Joss Whedon Endorses Mitt Romney (No, Really) [Video] - ComicsAlliance | Comic book culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews

I wasn't sure what to make of this political ad at first, but it's a case of reverse psychology and hilarious!


 My favorite part: pointing out that Gov Romney doesn't think of poor people the way many of the rest of us do!

Joss Whedon Endorses Mitt Romney (No, Really) [Video] - ComicsAlliance | Comic book culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews

John Chapter 6 Translation and Commentary - Vintage

Ever needed a good commentary on John 6? You an read Dr James White's commentary verse by verse.  Follow the link!

John Chapter 6 Translation and Commentary - Vintage

A Brief Definition of the Trinity - Vintage

James White has posted one of his articles in which he defines the Trinity! Take a look!


A Brief Definition of the Trinity - Vintage

MIT Gangnam Style (MIT 강남스타일) - YouTube

Image via CrunchBase

I'm sorry but what else can I do with MIT's Professor Noam Chomsky and Professor Donald Sadoway doing Gangnam Style? Of course I'd blog it!


MIT Gangnam Style (MIT 강남스타일) - YouTube

These are the Droids I'm Looking For!!

Answering Muslims: Jesus Owns Muhammad

David Wood has posted an insightful and provocative video and comments about how the Quran tells us to judge the Gospels and follow it. He wrote:

According to the Qur'an, Christians must judge by the Gospel (Qur'an 5:47). But the Gospel says that Jesus owns everything (Matthew 11:27; John 16:15). Since Jesus owns everything, he also owns Muhammad. If Muslims don't want us to conclude that Jesus owns Muhammad, they have to tell us not to judge by the Gospel. But why would Muslims contradict Allah? 

 Keep in mind that Jesus owns everything and everyone!



Answering Muslims: Jesus Owns Muhammad

Answering Muslims: Sami Zaatari vs. James White: Was Jesus Crucified?

A short while ago while James White was in the UK he debated Sami Zaatari on the question: "Was Jesus Crucified?". I'm amazed that this question even needs to be discussed but there are upwards of a billion Muslims on Earth and one of the foundations of popular Islam is that Jesus was not crucified but someone took his place.Everyone should watch this and see how James White ably defends the historical fact that Jesus was crucified.


Answering Muslims: Sami Zaatari vs. James White: Was Jesus Crucified?

FacePlant of the Day - Debunking Christianity: The God of the Bible Knows Nothing About Modern Psychology and Why it Offers No Real Solutions

John Loftus has again made an attempt to argue that the Bible is deficient and the Christianity has no solutions to the conundrums of life. He keep professing his view point but has of yet failed to provided any really good reason to agree with him. Does this post change his fail record? Nope.

A study done by Nicholas Epley from the University of Chicago tells us all believers think God agrees with what they do about a host of non-related issues.

Hmmm...a study that shows that all believers hold the same viewpoint? Does that really make sense?  I mean really? Does the study include every Christian? Every Muslim? Epley didn't ask me what I think. I'm a Christian. And I don't agree that God agrees with me. One of the reasons why I am a Christian is because I want to agree with  God. I want to know what God thinks about what I should do so I can do it instead of "leaning on my understanding". Do these people who come to such conclusions that God agrees with believers ever read Proverbs 3:5,6 or Isaiah 55? From the start we are not agreeing with God, about anything, by default. Being a believer means that I think I need to agree with God, not the other way around.  So my very existence demonstrates that not all believers would agree with that survey, therefore it's conclusions are flawed. Let's see more fail.

We know this. And it's dangerous. If this study shows us anything at all it should make believers less certain of what they pontificate about. In fact, this study falsifies faith itself, for there is no independent way to determine what God thinks, if he exists at all. Believers simply create their own religion, their own Gospel, and their own God in their own image.

