example when Barker asked about the origin of evil, Wilson admitted that God allows the presence of evil. I wish I could see a video of this, because I would have loved to have seen Barker's face. I'm reminded of how Walter Martin once dealt with this question. He pointed out that if God did not allow the existence of evil for a time, none of us would be here because he would have to destroy all of us. How many of you are glad that God chose to do things his way instead of our way? I am!

I heard about this debate on Jame White's webcast when he started going over the debate and making great comments. Here is the original debate.

Dan Barker vs Doug Wilson debate "Does the Triune God Exist?" Part 1

barkerwilson1.mp3

Dan Barker vs Doug Wilson debate "Does the Triune God Exist?" Part 2

barkerwilson2.mp3

The recordings do not include audience questions but I found it really interesting to hear Barker's surprise in Wilson's admitting that God allows evil. I wish Wilson had been able to talk more about the existence of evil and how if God unilaterally destroyed all evil He would by definition obliterate every human being who exists, has ever existed, and will exist. I do prefer that God chooses to show his mercy towards all of us, but that also means that also see his wrath.

Dan Barker vs Doug Wilson debate "Does the Triune God Exist?" Part 3

barkerwilson3.mp3

The third part is Doug Wilson's thoughts about the debate and some of the decisions why he did things the way he did them.It was really interesting. James White's insightful commentary can be found on the following links at his website

Dividing Line 3/3/09
Dividing Ling 3/5/09
Dividing Line 3/11/09

New SNL Skit: "Rock Obama"

I thought that this was hilarious! Don't make Barack Angry. You would not like him when he is angry.

Ehrman vs Craig Update Post

Here is the video of the debate...I posted the audio and transcript at the following link.

On March 28, 2009, Dr. Craig, Research Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology in La Mirada, California, and Dr. Ehrman, James A. Gray Distinguished Professor and Chair of the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, debated the status of the Christian claim to Jesus' resurrection from the perspective of historical data. The debate was sponsored by the Center for Religion, Ethics and Culture and the Campus Christian Fellowship.

Juneteenth 2008

I just found this on the internet. I took my family to the Juneteenth celebration last year. While we were there, Makayla was dancing to the music and a few people noticed, including a photographer from the Vallejo Times-Herald. He interviewed Mitsouky and I briefly and took Makayla's picture. I thought that they were going to run it in the newspaper, but instead they posted it on their website coverage of the event. Makayla had a great time! Here is the link: http://extras.timesheraldonline.com/galleries/2008/062208a/pages/Juneteenth%2002.html

New Wolverine Trailer

May 2 can't come early enough! Here is another trailer for Wolverine.

Keeping Cool During A Debate

I've been able to recently listen to a few good debates with William Lane Craig defending the existence of God and the resurrection of Jesus Christ against atheists who disagree. I enjoy him, but I don't think I agree with his views of free-will and how human free-will fits in with destiny and salvation. Also he seems to agree that the creation accounts can coincide with prevailing ideas of some scientists - namely that the earth is several billion years-old. I have different theories. In no area that I disagree with him is it a salvation issue that could lead someone to hell...that is why I like listening to him. I also like how he remain unflappable and undisturbed no matter how stupid the other people speak. Here is an example:

Humorous Parodies

I came across a very clever parody. I laughed a long time. I'm sure it's a joke because it's Watchmen animated series intro with the look and feel of TMNT, Cops, and the Extreme Ghostbusters shows of the eighties....cheesy theme music included...and I have never seen it. If it had aired in the United States I would know about it! Take a look it is very funny!

Watchman: TV ad "Countdown Midnight"

Vanilla Ice Apologizes

I realize that this comes as to no surprise but I'm surprised that Vanilla Ice actually comes out publicly and admit that as a "white rapper" he was nothing but a pawn for getting white people to buy rap music. They wanted to mainstream rap music. I'm still amazed that he admitted.

Status of Charla Nash

You probably remember last month when Charla Nash of Connecticut was mauled by her friend's pet chimpanzee. Her injuries are grave. She lost her hands, nose, lips and eyelids and may be blind and suffering brain damage! She is sedated in the hospital and we need to pray for her.She is a real person.

