Sunday, September 5, 2010

Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: Council of Nicaea in 325 AD – Excellent Question!

I have been reading a short transcript of Dr. James White answering the assertion made by Atheists, Mormons, and Jehovah Witnesses stating that the Trinitarian doctrine started at the Council of Nicaea
Pastor Joseph asked:
“Those who hate the doctrine of the Trinity like Jehovah’s Witnesses and Muslims and so many others, claim that the Trinity is an invention, of Nicaea, and maybe Constantine, and it’s a political thing, and none of the church fathers before 325 ever believed in the Trinity” can you address this?,. . . “
Follow the link to read Dr. White's response. You can also see the full video below:









Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: Council of Nicaea in 325 AD – Excellent Question!
Enhanced by Zemanta

Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: The Council of Nicaea – Pictures and Images can be Deceiving

One of the most often repeated objections that I have received against the Bible is the charge that Christianity as we know it was finalized at the Council of Nicea in 325 AD under auspices of the Roman Emperor Constantine. I have found a great article about why many of these idea are outright lies or misunderstandings. Here is a quote from the article. 

What do many liberals/skeptics/agnostics/atheists (like Dan Brown of The DaVinci Code book and movie fame) , Muslims, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, and many other people have in common as a mis-perception of Christianity? Sometimes it is just misunderstandings, but sometimes there is deliberate deception and outright lying about what happened at Nicaea. If told often enough, the mis-understanding gets embedding in people's thinking.

You can read this article and gain a great deal of information. It even include some links to some other good articles on this subject by Dr James White and Dr John Piper.

Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: The Council of Nicaea – Pictures and Images can be Deceiving
Enhanced by Zemanta

John Polkinghorne - Science & Faith | Faith Interface

Here is a quote from John Polkinghome regarding science and faith. I got the link from a post on Brian Auten's Twitter feed.
“I think of science and religious faith as being two eyes. Both are looking for truth. I can see with more depth and accuracy using both eyes together, like binocular vision, than if I use either eye by itself separately.”
“I’m a very passionate believer in the unity of knowledge. There is one world of reality - one world of our experience that we’re seeking to describe.”
“If the experience of science teaches anything, it’s that the world is very strange and surprising. The many revolutions in science have certainly shown that.”
Quantum theory also tells us that the world is not simply objective; somehow it’s something more subtle than that. In some sense it is veiled from us, but it has a structure that we can understand.”
“Science cannot tell theology how to construct a doctrine of creation, but you can’t construct a doctrine of creation without taking account of the age of the universe and the evolutionary character of cosmic history.”
I agree with Dr. Polkinghome. I think that if you have view of creation that does not match scientific data then maybe we need to think about what we think the Bible is really saying.

John Polkinghorne - Science & Faith | Faith Interface
Enhanced by Zemanta

THE ARGUMENT FROM DIVINE HIDDENNESS - Is God Hiding or Does He Not Exist?

I've been asked to try an interesting project by professor Paul Rinzler of Cal Poly University in California. He suggested a written discussion using Google Docs where we can both make comments and work together on it. The subject we agreed on is "THE ARGUMENT FROM DIVINE HIDDENNESS - Is God Hiding or Does He Not Exist?" It should be very interesting we have agreed on the rules and have agreed to make the rules fluid and compromise if needed. With his help, I have figured out how to post the document in a blog post (this one in fact, below) such that as we edit the Google Doc the most recent version is displayed here. IF you want to follow the discussion just go to the Google Docs page, linked directly below. I've also pasted the rules we agreed to below.
THE ARGUMENT FROM DIVINE HIDDENNESS - Is God Hiding or Does He Not Exist?




1. We agree on a specific point of contention between atheist and Christian (for instance, the argument from divine hiddenness, whether Jesus was resurrected, etc.).
2. One of us offers the first argument for or against, and the other responds.
3. Each argument that we offer is outlined in the Google Document, indented beneath the specific argument to which it is responding.
4. Each contribution to the document would contain a single, summary sentence as a header, followed by explanatory and amplifying paragraphs.
5. No name-calling nor disrespectful language. We can disagree without being disagreeable.
6. We cite sources and references and The Bible (any translation; or Hebrew/Greek/Aramaic manuscripts) are to be considered a source about what Christians believe throughout history.
7. Calling a Biblical interpretation or source into question is allowed.
8. When one of us wants to stop, the project will stop. There are no restrictions on the maximum number of days to respond as well as the end date, as each of us is merely doing this voluntarily.
9. No opening or closing remarks, as it doesn't serve the purpose of the project, which is exactly to keep track of every single point and counter-point on the topic in a logical fashion. While it is a type of debate, some features of traditional debates would be counter-productive. Instead we will have a short introduction written by both of us, introducing ourselves.
10. We agree to a topic and stick to it. I liked your suggestion regarding God's Hiddenness. We can phrase the topic thus: "Is God Hiding or Does He Not Exist?"
11. The Google document would be publishable by anyone of us on blogs, websites, or print
12. We both have equal access to the document.
13. We will go by first names.
14. Anyone can view the document, yet only you and I can edit it, we can ask others - friends, other online Christians and atheists - to look at the argument and suggest replies and counter-points to what is there. That way, we can tap into the collective wisdom (hopefully it's wisdom) of our respective communities. When someone else makes what you or I think is a good point, then you or I can then add that point to the document (only if we think it is a good point - you still retain control over the Christian side, and I still retain control over the atheist side). If we quote someone else we will attribute the quote to that person.
15. If either of us have an questions about a comment we will send each other e-mail before responding or asking the questions in the post.
Paul Rinzler has been professional, cordial, considerate, and kind in his dealings with me. This has been a much welcomed change in pace. His comments have also been thoughtful, although I disagree. I'm gonna enjoy this.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Apologetics 315: Matt Slick vs. Dan Barker Debate: Is there Reason to be Good Without God? MP3 Audio

Here is a debate posted by Brian Auten that I'm sure anyone could benefit from. I've heard Matt Slick's testimony and listened to how he approaches witnessing. He is a good foil for Dan Barker, whom I don't think is a good debater or representative for atheism, but I think this debate is worth listening to. Follow the link to Apologetics 315 to hear it

Apologetics 315: Matt Slick vs. Dan Barker Debate: Is there Reason to be Good Without God? MP3 Audio
Enhanced by Zemanta