There is an independent way to determine what God thinks: the Bible.  God isn't going to tell you anything that is going to contradict or undermine scripture. And an honest reading of scripture clearly demonstrates a coherent and ordered way to look at the world. People like John Loftus will disagree with that but for the moment set aside whether or not it is true and just judge it for what it says. Anyone who can read can understand what the commandments are and with study can learn to apply them.  Whether or not you agree with whether or not it's true of binding on you is quite another issue. An honest reading of the scripture in context will not produce the failed interpretation that Loftus gets of promoting racism, slavery, or misogyny. People who get such nonsense don't read the Bible as carefully as they would something else that they agree with.


There is something else, a few corollaries that need highlighted. What believers think about God is also what believers think that God thinks about God. Why not? Not only this, but what believers think about God is dependent on what they think of their parents and themselves to a large degree.

If you are a born-again Christian you are agreeing with God that you need a savior and God's constant guidance because you are too flawed and enslaved by sin to make correct and proper judgments apart from God's help! Therefore John Loftus' corollaries are wrong along with the inital conclusions. 

The real causes of one's beliefs are almost never addressed and since that's the case believers cannot offer real solutions because they aren't to be found in the Bible.

Written like a man who has never been born-again or knows what it's like to have a change of heart.

In the Bible people who are selfish, unruly, prideful, lustful, divisive, unforgiving, doubting, lazy, liars, disobedient, un-pure in heart, and who cannot love their enemies, are simply told not be like that.

Nope,. When we look at their lives, we see God come along side and mold them into people who are unselfish, humble, self-controlled, forgiving, faithful, industrious, honest, courageous,  obedient, pure in heart,  and lovers their enemies. If I can name a single person in the Bible that disproves Loftus he is wrong and I can name several: Abraham, Moses, Jacob, Joseph, David. Jeremiah, Isaiah, Daniel, and many many others. They grew as people through their relationship with God.

[Yes, yes, I know, the New Testament promises God's Holy Spirit to help, but if that's the case then why didn't he communicate his will more effectively so that eight million Christians would not have slaughtered themselves during and after the Protestant Reformation?]

 Eight Million? Really? I would really like to see how he counts that. And let's face it the reason for amy schisms is people doing what Loftus does - making it up as they go insteasd of depending on God.

In any case, I think this can be tested when it comes to the supposed "spiritual gifts" Christians claim to have been given by their God.

This oughta be good. Can he show that there are no spiritual gifts in play today or ever?




First, I'll grant that faith is self-fulfilling such that someone who was raised to feel guilty or raised to loathe themselves that personal faith can help them.

Ever really looked in the mirror? Ever measured your righteousness along side what the scripture says righteousness is? It doesn't take being raised in Christianity to do that. Lofuts likes the OTF so much but interesting enough, that isn't brought in when he wieighs the truth claims of Christianity.

 It doesn't matter what kind of benevolent or forgiving or gracious God they had faith in though. That's why believers will forever struggle with their faith because it has to overcome how they were raised.

Oh wait, you mean people lean on their own understanding instead of what God has revealed? Yup. 

That's why some believers are optimists while others are pessimistic, why some have little trouble believing while others forever struggle with it, while some feel forgiven while others always feel guilty, why some believers view God as a harsh judge while others picture a jolly Santa Claus, why some believers hate anyone who argues against their faith (after all, doesn't God?) while others love non-believers and wish to help them, why some Christians like the Old Testament while others like the New Testament, while some like picturing non-believers in hell while others deny the existence of hell or mitigate its horrors, and the list goes on and on.

It's true that there are these broad range of perspectives among people who claim to be Chrtistians. People have opinions and will push them on others. So what? That doesn't matter. This is why 

⁵ Trust in the Lord with all your heart
    and lean not on your own understanding;
⁶ in all your ways submit to him,
    and he will make your paths straight. - Proverbs 3:5-6

You have to know scripture for yourself. The Bible addresses every single things Loftus is offering as to how people think. The Bible is clear enough to tell us which of those persepectives is God's and which are not.  As my own relationship with God has grown and I have found out more and more about God, I've had to change my own views about many, many things because they did not align with scripture. It's called growth. 

But whatever believers think of God or themselves they think God shares that same view. For some believers this is tragic. For others it's liberating, and there are various responses in between. The real causes of one's beliefs about God or themselves are almost never addressed, and since that's the case they cannot offer real lasting solutions.

