Apologetics 315: Apologist Interview: William Lane Craig

Thanks to Apologetics 315, we have a great interview with philospher and theologian, William Lane Craig. Listen to the interview at the following link

Apologetics 315: Apologist Interview: William Lane Craig

Islam and Christianity A Common Word: My thoughts on the Ergun Caner James White dispute

Image via Wikipedia

The blogger from Islam and Christianity A Common Word has posted a summary response to the Caner/White debate playing out over the Internet. I just want to comment on about half the post. I don't know enough about Ergun Caner to comment on his character or ministry. However I have been reading and watching Dr. James R White for almost 6 years. Although the blogger has no respect for Caner because he believes Caner to be dishonest, the blogger almost seems to go out of his way to show how White can't be trusted. I respectfully disagree. My comments will be italicized.

Now on to James White. James White though not a flat liar and full of deciet like Ergun Caner nonetheless has some serious issues to contend with. For example I couldn't help but notice a theological paradox that James White get's himself involved in when advising Ergun Caner in the following way,

"Dr. Caner, when speaking about the sacrifice of Christ, one can trust the Spirit to make the words alive in the hearts of God's elect. You don't need to make up fake debates just to wow an audience. "

Hmmm this is interesting. If the Spirit is what makes words alive in the hearts of God's elect what theological implications does this hold for James White? For example would it not be impossible for James White to ever admit to a wrong doing? I think anyone who debates James White has to seriously look into this very heavy Calvinist presupposition. Since they are sealed in Christ as many of the hardshells believed to be in pre regeneration is it possible for them to ever err? 

I have to say that I believe the blogger's viewpoint is being shaped by the Islamic view that all prophets are sinless while they are ministering and can't make mistakes. As a Christian, I know what it's like to experience the Holy Spirit at work in my own heart and have seen the work of the Spirit in others. I also realize that this does not make me perfect of sinless. I'm working on myself to get rid of sin although I am justified because of Christ. God sees me and judges me perfect although it is not yet actualized. Can the blogger say the same? Of course it's possible for White or I to error and still be saved. We just aren't supposed to make it a practice to sin on purpose. We are supposed to live holy on purpose!

The reason I say this is because James White high on himself in pointing out Ergun Caner's mistakes doesn't want you to see this video.

I don't get that from White. He's confident in the truth God has given him and is seeking more truth. He is also humble about his own worth. He's a freakin' Calvinist! Anyone remember the "T" in "TULIP" stands for "Total Depravity"? As far as White's concern that he is as worthless as the rest of us without Jesus. Without Jesus we are dead in sin and bound lock, stock, and barrel for hell because that is what we deserve! I've never heard White back down from an accusation. If you really have something why don't you send him the video below and call him on his webcast and give him to respond.

Notice the quote at 2:23 is not from the book he claimed it to come from? Than when we actually find the source it goes back to another source and another.... and... so forth. In fact in this debate James White did a very horrible job of trying to prove why the scriptures were inspired. The Christians felt it was a victory. Allah willing I will post this debate in the near future with commentary on why I felt Shabir Ally devastated James in this debate. The least of which is that James uses circular reasoning namely the sciptures are inspired because they say so. This also doesn't clarify for us which of those scriptures are inspired and which are not.

I'll be waiting for this post. Please be sure to document which debate it is, the date, and the location. 

The point being though is that James made an error here. He has not attempted to rectify this he has simply had some of those who dote on him respond by saying well is the source correct or not? Shabir Ally responded to it in the debate. So James White has still yet to make the correction. Now if the Holy Spirit inspires one what to say and James White is always abiding by the Holy Spirit and has always been pre-regenerated in Christ Jesus this has serious implications for anyone debating him.

I've never heard a Christian use the term "pre-regenerated". I hope that the blogger will provide a link to a post where he will explain what he means. I don't buy Ally's explanation because he didn't really explain why he knew the story was wrong. Also by asserting that White said he quoted a source that he says he did not quote is calling him a liar. I've never heard White respond to it. The blogger seems desperate to discredit James White. If the blogger will not call in to White's webcast, I will.

