The Insider Movement: Unbiblical And...It Just Doesn't Work Anyway!

Dr James White has posted a video from YouTube about "the Insider Movement".

Western missionaries are removing "Son of God" from Bible translations produced for Insider Movements. Hear Asians talk about the impact, in their own words.

FYI, the makers of the video are bring a new documentary on the creation of born-again Islam and the death of the church. More more information, check out the following:

Website: http://www.halfdevilhalfchild.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Half-Devil-Half-Child/321082407911665

Definitely a bad idea!




The Insider Movement: Unbiblical And...It Just Doesn't Work Anyway!

FacePalm of the Day - Private Subjective Experience is No Evidence At All: Against William Lane Craig's Inner Witness of the Spirit

pics on Sodahead John Loftus recently posted a blog post summarizing his arguments against Dr. William Lane Craig's appeal to the inner witness of the Holy Spirit in convincing him that Christianity is true. Follow the link at the end of this post to read the whole argument. I want to focus on one of paragraphs to see where Loftus really goes off the reservation.

Listen up, God spoke to Moses privately, and privately to Paul, and likewise to Joseph Smith, and to Mohammed, and to many Pentecostals, and to David Koresh, and to many of the prophets we read in the Old Testament. Why does God always speak to people privately? Why do most people claim to know God in a private way? A private subjective experience has no more evidence for it than none at all. Given that most people are delusional when they make such claims it's extremely probable Craig is too. The ONLY reason evangelicals buy into this is because they need to believe. They would never entertain Craig's claim if they were a Mormon, or Muslim, Catholic, or Jew.

Loftus writes as if we don't know what God revealed to Moses, Paul, Joseph Smith, Muhammad, David Koresh, or anyone else because they were private and subjective experiences. I disagree. It stays private if no one speaks publicly about what as revealed. And in the cases Loftus points to we know what they said they got from God and we can lay them beside each other and compare. Interesting enough the Bible writers agree but contradict Joseph Smith, Muhammad, Koresh and many people today. This means at the very least they can't all have heard from God. Someone's wrong. As long as someone's experience does not contradict what has been revealed before there is no reason to assume they are wrong, however if there is contradiction then you know for sure someone is lying or has been lied to. The Standard. The Bible - Old and New Testaments. That's not an arbitrary standard. It is the best attested and stands up to scrutiny. If you disagree with that standard, you either have to point to a better one and/or show how the Bible is not a good standard. Loftus has failed to do either.


Debunking Christianity: Private Subjective Experience is No Evidence At All: Against William Lane Craig's Inner Witness of the Spirit

RE Islam and Christianity A Common Word: Why I Believe Jesus Never Existed.....however

thegrandverbalizer has posted another blog post that I think fails to demonstrate what he thinks he was trying to verbalize.  His words are in black font. Mine are in red font.

I want to say that the only reason that I believe that I believe that Jesus (Esau) existed is because of my presuppositional belief that the Qur'an is the word of God.

If I did not believe that the Qur'an is the word of God I would not even believe that a person named Jesus (Esau) was a historical person.

For me personally I would be right in the same category as George A Wells, a man who wrote the book 'Did Jesus Exist'.

I find it amazing. It's just like Dr James White points out often: some Muslims, like thegrandverablizer, are so focused on disproving Christianity that they use sources and works of people who would also throw the Qur'an and Islam under the bus as well. I mean anyone who would deny that Jesus existed would also deny the virgin birth which the Qur'an does uphold as well as Jesus' sinlessness. Would thegrandverbalizer agree with Wells on these points as well? If so then does that mean that the Qur'an is only partly right?

I want to say I thank David Waltz, an amazing man who is a treasury trove of information for the introduction to the said book above. I think that Robert E Van Voorst and Craig Evans do the best job they can do for trying to provide evidence for the 'historical' Jesus.

I don't really get this paragraph. Is it that Dr Craig Evans and Dr  Van Voorst agree with Waltz and Wells?  What is it that thegrandverbalizer is commending them for?

It may seem strange that since the Qur'an comes hundreds of years after the New Testament manuscripts that my belief in the 'historical' Jesus would hinge upon a revelation that comes 700 years after the supposed time in which Jesus is said to have 'existed' and in fact hundreds of years after the collation of fragments that become the basis for today's New Testament text.

" in fact hundreds of years after the collation of fragments that become the basis for today's New Testament text."?  Really? There is historical evidence and fragments of the New Testament less than 100 years older than when we think the autographs were written. I'd like to know why thegrandverbalizer is saying otherwise.

I would absolutely agree that it is very strange indeed. However, as I mentioned in my opening my belief in Jesus being a historical person hinges upon my belief that the Qur'an is the word of God. As the Qur'an mentions Jesus (Esau) and as I believe the Qur'an to be the word of God, I therefore believe that Jesus must have existed.

Wells would disagree with you about the Qur'an. Why would you believe him about the New Testament?

After reading the book 'Jesus outside of the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence' I am absolutely convinced that without my presuppositional belief in the Qur'an I would have no evidence upon which to believe that Jesus (Esau) even existed!

I'd like to know how thegrandverbalizer could ignore the evidence outside the Bible and the Qur'an showing that Jesus did exist? 

Allah-willing I will begin a series that looks more closely at the claims and evidences put forth by the Author of the book. I will also show why after examining point by point all the claims put forward why I find all of them incredulous.

I'll be waiting to see if he can substantiate these bold claims.  I guess all the anti-Christian scholars who agree that Jesus did live and was crucified are also wrong? What about Wells, who would deny that the Qur'an is the Word of God? Is he wrong?

If I no longer were to believe in the Qur'an, Christianity would be absolutely out of the question. The reason being is because I have absolutely no basis upon which to believe that Jesus even existed other than my presuppostional belief that the Qur'an is the word of God; and that the Qur'an mentions Jesus (Esau).

So it doesn't matter what the evidence is, thegrandverbalizer has decided that Christianity is false even if the Qur'an is false.

"When the foundations are being destroyed, what can the righteous do?" (Psalm 11:3)

Yes, indeed. how can thegrandverbalizer take Wells' arguments against the Bible concerning Jesus' existence and not apply it against the Qur'an. "Presuppositional approaches" are not a license for ignoring logic and consistency.

Islam and Christianity A Common Word: Why I Believe Jesus Never Existed.....however