Loftus does make a point. The "that's what my momma taught me" reason isn't good enough. However we can and should do better than that. 

Believers have psychological problems due to the experiences they have had in life. Only psychological probing can offer lasting healing. A person who has trouble with faith doesn't need a Bible verse. He or she needs to understand why trusting is a problem for him or her. A stingy person doesn't need to be told to tithe. He or she needs to know why security is a problem. A hateful person doesn't need to just hear the parable of the Good Samaritan. He or she needs to understand where his hatred comes from.

The insecurity comese from an inabillity to trust God. Hatred comes from sin. The Bible is clear on this and how to get around it. 

That's why preachers like Joel Osteen are so successful even though evangelicals are not happy he doesn't preach "true" doctrine. It's because he's offering some real solutions to the problems that afflict people, including believers. He merely uses the Bible as a platform for offering some good psychological advice that people could get from listening to Dr. Phil (although they both annoy me). Preachers who preach "true" doctrine alienate their people with guilt, with hate, with self-loathing, and fear.

True doctrine does not produce guilt, hate, or self-loathing, or fear. Those come about from rejecting the Gospel and trying to do things on your own. 

So let's test this. Take for example the lists of "spiritual gifts" in the New Testament:

Most of these aren't "miraculous" gifts given by God even on Christian terms, and I think none of them are. God doesn't give these gifts. People gain them mostly by their upbringing. Identifying them is merely identifying who you are. I'd like just once for evidence that a person who was brought up to be stingy to have the gift of giving, or a shy unassuming person who was given the gift of leadership, or dense person without common sense or education given the gift of teaching, and so forth.

So laying hands on a sick person and they are healed, is not a miracle?  A person who was brought up to be stingy could not have been raised a Christian and according to Loftus' own delusions that people are in the religion they are in because of upbringing, his own "proof:" can't happen.

Folks this just does not happen, ever!

Lofuts' is wrong. God does raise shy people to leadership, make stingy people generous, and uneducated people int prolific teachers. I've seen God do it.. For example there have been many great teachers with minimal education in the Black church given that for year black people were not granted access to education. Charles Harrision Mason, had a thrd grade education, yet God used him to found my denomination and he was an awsome leader,. preacher,  and teacher - but of course he did pray 6 hours a day. - staying plugged in to the Holy Spirit. 

Where the Bible does help believers it's self-fulfilling because of one's faith, or based on what anyone could figure out for themselves without it.

So many things wrong with that sentence. 

 But it offers no real solutions to the problems that afflict people because modern psychology had not yet arisen. In the Bible the only solution offered to people is to have faith in God, in his Word, and/or in the Holy Spirit--self-fulfilling things like that.

Modern Psychology is not able answer ever question about why we do what we do nor can it because we don't always know. "The wicked know not why they stumble."  And that applies to everyone of us.

The Book of Proverbs might be thought of as the exception but the practical advice in it could be figured out by anyone without divine inspiration at all. It only talks about the consequences of one's actions and why doing bad things will not be good for one's future. It doesn't speak to why we are who we are and how to fix that.

The Proverbs do tell us why we are who we are - we are sinners. And if we want to change that we have to obey God's instructions. Much of what the Proverbs teach about does indeed  include the consequences of your own actions but it's done in a way to keep you from having to figure it out through trial and error. But becausse we refuse to humble ourselves and obey God, many of us end up "figuring it out" by a lot of trial and much costly error that could have been avoided. 

In the Bible God knows nothing about modern psychology. I wonder why? Why is it there is nothing in the advice offered in the Bible except that which was understood by the ancient people of that time? Oh, I know. It's the same reason why Martians who visited us never spoke about anything but current events: That Which Disconfirms UFOs From Mars Also Disconfirms God’s Existence

Just how much does the Bible know about modern psychology? I'd argue that it's a lot.  Take the prescription of tithing as a vehicle for learning how to be giving. There are all kinds of psychological treatments that revolve around changing a character trait by performing tasks that cause desirable habits to form in ones's life.  Developing a habit of tithing teaches you to give. It changes your attitude towards otherse. God knows how we tick and this is an example .