Obviously the man can never be wrong! James White doesn't believe that 'We' come to the truth on any matters. When he says 'We' this should be understood as 'those of you who don't yet believe as I do'. This is another reason why James White believes he doesn't have to prove the Trinity because it's revealed by the Holy Spirit, he simply has to defend it.

I have heard James White on many occasions admit to being fallible and to not being perfect on all matters! I think the blogger is not being fair to the man at all. I hear most Muslim apologists try to argue that the Bible does not teach the Trinity not that the Trinity can't be proven. Agreed that the Trinity is a revelation but its a revelation based on scripture that Muhammad himself said that you, as Muslim, should believe. If it wasn't in the scripture, White would abandon it. So would I. You have written that Allah is not omnipresent because he completely transcends space-time -  existing completely out of space and time. How would you know such a being without revelation? How do you prove that the God of the Qur'an exist?

He doesn't have to give reasons how the Bible came to be collected in the manner it is today, and what makes it inspired he simply believes. This is all fair and well, and James does come off as looking polished and forceful in debates. Yet, when you look a little closer at his position and arguments he has to be one of the worst Christian apologist of all time.

I totally disagree. Did you read the King James Only Controversy? He has written a whole book on the transmission of th Bible and why we know it is inspired and why we can be sure we know what it says.

Let's look at the facts:

1) James White has never proven the Trinity to be true, that's not his theological position. He simply defends the doctrine of the Trinity.

 How does the blogger prove that Allah wants Muslims to pray 5 times a day facing Mecca?

2) James White has never shown us who chose the New Testament canon and how it came to be regarded as scripture (doing so ventures into Catholic territory) something James wishes to avoid at all cost.

Again, read the King James Only Controversy. I think the blogger does not know much about White. If he did he would know that White has debated many a Catholic theologian/priests/apologists. He wrote a whole book - The Roman Catholic Controversy! What does the blogger mean White does not want to mix it up with Catholics. He just debated Roman Catholic apologist Tim Staples on Purgatory about 4 weeks ago!!!

3) James White never gives reasons why the Bible is inspired (God-breathed) for example scientific miracles, prophecy fufilment or anything that can be falsified proved and disproven. He simply makes the statement that the New Testament gives some vague reference to inspiration and for him that alone is sufficient.

Please go read the KJV Only Controversy and I think the Blogger should read and listen to more of White's work.

4) James White can never honestly look out at an audience and say 'God loves you'. If he did say it he should clarify by asserting that God loves everyone in that audience. His theological position cannot allow him to say this.

Can the blogger look at an audience and say "Allah love you" as in everyone in the audience?  No? Because it's more complicated than that? I'll take that answer but White would have to give the blogger the same answer.

Conclusion:

Ergun Caner's bad point (liar , charlatan, and Christian con man)

Ergun Caner's plus point (salesman, entertainer, mic skills, theologically Arminian)

Kind of scary that the blogger considers Caner's arminianism a plus given how Islam has it's own version of predestination.

James White's bad point ( inconsistency , poor exegesis, inability to make the Bible credible, theologically Calvinist)

James White's plus point (his crafty style of debating which doesnt' really involve meaningful exchange, just trying his best to shift the burden of proof on his opponent without having to defend anything himself) , His emphasis is not on winning souls it's upon debates and it can't be do his theological position as a Calvanist.

As much street preaching White has done....all the world-travel...all the books....all the study....to be said that he doesn't care about winning souls seems completely dishonest. I've never seen Dr. White shy away from explaining why the truth is on his side. The blogger not only shows a misunderstanding of the Trinity but of Calvinism also.

Islam and Christianity A Common Word: My thoughts on the Ergun Caner James White dispute

Islam and Christianity A Common Word: "Ex Muslim" Ergun Caner Exposed by Christians

I've recently have discovered a great blog called Islam and Christianity A Common Word and although I don't agree with much of Islam, I've got to give the blogger credit on good material that requires good answers and deep thought. In this post I have linked to is a deconstruction of a video by Ergun Caner from a Muslim point of view. It attempts to document the errors and lies that many Muslims believe he is guilty of. It's instructive because the blogger sees Caner's tactics and offensiveness as one-in-the-same as failures in Christianity. This is why James White coming out and saying Caner is wrong is important. Caner is making all Christians look bad and when people loose their respect for you it is really hard for them to hear you declare the Gospel. You can really see that in the blog post, even if you agree with Caner and not with White.