Human/Chimpanzee Hybrids

I came across a video in which the question of if it is possible for humans and chimps to mate and produce offspring. The video suggests that humans and chimps are over 99% the same genetically, then the question should be explored. This argument really bothers me because more current research has shown that humans and chimpanzees are not as similar as the popular media tries to make us believe. Read my previous post: http://mmcelhaney.blogspot.com/2009/02/another-look-at-genetic-evidence-for.html

Here is the video:

A Stupid Criticism of Michelle Obama

I can't believe Michelle Obama is being criticized foe wearing clothes that are sleeveless especially in her official portrait! I mean she is still young and she's not showing any cleavage or anything risque. No where as revealing as the dresses sported on the red carpets of award ceremonies for the entertainment industry. I read an article about this turn of events at AOL. Apparently there are two opinions. One is that she should not wear such dresses because it is not formal enough for her position as First Lady of the United States. The other side sees nothing wrong with it. At first I was tempted to think that it was just because Michelle is black and racists were just looking for a reason to criticize her. Turns out that it's more complicated than that. Turns out that it goes with being First Lady of the United States period. The article references another article about the history of style of First Ladies of the United States. It turns out that all of them were either criticized for what they wore or started new trends, and sometimes both. It's really interesting. Read that article. Not all of Michelle Obama's critics are racist, many of them are just stupid.

Spider-Man Met President Obama

You probably already knew this but on January 14, 2009 Marvel Comics released a special issue in which Spider-man met President-Elect Obama and was present for his inauguration in Amazing Spider-man #583. I did not pick it up then. Fortunately, Wondercon 2009 was held last weekend and there were many opportunities to buy it and I did. What I wasn't prepared for was the fact that there have been 5 printings! You see sometimes a comic book (or any book for that matter) has a higher demand for more copies than the publisher published. The publisher will print more copies to keep up with the demand. What 5 printings mean is that this issue sold out 4 times! The only unfortunate thing is that later printings are not as valuable financially as earlier printing. This issue is a great example. At the convention, the first printing was being sold for $150.00 while the fifth printings were sold for $4.00! Adding to the collectability each printing has a different cover with Spider-man and Obama on them. The first printing has an alternate cover that does not have Spider-man on it. I bought a fourth printing of the issue and I am very pleased with it.

So what's in the book? Well, it contains 2 stories: a feature telling about Spider-man life's life in continuity and a back-up where Obama's involved. Both are interesting. In the first story it's about Spi-der-man relating to a good friend of his on her birthday. She doesn't know Peter Parker is Spider-man and the story is told from her point of view. Throughout the story she complains that Peter is flaky and undependable while simultaneously he is being a hero as Spider-man. At the end of the story Peter is the only one who shows up to her birthday celebration and he is there when she needs him. It's a great human story. As for the the shorter Obama story, Spider-man's arch-villain the Chameleon tries to impersonatee Obama so he will be sworn in instead as President. With Spider-man's help, Obama proves he's the real one and Chameleon goes to jail and Obama makes it to the Inauguration. It was a cute story.

Craig vs. Dicarlo Debate - Does God Matter?

In a word the answer is "True!" Dr. Craig argued that God does matter and Christopher Dicarlo argued that God does not matter. This debate was different. Instead of trying to prove that God exists they were arguing about God's relevance. This is a very different question. I liked how Dr. Craig argued about the absence of moral absolutes and plain emptiness and purposeless of life without a relationship with our creator. He was brilliant. This one is important enough that I will post it below the link where I initially found the debate

Apologetics 315: Craig vs. Dicarlo Debate MP3 Audio - Does God Matter?

Here is the audio:

Craig-Dicarlo-Deba...

Programmable Matter

I want this!!!!!

We Need God

I just read an article I found through AOL. It is called Does Any Woman Have to Lose Weight to Get Lucky? It details the story of a young woman who lost over half her body weight to make herself more attractive to men.

Charlotte developed an unhealthy obsession with food after she graduated from school. Being shy, she would stay home and have dinner for one while her friends went on dates. "I was 21 and desperate to be loved and to enjoy the affection my friends were getting from men," she said.

So she dropped the weight - 180 pounds and the article goes on:

After losing 180 pounds, Charlotte did the deed with a guy she met on vacation and has done it with two more since. She says, "Since I've become slim, I am more attractive to men. Sadly, that's the world we live in."

While we can't argue with the fact that we live in a looks-obsessed society, we know plenty of women of all sizes who have never let a few extra pounds stop them from getting active in the bedroom.

According to Charlotte, when she was heavy she "feared men seeing her naked and eventually stopped going out altogether." Sure, weight gain can take a toll on your self-esteem and energy levels, but that's only if you let it.

Take notice of what she said. She said she was "desperate to be loved" and she wanted attention from men because she thought that men would fulfill her desire to be loved. She overate because she was trying to fill a hole in her soul. My question now that she has slept with 3 different men, is her need to be loved been fulfilled. She's had three relationships with three men and after they got what they wanted from her, she was alone again. Is that love? Not according to the Bible. God wants more for us. Charlotte is not alone. We all have whole in our souls. Some of us try to fill it with food, material possessions, success, sex, drugs, television, all kinds of various vices, and everything that we use to make ourselves that we are happy apart from God. None of this will satisfy a human being but the love of God. It's a free gift. All we have to do is put our trust in Jesus, admit and repent of our sins - the things in our lives that are ungodly, and serve the Lord.