Debunking Christianity: The God of the Bible Knows Nothing About Modern Psychology and Why it Offers No Real Solutions

Laugh at Donald Trump's Insanity, But Call it What it Is: Racism | News on GOOD

Donald Trump has lost it. Officially. This is what he announced:

I wonder if Donald Trump accept Stephen Colbert's counter offer







Laugh at Donald Trump's Insanity, But Call it What it Is: Racism | News on GOOD

36 Purposes of God in Our Suffering - Apologetics 315

Brian Auten has posted a list from the appendix of the book by Joni Eareckson Tada titled When God Weeps: Why Our Sufferings Matter to the Almighty. The interesting thing is that despite the horrendous suffering she has endured in her life she has clung to and grown in her relationship with God. What is it in the scriptures that she understands that explains why God allows suffering? Looking at her list is a great place to start. Follow the link to see her list.


36 Purposes of God in Our Suffering - Apologetics 315

Dissident Artist Ai Weiwei Parodies PSY's 'Gangnam Style' Video | Politics on GOOD

Ai Weiwei during documenta 12 (2007) 中文: 2007年，艾未未在第十二屆卡塞爾文獻展。 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

So what do you do if you are being persecuted by your own government? If you are artist Ai Weiwei protesting Chinese government policies...you protest like this. 


Go to the following link for more context.

Dissident Artist Ai Weiwei Parodies PSY's 'Gangnam Style' Video | Politics on GOOD

Related articles

• Artist, Yes, Dancer, No: Ai Weiwei Does Gangnam Style (world.time.com)
• Ai Weiwei Goes Gangnam Style (washingtonian.com)
• Chinese Dissident Artist Ai Weiwei Releases Gangnam Style Parody (businessinsider.com)

Felix Baumgartner: Space Jump [Infographic] | Daily Infographic

Felix Baumgartner: Space Jump [Infographic] | Daily Infographic

Real Super Powers: 10 Amazing Real-Life Super Powers & Superhero Gadgets

10 Amazing Real-Life Superhero Technologies/Gadgets & Powers

Real Super Powers: 10 Amazing Real-Life Super Powers & Superhero Gadgets

Thinking God's Thoughts: Marriage = Biology (Not Bigotry) Video

Want a secular argument for NOT legalizing same-sex marriages? Here are some good ones!




Thinking God's Thoughts: Marriage = Biology (Not Bigotry) Video

Who is Wolverine? - A WIP Just Like You

This is why I like the superhero genre: the characters. Take Wolverine for example. Wolverine is an amazing character that has been around for almost 40 years to become one of the most popular characters...ever. It has been said to best understand a person you should look at what people say about him. I found these panels on Tumblr today. We get several of Wolverine's colleagues and friends attempt to sum up who Wolverine is. It is real interesting.

One thing I notice is that what everyone says about Wolverine depend on their relationship with him. I think the writer of this not just nails Wolverine's personality but the personalities of all the other characters. Based on what I know about his interactions with each of them, I'd expect each of them to say what they said about Wolverine. learn not a lot about who Wolverine is to each of these characters but we also see who each of these speakers are. This demonstrates that when we judge anyone our thoughts are influenced by who we are. It reminds me to be careful and remember that not one of us can truly be fully described or known to each other. When it really comes down to it...we are all "...works in progress".

Who is Wolverine? - Super Heroes Behaving Badly

FacePlant of the Day - Debunking Christianity: Dinesh D'Souza Resigned Under Pressure From King's College Amidst Scandal

So what does sour grapes look like? Well when one loses a debate and uses his opponent's public trial years later to insult and belittle him - it is a great example of sour grapes.

While attending a conference last month, the president of the King’s College was spotted in the company of a woman other than his wife. At a typical institution of higher learning, a sighting like that might not have turned into a major controversy. But the King’s College is not a typical institution of higher learning. It is a tiny Christian college based in a downtown Manhattan office building, whose mission statement articulates a “commitment to the truths of Christianity and a biblical worldview. The King’s College announced Mr. D’Souza’s resignation on Thursday, two days after World Magazine, a Christian-oriented publication, reported that he had checked into a Comfort Suites in South Carolina in September with a woman he introduced as his fiancée, despite the fact that he was already married. Link.