IsIslam and Christianity A Common Word: "Ex Muslim" Ergun Caner Exposed by Christians

Islam and Christianity A Common Word: "Ex Muslim" Dr. Ergun Caner accepts James White's challenge...

Here is another great post from  Islam and Christianity A Common Word. It's again concerning the dispute between James White and Ergun Caner. My remarks will be in red.The blogger seems to spend time criticizing White.

Bismillah ir rahman ir raheem
As salamu 'alikum wr wb
(May the Peace,Mercy of Allah and Blessings be upon you)


"Ex Muslim” Dr. Ergun Caner accepts James White's challenge... Help from Peter Lumpkins

Tom Ascol and James White may have exposed Ergun Caner as an 'ex fake Muslim' but Dr. Caner is not ready to resign from Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary yet!

There are several stages to Ergun Caner's response and attack upon James White.

Ergun Caner's personal attack could consist of many things.

Considering the true things that White has been able to bring up against Caner, the only Christian response he could possibly make is to humbly repent for the errors. Doesn't seem he's going to take that option.

These are some of the things Ergun Caner may bring up in retaliation against James White.

The first of which is personal. Many people do not know about James White's troubled past. The fact that his sister has left Calvinism for Catholicism.

Um, how does the decisions his sister makes have anything to do with James White's ministry or salvation or with vindicating Caner? Let me help you. It doesn't

Please see here:http://thegrandverbalizer19.blogspot.com/2009/11/apologist-james-white-denies-doctrine.html

The fact that James White does not wish to discuss his father's molestation of his sister; and the extremely unloving attitude that James White has shown his sister. Please see here: http://thegrandverbalizer19.blogspot.com/2009/11/apologist-james-white-cold-attitude.html

Um, how does the pain in the White family have anything to do with defending Caner. And if James White has not publicly spoken about his sister's accusations, how does that lessen the value of his work or person. You don't know what he has or has not done for his sister. I am not convinced by her letter because when I read the part where she said had she been raised catholic she would have known to call the police I have to wonder about all the child abuse by catholic clergy? Were they taught to call the police if a parent abused them but accept it if a priest does it? I don't think so. The bottom line is that we don't know what happened and it's none of my or anyone outside of their family's business either!

Ergun Caner's personal attack of James White could consist of questioning his academic background.

There could even be a declaration signed by all disputing factions that no person will be taken seriously in the realm or area of debate until their degrees and qualifications can be taken as credible by the U.S department of education. This could see several debators and apologist most notably James White taken out of the debate arena completely!

What would happen in this scenario is that in general Catholics, Baptist, Mormons, and other demoninations and factions would not debate James White anymore until he got his education first.

The part of this post floored me. What proof does the blogger have that James White does not really have a good doctorate? How is his education is not up to snuff? Just because you disagree with me does not make you uneducated. It's a fallicious statement atheists use against theists all the time. The blogger offers no proof that James White is academically challenged.

Ergun Caner's could point out that James White is moving away from the once saved always saved position. Please see here:http://thegrandverbalizer19.blogspot.com/2009/11/apologist-james-white-denies-doctrine.html

I read the blogger's "proof" and I disagree. Eternal security is one of the 5 main points of Calvinism. And I have never heard a Calvinists deny that people leave the faith and become apostates but this means that they were never part - they were never of the elect. 

Ergun Caner could further point out that James White is slowly moving away from the Biblical Innerancy issue.Please see here: http://thegrandverbalizer19.blogspot.com/2010/01/james-white-backs-away-from-biblical.html

The blogger at this point actually points to a previous post that I myself also blogged months ago. However he got a totally different understanding of what White actually said. He makes the error all Muslim apologists make in  assuming that Christians mean the same thing they do when we say a scripture is inerrant. The Muslim view of inerrancy seems to be more akin to the King James Only proponents. Therefore rather than try to correct all the errors here, I suggest the blogger and all who are interested read The King James Only Controversy by James White. It tells how the Bible was transmitted to us today and why we can trust it to be true. 

Personally I think if I were a Christian I would stick with William Lane Craig, Mike Licona, Norman Geisler and the like. If I were a Christian I would be suspicious of both James White and of Ergun Caner!

