Truthbomb Apologetics: Article: God-of-the-Gaps or Best Explanation? by Kenneth Samples

Chad has pointed to a very enjoyable article written by Kenneth Samples. It is very interesting. He answers the objections that many atheists level at Christians that we argue that just because science can't explain something than God must have done it. It's unfair. It's not true and Samples explains why believing God is not dodging questions or stifling scientific inquiry. I know atheists loathe this point but it's no less true: Without God there is no science. The scientist Johannes Kepler described science as "thinking God's thoughts after Him." I think that this is the best description ever.  Johannes Kepler is the one credited for starting to systematically looking at planetary motion. His work was later extended up by folks like Isaac Newton.


Truthbomb Apologetics: Article: God-of-the-Gaps or Best Explanation? by Kenneth Samples

Islam and Christianity A Common Word: What was the religion of Abraham?

I read another interesting  post from thgrandverbalizer on his blog. In this article he examines what Religion Abraham had. He makes the arguments that Abraham was not a Jew or a Christian because Abraham predates both Judaism and Christianity. I agree....partly.  Abraham did not have the law but he still made blood sacrifices to atone for his sins. How do we know this? When God asks Abraham to sacrifice Isaac as a burnt offering, Abraham didn't respond with "What is a burnt offering?" This is evidence that he was familiar with this aspect of worship. Abraham and God also made a a covenant over a slaughtered a heifer, goat, ram, dove, and a pigeon in Genesis 15 as a guarantee of the promises given to Abraham. The need to atone for sins through blood sacrifice to take away guilt and stay judgment. is evident before the law was given through Moses and is binding on everyone.

The grandverbalizer quoted the following from the Qur'an:

“Abraham was neither a Jew nor a Christian; rather he was an upright man who had surrendered to Allah (Muslim), and he was not of the idolaters.”( Holy Qur'an chapter 3 verse 67)” 

 

The suggestion seems to be that Jews and Christians don't submit themselves to God. I totally disagree. The thing is that describing Abraham as a Muslim is a tad of an overreaching conclusion. Did Abraham follow the  pillars of Islam? Did he ever once go to  Mecca? Nope. Therefore if you are going to use the ithe given logic that Abraham as not a Jew or Christian, then Abraham was not a Muslim either. So if you were going to label Abraham's religion  what would it be? Abraham was a believer. That is  how he was made righteous.

 ¹What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter? ²If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God. ³What does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness. - Romans 4: 1-3 

 

Paul quotes from Genesis 15:6. Abrahm was righteous because hebelieved in that God promised him. He didn't just promise him Isaac, God promised that through Abraham and isaac all humanity would be blessed.

God said to Abraham in Genesis 22: 17-18:

¹⁷ I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as the sand on the seashore. Your descendants will take possession of the cities of their enemies, ¹⁸ and through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me." 

 

Notice "offsrping" is singular! Some translations say "seed". God was referring to one particular person - Jesus. How can I prove that? Jesus said it.

 

⁵⁶Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad."
 ⁵⁷"You are not yet fifty years old," the Jews said to him, "and you have seen Abraham!"
 ⁵⁸"I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!" - John 8:56-58

Jesus' coming  excited Abraham. It was  Abrahm's belief that god was going top do what god told him He was going to do that made Abraham righteous. This is how we are saved today. Not of works.  I'm not saying that Abraham understood all of this as much as we do today but he did know that God would provide the sacrifice Himself.

 ⁶ Abraham took the wood for the burnt offering and placed it on his son Isaac, and he himself carried the fire and the knife. As the two of them went on together, ⁷ Isaac spoke up and said to his father Abraham, "Father?"
      "Yes, my son?" Abraham replied.
      "The fire and wood are here," Isaac said, "but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?"
 ⁸ Abraham answered, "God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son." And the two of them went on together. - Genesis 22: 6-8

That sacrifice was Jesus Himself.

Islam and Christianity A Common Word: What was the religion of Abraham?