Dinesh is in the process of getting divorced. He said, “I had no idea that it is considered wrong in Christian circles to be engaged prior to being divorced.” Really? ;-) Now he's saying I am not having an affair with his new girl. Really, no sex before re-marriage? What a prude, or a liar, or something.

If one bothers to actually read the links Loftus posted we can see that there is something going on with people who had issues with D'Souza and who wanted him out of his job. I think it may have more to do with his documentary about President Obama than his theology or philosophy. I didn't agree with the conclusions he had drawn about Obama, but I don't think he should be silenced or censored in some way because of them. I think that Loftus is still smarting from their debate and because he could not make good arguments against D'Souza's presentation, Loftus decided to attack D'Souza the only way he can. If D'Souza is telling the truth that he was not with another woman before his divorce was final, then I don't think he did anything wrong. Divorce is horrible but I don't know why he was separated  from his wife or the circumstances around the divorce so criticizing him for it is none of my business. 

Debunking Christianity: Dinesh D'Souza Resigned Under Pressure From King's College Amidst Scandal

Calvinistic Cartoons: Willful Refusal

Calvinistic Cartoons: Willful Refusal

FacePlant of the Day - Debunking Christianity: Why All Oppressed Minorities Should Reject Christianity

In my previous response to the Harry McCall's post I wondered how John Loftus could let such a splendid example of reading incomprehension and lies pass for a responsible blog post? Turns out that Loftus unfortunately agrees with McCall's arguments and  is just as deluded. Loftus posted the following in support of the thought that women should reject Christianity and extended the thought  to include to all oppressed minorities. My responses are in red.

Harry McCall's post, Why Women Should Especially Reject Christianity, now has the second highest hit count of any post at DC. I agree. They should.

I sure would like to know why either of them would come to that conclusion since the passages that McCall points to support his delusions don't say what he says they say and there are passages written by the same author contradicting his conclusions. Maybe Loftus is unable to read the Bible any better than McCall can.  Hopefully most people are reading the post to learn what not to do.

There are other minorities the same thing could be said of them.

 How can women be a minority if half of the human race is female?

African Americans should reject Christianity given their history as slaves in Christian America.

I am an African-American. I am a descendant of slaves. My people were not enslaved beuse people were following the Bible. People who called themselves "Christians" disobeyed God  and did not follow the Bible. I know the deluded and/or ignorant like to think that slave systems in Ancient Israel and the slavery during the time of the New Testament were there same as the slavery perpetuated by Europeans and White Americans before the American Civil War, but it's not. Not even close. I should reject Christianity because of slavery no more than I should blame all ____ for ____ (fill in your own blanks).


The same thing goes for Native Americans who were conquered by American Christians (ala Manifest Destiny),

Manifest Destiny has nothing to do with the Bible or Christianity.  Serious fail.

as well as Mexican and Hispanic Christians who are largely Catholics because of the Spanish Conquistadors who killed, raped and plundered their ancestors.

Africans were also killed, raped, and plundered by the same nations that colonized the rest of the world.  Their reasons for doing so was greed not because the Bible told them to. 

There are gay (or "gay friendly") Christian churches like The Metropolitan Community Church of San Francisco.

And....? How does the above statement support Loftus' post? Is he saying that it is okay for homosexuals to be a Christians because there are now some churches claiming to be Christians that are "gay friendly"? If he is, he's undermining his point. Is he also equating homosexuality with having a particular gender or a race or an ethnicity? That would be another lapse in logic if that is what he thinks it is.

All oppressed minorities should reject Christianity, even the liberal or radical ones, given what "true" Christians have done to them. I know I would if I were them. It's almost absurd to me that they embrace the faith of their oppressors.