After reading a few posts, the blogger does not like James White! I can tell. He does not like Calvinism either. I listen to and enjoy William Lane Craig, Mike Licona, and Norman Geisler. However Christians follow Jesus no one else. Suggesting otherwise is like if I accused the blogger of following Muhammad not Allah. I wonder if the blogger ever looked at what Geisler think of Islam? He throws it into much the same categories as Calvinism. http://mmcelhaney.blogspot.com/2009/05/predestination-in-islam-dr-norman.html

It seems that those who are attacking the credentials of Ergun Caner are not looking into James White self proclaimed 'doctorate' and rather or not he should be called 'Dr' White. Also people may refuse to debate James White in the future as apologist should only want to debate people who have the education and academic profile and not just an ability to speak infront of crowds.

Let us be frank: to be able to speak in front of crowds about high level, technical subjects against "experts" and win, means that you have the education and academic profile. I still would like to see proof for why the blogger would call White's doctorate into question because none is provided. But he beats those who do have doctorates. Does that mean we should call his opponents into question too?

So Peter Lumpkins has called out the James Whiteophites on their inconsistencies when attacking Ergun Caner.

As Peter Lumpkins has pointed out see here:

http://peterlumpkins.typepad.com/peter_lumpkins/2010/02/dissing-dr-ergun-caner-the-monotonous-mission-of-tom-ascol-and-james-white.html#more

Stay tuned .... will keep you posted (literally) Allah-willing. 

 I looked that Lumpkin's arguments. I had laugh so I would not cry. They are none arguments. They basically amount to: "So what if Caner misrepresented himself as debating good Muslim apologists? You're a stinkin' Calvinist. I never liked you anyway." Great way to win a debate.

Islam and Christianity A Common Word: “Ex Muslim� Dr. Ergun Caner accepts James White's challenge...

A Response to Dr. Ergun Caner, President, Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary

I've done a couple of posts pointing out  Dr. James White's response to the ministry of Ergun Caner (on the right). Caner has attacked Reformed theology and claims to have been a Muslim (although he converted to a Christian as a teenager).  Caner has said that he has debated people that he hasn't debated. White and other Christians have called him on that. because it makes Christians look bad...real bad...like we have to lie to defend the Bible.  White is not wrong to do this. The Bible tells us that we must judge the Church in the Church. We can't allow the name of Christ to be reproach by our actions. Muslims and Atheists are having a field day saying that Christians lie if it furthers are agenda. Christians like James White try to head this off. I wanted to link to his formal response because Dr. White is handling the situation exactly as the Bible tells us we should when Christian brothers disagree. White is often be smudged by being called cruel or unloving but you can't think that when you read his post. Before I end this here are scriptures that show what I'm talking about.

When people were spreading false teaching in Galatia, Paul pulled no punches.

 ⁷You were running a good race. Who cut in on you and kept you from obeying the truth? ⁸That kind of persuasion does not come from the one who calls you. ⁹"A little yeast works through the whole batch of dough." ¹⁰I am confident in the Lord that you will take no other view. The one who is throwing you into confusion will pay the penalty, whoever he may be. ¹¹Brothers, if I am still preaching circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross has been abolished. ¹²As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!
 ¹³You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature; rather, serve one another in love. ¹⁴The entire law is summed up in a single command: "Love your neighbor as yourself." ¹⁵If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other. - Galatians 5:7-15

¹⁵"If your brother sins against you go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. ¹⁶But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that 'every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.' ¹⁷If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector. - Matthew 18:15-17

A Response to Dr. Ergun Caner, President, Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary

Dr. Claude Mariottini - Professor of Old Testament: The Name of God: Jehovah

Image via Wikipedia

Dr. Mariottini has posted a great post summarizing everything one needs to know about the name of God. I find this very important information. Too often Christians seem to forget that the Bible has two testaments not just one and the Old Testament is full of great knowledge and real nuggets that we can use to deepen our relationships with God and each other. All the people we read about in the Bible has a relationship with God. One thing that this post reminded me of was the fact that the desire to avoid using the divine name goes back to Judaism where many Jews went out of their way to not even write out the Divine Name - let alone speak it out loud. I've heard of cases of accidentally offending Jews by just reading the Name out loud. In some ways this may be good because it helps us to remember to reverence the name. I enjoy thinking about who God is - His Nature and His Character. Here is a great video and song that I think sheds much light on what the Old Testament is saying.