Apologetics 315: Apologist Interview: Paul Copan

Paul Copan was interviewed by Brian Auten from Apologetics 315. It is very interesting. Copan talks about Apologetics and an upcoming book discussing the morality of God in the Old Testament. He was good enough to give us a sneak preview. He talks about slavery and the destruction of the Canaanites. I like what I've heard so far and I would like to read more. He bring up points I haven't thought of yet. This is a great interview.

Apologetics 315: Apologist Interview: Paul Copan

Related articles by Zemanta

• Facebook Apologists Miss The Point: Facebook Isn't The Future [Voices] (voices.allthingsd.com)

Apologetics 315: The Golden Rule Apologetic by Bob Passantino

Brian has posted a brilliant essay by Bob Passantino. The article is about how to apply the "Golden Rule" to how we do witness and how we do Apologetics.The principles and points raised are timeless. I totally agree with his points We can't ever treat people like we don't want to be treated and more than that we must do for others what we want done for us. I'm amazed how often people think the negative form of the Golden Rule is equivalent to what Jesus said but it isn't. He phrased it in such a way that we can't just passively not harm others but we must work to have a positive impact.
It can be really hard not to mock another's viewpoints or belief when they disrespect your own.  I think that sometimes when people push on you, you have to push back so that they know you are serious. This isn't always what we need to do. It can be used to make a point, get attention, and not to just smooth  a bruise ego. I find that discussing Christianity on John Loftus' blog - Debunking Christianity - does bring up a lot resistance. People who disagree with me often resot to name-calling and speaking meanly at  me because they disagee. So much pain and suffering and they dismiss the only way they can be free. However they have convinced themselves that God is not real and they don't need Him even if He did.exist. One example of how heated it's gotten is after Bronxboy47 had said very horrendous things to try to rebut my arguments.At one point he said that the Bible does not make sense and then makes the following argument:

On Satan's Fall From Grace

To speak of the unprompted emergence out of nowhere of a malice so unfathomably deep as to reject one's maker and attempt to sabotage his creation, is to postulate yet another uncaused cause. We are told the angels have free will. Free will to do what? To reject and rebel against an omnipotent God? That would be sheer and utter folly, and the angels damn well knew it. And yet, we are asked to believe that, nevertheless, some made the choice to rebel. Now I ask you, how brain damaged would you have to be to make a decision like that? 

Grace,

And please don't answer me, as Marcus would, that don't have brains! 

But what I said in response was:

BronxBoy47, Why shouldn't the angels be that stupid? I mean you are.

I realize that some might think that's heavy handed but I wanted to drive home the point that he is saying that it's stupid to rebel against an omnipotent God, yet that is what he himself is doing.  I've realized the best way to handle things so I don't end up getting so frustrated that I say something I'll regret later is to step away and then come back. It's not even that they have great compelling arguments, it's that one can take only so much stupid in a single setting.




Apologetics 315: The Golden Rule Apologetic by Bob Passantino

How long did the Hebrews live in Egypt? - BibelCenter [apparent] contradictions

I was recently  challenged on the point that some think that the Bible gives contradictory information about how long were Abraham's descendants in Egypt before the exodus. They ask was it 400 or 430 years? I found a great website that explains the discrepancy. It's interesting to me how if you only speak English and know nothing about life and culture in Abraham's and Moses' times there is no way you can understand what the text is saying. What I don't get is the protest that if this is the turth and the word of God that you shouldn't need to gain any special knowledge to understand it. We don't teat any other text that way. For example if you buy a new cell phone, do you really think you can use all the features on it without studying the manual? How much more do you think you need to know to fully understand a book eras removed from your experiences? Context and getting out of the text what it really says instead of what I think it says is important. We need to ask what is the author communicating? What is being said?  It's not asking those questions that lead to erroneously perceived contradictions. If am reading something in the Bible and in my opinion there is a conflict, why would I assume the bible is in error and I am not?

How long did the Hebrews live in Egypt? - BibelCenter [apparent] contradictions