I 'd like to know how Loftus knows that those people who murdered, raped, pillaged, oppressed, subjugated,  and/or enslaved other human beings (who were also created in God's image) were "true" Christians? They weren't. They did not follow the Bible. They did not make Jesus Lord of their morality or actions. As one of the "oppressed minorities" that Loftus is so concerned with, I would wanna know why would I wanna burn in hell with my oppressors? I don't. These same oppressors attempted to use scripture and Christianity and establish and maintain their evil. An honest reading of the texts and History demonstrates that in order to do that, they had to twist and distort the Bible and History to rationalize those evils. When people like Harry McCall and John Loftus distort and twist scripture to rationalize their hatred of God so that they agree that the Bible says what those evil men told my ancestors it said, they are embracing the faith of my oppressors.

I come to Christ despite their best efforts due to the grace of God. My forefathers and foremothers found God through that same grace and personal relationship with the true and living God recognizing the lies of their slave masters for what they were. Why are McCall and Loftus still falling for those same lies?

Debunking Christianity: Why All Oppressed Minorities Should Reject Christianity

Answering Muslims: What Is the Shahada?

David Wood has posted a great article defining the Shahada and what it means for Islam and for non-Muslims. The Video gives you  the Shahada in Arabic and  the following link will take you to the article.


Answering Muslims: What Is the Shahada?

Assassin's Creed 3: Liberation

I've got to admit that this game would make getting a Playstation Vita worth it!

Developer's Diary

Story Trailer

Assassin's Creed 3: Liberation Developer Diary Video – G4tv.com

Explore Darth Vader’s TIE Fighter In Your Browser With This Gorgeous 3D Model

David Prowse as Darth Vader in The Empire Strikes Back (1980) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Ever wanted to explore Darth Vader's Tie Fighter? Sure you do! You can now thanks to Sketchfab



Explore Darth Vader’s TIE Fighter In Your Browser With This Gorgeous 3D Model

If the fighter is not visible above go to the direct link

https://sketchfab.com/show/eIFt03aD0BrZPcTVU4F9jfw9duj

FacePlant of the Day - Debunking Christianity: Why Women Especially Should Reject Christianity

I wonder why Harry McCall even bothers to make arguments using the Biblical text because he never bothers to get the text correct. Who edits the Debunking Christianity anyway? Why does he think that Paul's writing is misogynistic? Is that what the text really saying? Can he substantiate his conclusions? Nope.

The first mark for Paul against women is that THEY ARE NOT created in the image of God, but have been taken from Adam (who alone is created in the image of God). In 1 Corinthians 11: 7b – 9 Paul states this fact: “…he (the man) is in the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman, but the woman for the man.”


That does not mean that women are less than men or that women are not created in the image of  God. Paul would have agreed with Genesis 1:26-28

²⁶ Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,^[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

²⁷ So God created mankind in his own image,
    in the image of God he created them;
    male and female he created them.

²⁸ God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.” - Genesis 1:26-28

God created men and women in God's image. Genesis 2 gives the details  of how God did it. Paul is not contradicting scripture. Paul is, instead, discussing the roles of men and women  not ontology.  McCall did not show how Paul's words elevates men over women.  Let's look at  what Paul wrote that shows how this works out even clearer (I wonder why McCall does not quote the whole passage?)..

² I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the traditions just as I passed them on to you. ³ But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man,^[a] and the head of Christ is God. ⁴ Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. ⁵ But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is the same as having her head shaved. ⁶ For if a woman does not cover her head, she might as well have her hair cut off; but if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, then she should cover her head.
⁷ A man ought not to cover his head,^[b] since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. ⁸ For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; ⁹ neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. ¹⁰ It is for this reason that a woman ought to have authority over her own^[c] head, because of the angels. ¹¹ Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. ¹² For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God.
¹³ Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? ¹⁴ Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, ¹⁵ but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering. ¹⁶ If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice—nor do the churches of God. - 1 Corinthians 11:2-16
Think about what the order of roles that is being stated.Woman submits to man. Christ submits to God. Paul believed that Jesus is God therefore Jesus is not inferior to God. 

¹¹ For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people. ¹² It teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age, ¹³ while we wait for the blessed hope—the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, ¹⁴ who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good. - Titus 2:11-14

Therefore, extending the parallel that Paul is using, women are not inferior to men. And what about verse 13? Paul was not explaining that women were inferior in any way.