Dr. Claude Mariottini - Professor of Old Testament: The Name of God: Jehovah

Dr. Claude Mariottini - Professor of Old Testament: Palestinians Oppose Calling the Cave of Machpelah a Heritage Site

Image via Wikipedia

 Dr Mariottini has posted a great article about how the Palestinians are reacting to the recent archaeological evidence for the Jewish claims to the Holy Land. I agree that the reaction comes to no surprise. If it is proof that Genesis is correct that several of the founders of  Israel are buried where the Bible says they are buried it adds credibility to Jewish claims on the land. I wish that there was some way that they could share the land.  I mean because technically the land does belong to the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. While the Palestinians are obviously also Abraham's descendants they are not Isaac's or Jacob's. It's like Issac and Ismael are still at each other's throat although the two men buried their differences and buried their father together.

¹ Abraham took  another wife, whose name was Keturah. ² She bore him Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak and Shuah. ³ Jokshan was the father of Sheba and Dedan; the descendants of Dedan were the Asshurites, the Letushites and the Leummites. ⁴ The sons of Midian were Ephah, Epher, Hanoch, Abida and Eldaah. All these were descendants of Keturah.
 ⁵ Abraham left everything he owned to Isaac. ⁶ But while he was still living, he gave gifts to the sons of his concubines and sent them away from his son Isaac to the land of the east.
 ⁷ Altogether, Abraham lived a hundred and seventy-five years. ⁸ Then Abraham breathed his last and died at a good old age, an old man and full of years; and he was gathered to his people. ⁹ His sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah near Mamre, in the field of Ephron son of Zohar the Hittite, ¹⁰ the field Abraham had bought from the Hittites.  There Abraham was buried with his wife Sarah. ¹¹ After Abraham's death, God blessed his son Isaac, who then lived near Beer Lahai Roi. - Genesis 25:1-11

Dr. Claude Mariottini - Professor of Old Testament: Palestinians Oppose Calling the Cave of Machpelah a Heritage Site

Dr. Jason Lisle and Dr. Hugh Ross Debate: Special Webcast - Answers in Genesis

Image via Wikipedia

So what happens when two believers who are educated in similar scientific discipline really debate old earth and young earth creationism? I always wondered. Well thanks to Mike from the Apologetic Front I have found one. A radio debate between Jason Lisle who is an AstroPhysicist and Hugh Ross who is an Astronomer. Lisle was arguing that the days of creation were six 24-hour days while Ross sees them as 6 periods of time that scientific observation gives you periods of millions of years. What struck me was how similar Lisle's arguments were to Kent Hovind's. The only difference I could find was that Kent has a thick southern accent living from Florida.

The discussion seemed to center on how the question affect how you view and have confidence in the Bible. I personally agree that the Bible is correct and we should make all effort to understand what the Bible says. In both Lisle's and Hovind's theology I see a few problems

1. They argue that plants are not alive because they don't have consciousness.
2. They ignore that the genealogies in Genesis don't list every single generation.
3. They think that nothing died but plants (but according to them plants are not alive) before Adam sinned.

In addition Ross made a major point. Many times this debate centers on Genesis 1 and 2 but ignore the fact that the Bible does discuss it in other passages: Job 38; Psalms 104; and Proverbs 8. This is an awesome point. And I did not like Lisle's response, I don't think we can say those passages are poetic.

I was real disappointed how Leslie did not try to engage Ross on the Astronomical and Physics that Hovind failed miserably to be able to do. I would have like to see how Lisle would explain how he can see that the earth is only 6000 years old from astronomical information. I find that my attitude towards the subject fits much closer to Hugh Ross' attitude.




Dr. Jason Lisle and Dr. Hugh Ross Debate: Special Webcast - Answers in Genesis

Related articles by Zemanta

• "old-earth" vs. "young-earth" creationism (schansblog.blogspot.com)

Surah 112 in Response to a Muslim Apologist

I don't know what what bothers me the most: equating Biblical Christianity with Islam or seeing the Doctrine of the Trinity butchered beyond recognition. The Trinity is one of the major differences we have with Islam. A misunderstanding of the nature of God is the root of almost all heresies. The reason why Islam considers us heretics is because we disagree on this major point. They think that we are saying God is three while we really agree that God is one being. Dr. James White does a great job explaining what the difference is and what do we really mean in historic, Biblical Christianity when we use the term "Trinity".




Surah 112 in Response to a Muslim Apologist

YouTube - Is religion battered woman's syndrome? No!

Image via Wikipedia

I have heard about this very interesting video via Twitter. And iu thought it warranted a response because it is something we should consider. Do religious people suffer from a similar mental bondage as a woman abused by the man in her life who should love and protect her? Here is the video:




Let's analyze the argument to see if it makes sense. The video's author first begins to make great pains to say he is merely raising the question not making an assertion. He also says that he takes issue with being called a God-hating atheist because you can't hate what you don't believe exists. Point granted. So instead of accusing him of being an atheist, let's just concentrate on the God-hating part. It's come up later. For now I will grant his four characteristics of an abused woman.

1. The Woman believes violence is her own fault.
2. The Woman has the inability to place the responsibility for the violence elsewhere.
3. The Woman fears for her life and/or her children's life.
4. The woman has an irrational belief that her abuser is omnipresent and omniscient.

The video author then makes the argument that each of these characteristic are shared by religious people. Let's look at his argument for each one. I'm going to combine 1 and 2.

1. It is suggested that acts of nature and natural disasters is the same as woman battering if you blame them on yourself - ie "bad thing happen because of sin,lack of faith,non-acceptance of God's love"

"Meaning that you can't conceive of the possibility that god just let's bad things happen to good people for no reason (the must be part of god's plan"

The argument amazes me because the Bible nor science supports this. The Bible makes it plain that bad stuff happens and it may have nothing to do with anything we do bad or good. Natural disasters like earthquake, flood, tornadoes, hurricanes and the like are necessary for the health and well-being of the planet earth. Unfortunately, many of us die in these things, but the earth would be inhabitable without them. It's not always personal. And Christians die in natural disasters just like everyone else. However a woman can survive just fine if her husband does not beat her. Let's not just bring up natural disasters - what about human atrocities and crimes. Well Jesus did comment on this issue:

1Now there were some present at that time who told Jesus about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. 2Jesus answered, "Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this way? 3I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish. 4Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them—do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? 5I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish." - Luke 13: 1-5

3. You fear for your life or the lives of your family (meaning that if you are not well behaved according to god's rules, god will punish you with death, either via a natural disaster or as horrible disease or torture for all eternity.

If you are Biblical Christian why would you be afraid? No one is well-behaved enough to expect to have no problem. How ever we have the following promises.

1Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, 2because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death. 3For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man,[d] 4in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit. - Romans 8:1-5

28And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him,[j] who have been called according to his purpose. 29For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified. - Romans 8:28-30

As for point 4, obviously a man who abuses his wife is not omnipotent, omnipresent, or omniscient although he wants his poor women to believe that. God how ever is truly all of those things and he has a word for those abuse their role as husbands.

The video's author asks a very important question and it's definitional to what being a Christian truly is.

In summary, do you thank god for the good things in your life, and blame yourself for the bad?

A christian thanks God for the good and the bad!

He replied, "You are talking like a foolish woman. Shall we accept good from God, and not trouble?"
In all this, Job did not sin in what he said. Job 2:10

Here is something that the video author wrote that make me think he is a God-hater:

Personally, I believe that if you truly love someone, yet they refuse to love you in return you do not cast them into a pit of fire to suffer eternal torment.

He thinks that people are tormented in hell because they just refused to love God as if the relationship is the same as when a woman rejects marrying a man or passes up a date.It's not the same thing at all. It's more like a man pays all a woman's bills, buys her a house and cars, gives her the best of everything without her working and she squanders it all, has sex with other men in their bed, cursing him to all who will listen and to his face. Not just disrespect...but hatred and scorn. This what we do to God when we choose not love Him.

The video ends with:

So Is Religion equivalent to battered women's syndrome? That's up to you.