Secondly for Paul, when in a worship service all women MUST keep their faces veiled so the glory of God will be revealed in the men in attendance of whom God created alone in his image: “But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same as the woman whose head is shaved. For if a woman does not cover her head, let her also have her hair cut off; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, let her cover her head.” (1 Corinthians 11: 5 - 6)

Verse 13 kills McCall's whole argument.

Simply put, all women must keep their ungodly faces covered with a veil if their hair has been cut short (shaved) or – if they don’t have a veil – then let them use their long hair to cover their faces. For if there are angles in the worship service, these angles would be shocked to see any woman worshipping with their face uncovered taking away the glory of God found only in men: “Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.” (1 Corinthians 11: 10)

So why did Paul say "If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice—nor do the churches of God." (1 Cor 11:16)? Simple: McCall is wrong.


For Paul, all men must keep their hair short as to display the glory of God: “For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man.” (1 Corinthians 11: 7) and “Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him, but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her? For her hair is given to her for a covering.” (1 Corinthians 11: 14)

More importantly, in Paul’s view all women are the deceivers descended directly from Eve who alone listened to the serpent then mislead Adam: “And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being quite deceived, fell into transgression.” (1Timothy 2: 14)

The Bible does not lay the blame of sin on Eve, But Adam. Eve was deceived. She was innocent. Adam had the responsibility and the failure. 

¹² Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned— - Romans 5:12

This being the case, Paul demands: “Let your women keep silent in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also says the law. And if they will learn anything let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.” (1 Corinthians 14: 34 - 35)

This cannot mean that women are not supposed to ever teach or preach in the Church. I've written more about at this link and you should also read here.

And

“Let a woman quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. 12. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. (I Tim. 2: 11 – 14)

Thus all women have two strikes against them over and above Original Sin, and these two curses have been pasted to ALL women just as Adam and Eve’s collective disobedience has been pasted down on all humanity:

Um what curses?  

A. Women ARE NOT created in the image of God, but have been taken out of Adam making them forever inferior to men thus requiring them to cover their faces while in the worship assembly.

Already shown that this is not true. 

B. Women are weak and gullible in that only the woman was tricked by the serpent, who in turn deceived the man. Thus for Paul, all women are simple minded and gullible and should NEVER be given the chance to mislead men again.

The woman were gullible while the man outright rebelled against God. He knew better,. I admit that many people look at this point the way that McCall presents it, but that is not what the Bible says.

In the so called Lord’s Prayer, Jesus made an emphatic statement: “γενηθήτω τὸ θέλημα σου, ὡς ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς” (with γενηθήτω in the aorist imperative) that God’s will (θέλημα) must be done in Heaven as upon earth.

Yes. And just what is God's will that will be on Heaven as it is on earth?

²⁶ So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, ²⁷ for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. ²⁸ There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. ²⁹ If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise. - Galatians 3:26-29

Now when we put this statement in with Paul’s theology of women, sadly women bear a huge curse above men that can NEVER be forgiven either here on earth or in Heaven!

Um no. Not even close. It's only through Christ that we - male and female - are free. This isn't the point women are less than man. Just the contrary and McCall has failed to demonstrate that the Bible says women are inferior to men.

Harry McCall 

Please Pray for Harry McCall



Debunking Christianity: Why Women Especially Should Reject Christianity

Eastwooding Richard Dawkins - YouTube

Continuing the running cultural gag of debating with an empty chair as if your opponent is sitting there and responding to how you think he may respond to you, William Lane Craig recently used the same tactic in a lecture responding to the argument of  Richard Dawkins.


Eastwooding Richard Dawkins - YouTube

I don't think that Eastwooding was really effective in this situation. I doubt it will make Dawkins come up debate Craig, but it is interesting to see how Craig understands Dawkins' argument. 

Apologist Interview: Douglas Wilson - Apologetics 315

In this week's interview Brian Auten interviewed Douglas Wilson. I love to Pastor Wilson preach, teach, and debate. It was very interesting! Follow the link to Apologetics 315 to hear the interview. 

Apologist Interview: Douglas Wilson - Apologetics 315