I'm not telling anyone to give up their faith but if u are going to devote your one chance at existence to worshippng a god the least you can do is think about it.

and the thought that religious people are in denial just like the abused woman who stays with her abuser is presented. God does not abuse us..so the analogy does not hold. It's not up to the one who is considering the question - it's the objective truth. The equivocation does not work if you are at all honestly thinking it true. I'd invite the one who thinks serving God as a waste of  a life to really think about it because I personally know that the you cannot afford not to serve the one who created you and sustains you! Not out of fear but love and common sense!

YouTube - Is religion battered woman's syndrome?

Trinity International Baptist Mission

Here is a great article about how to exegete scripture. It's not a bad explanation.I would add research what other people have said and written. Discuss passages at church and look at historical and cultural contexts.

Trinity International Baptist Mission

YouTube - Mary Jo Sharp vs. Tabasum Hussain: Women in the Bible and the Qur'an, Part Two

This is part 2 of the debate between Mary Jo Sharp and Tabasum Hussain regarding "Women in the Bible and the Qur'an" This is the first rebuttal period. The debate really heats up with each scholar give it her best shot to defend against the claims made by the other and simultaneously making the point their own Holy text has a higher view of women than the other. I thought Dr. Sharp was great. She stuck to just the Qur'an and the Hadith. However Dr. Hussain meandered off the Bible and the Jesus a lot. I notice that a lot of male Muslim apologist argue much the same way. At least Hussain is more respectful about it. The problem is that Dr Tabasum Hussain seems to me to be an anomaly - almost a contradiction. She is a Muslim, highly educated woman yet she was born and raised in the west. Had she been born in a Muslim country, would she had have had the same opportunities? To be fair many women in the West don't get the same opportunities either. I think Sharp is handling the debate correctly because both Christian and Muslim men have misused their authority and power, therefore the debate should center around what the Bible and Qur'an actually says and what Jesus and Muhammad said.






YouTube - Mary Jo Sharp vs. Tabasum Hussain: Women in the Bible and the Qur'an, Part Two

Iron Sharpens Iron: Louis C. Love, Jr.: The Doors of the Church are Opened (And How I Walked In)!: An African American's Journey into Reformed Christianity

This was a great video on Iron Sharpens Iron of Pastor Louis C. Love, Jr.  on how he as an African American begain to agree with the theology of Calvinism (aka The doctrines of Grace). I really enjoyed him. It's been my experience that my African-American ancestors accepted God's sovereignty in their lives although they may not had articulated a systematic theology as the reformed denominations have. How else could you accept your station in life as a slave or a persecuted minority and a sovereign all-powerful God unless you believe that God has a purpose for everything and that he will deliver you? It has been my experience that most African-American churches are not theologically centered but deal mostly with emotion. WE say we believe the Bible. We say we want to live Holy and that Jesus redeemed us, but few of us really think through what all of those things mean.  Listen to the interview from the link below. The Pie chart above shows the religions of African Americans.

Iron Sharpens Iron: Louis C. Love, Jr.: The Doors of the Church are Opened (And How I Walked In)!: An African American's Journey into Reformed Christianity

Moral Relativism? / Messenger Puppet

I found the graphic above without much explanation.  It's obviously that the point being made is that in the Bible God is credited with killing more people than the number of people who the Bible says were killed by Satan. Fine I agree. The graph does not explain how the final tally was arrived, but let's grant that it's true. My response is "So!!!" God can literally do whatever He pleases and any time anywhere.There isn't a single human being who doesn't deserve death. The fact that we live at all is because God's grace and mercy which He is not obligated to give to us.

Moral Relativism? / Messenger Puppet

YouTube - Lawrence Krauss and Michael Behe debate

Okay, this isn't really a debate but a moderator on a PBS News program. I like Krauss a lot. It saddened me that he did not listen to Behe. Krauss claims that science should be agnostic and unbiased. He said that he thinks Intelligent Design is just a way to get God through the back door of science. This shows that he has a bias, believing that God does not exist. I call it a bias because if God does exist why throw out evidence and an interpretation of that evidence for God and only because there hasn't, in his opinion, been enough peer-reviewed research. Don't you think the ramifications could be profound? Why would you wanna miss out on it? Shutting down the dialogue is not the answer.





YouTube - Lawrence Krauss and Michael Behe debate

Confident Christianity: Debate on Women in the Bible and the Koran

Mary Jo Sharp recently debated Tabasn Hussain on the topic of Women in the Bible and the Qur'an. It's interesting to see two women discussing this issue especially since both Christianity and Islam are accused of denigrating women. I loved Dr, Sharp's presentation. She made a great defense for how the Bible sees women. She seemed to be fair to the Muslim's view. Dr. Hussain however misrepresented Genesis 1:26. While you may try to explain "man" as meaning only "male" you have to ignore verse 27 to think that male is more important than female. I also don't think Hussain fairly represented what the Bible teaches about who was responsible for humanity being kicked out of the Eden. The Bible does say that Eve was deceived but like the Qur'an put the responsibility on Adam. I think Hussain also tries to use the New Testament to say that the Christian church tells women to be quiet. I think Hussain's explanation about the passage about dealing with wayward wives does not hold much weight. No where in the Bible does it say its okay to use physical violence on the wife.  Hussain employed many tactics that I see Muslims used time and time again. She used non-Christian sources and used men as sources. She even used the Biblical imagery of adultery and prostitution being equated with apostasy to say that the Bible condones rape?!!! However she repudiate honor killings while it is an establish practice non-western muslim countries because the majority of western scholars do not view the Qur'an that way. Why is it okay to argue that way when it helps her and not to argue that way when it helps her? This is part one. I can't wait to see the next part of the debate because I hope to hear some interaction between them. They both raised questions and great points I want to see how they deal with the issues being raised.





Answering Muslims
Confident Christianity: DEBATE VIDEO

YouTube - Does The Fossil Record Support Evolution?

This was an interesting video tweeted to me in order to support the idea that the fossil record supports macro evolution. It's shocking to me how many people assume that if you disagree with evolution you don't understand what it is. This video does not present any new information for me but it does try an analogy that I haven't seen used before. The video equates the fossil record to a family photo album. I like the analogy. I also am amazed that at one point it's asserted that "transitional forms" are not animals that are half one thing and half another. Like the fact that we are not expecting there is not going to be a half crocodile and a half duck we can agree on. However later in the video transitional forms are suggested to have been found and cataloged. They are defined as animals that fill in gaps between animals as a common ancestor. Such literature holds that dolphins and hippos have a common ancestor. However they also agree that dolphins and lettuce have a common ancestor if you go back far enough. The analogy in the video is that each ancestor is only slightly different and those differences accumulate to major differences like running on four legs versus swimming. This is why the family album breaks down. All humans on it will only be slightly different and will be human. Does that make sense that there should be nonhuman characteristics represented in the Album without inferring ancestors to fill in the gaps. It's like claiming to be a descendant of Ghengis Khan yet not having a single mongol ancestor.




YouTube - Does The Fossil Record Support Evolution?

Christian Apologetics - Life and Doctrine: Trinity : is Jesus Identified as God?—the Doxologies

Image via Wikipedia

Mariano has posted an article listing the doxologies in the New Testament pointing Jesus out as God. This is proof that the early Christians did see Jesus as God. Doxologies are the prayers, short hymn of praises, and benedictions pronounced during Christian services. These early Christians would heard these theological points and even memorizing them just as we should today!them.

Christian Apologetics - Life and Doctrine: Trinity : is Jesus Identified as God?—the Doxologies

A Wonderful Evening of Debate at Trinity Road Chapel

On February 22, 2010, Dr. James White debated Abdullah al Andalusi on the subject of the Christian and Islamic positions on the nature of God in London. He posted several pictures on his blog post and I hope to be able to see a recording from the debate soon. It's going to be a goodie! Read Dr. White's thoughts regarding the experience at the following link!


A Wonderful Evening of Debate at Trinity Road Chapel

Dr. Claude Mariottini - Professor of Old Testament: Biblical Fonts

Image via Wikipedia

Dr, Mariottini has been kind enough to point out some great Greek and Hebrew fonts. I'm real grateful because I'm sure I'm going to be publishing more Greek and Hebrew words as my study in those languages continue.

Dr. Claude Mariottini - Professor of Old Testament: Biblical Fonts