Does This Make Me Look Racist?

Today, when it comes to race relations in America things are much worse than I think it used to be, especially in the Christian church. I think that there is just a disconnect between black Christians and white Christians. I see that many white Christians become really sensitive when we we black Christians bring up racism and slavery and then both sides begin throwing around accusations of racism against the other. I think that's unfair. Not all claiming to be white Evangelical Christians are racist and want to bring all non-white people to heel with a right foot on their necks. Some do. But not all. I think the current Twitter/YouTube threads I have been following are problematic because we are not making a distinction between the people who are trying to follow Christ and those who are racist.

This post is with regard to three theologians who have found themselves on opposing sides regarding

President Trump and racism in American Society and in the Church. Bishop Talbert Wesley Swan II, Dr. James White, and Dr. Michael L Brown have been in controversy for the past week. These three men are worthy of respect and have a few things in common. I believe each one truly loves Jesus and the Church. All three have degrees and years of study. All three serve in churches. They each have a podcast/radio show in which they discuss Bible and social issues.  But they disagree about racism and who is being racist. I am going to attempt to follow a time-line so we can see what happened.

I first heard about this current round of controversy from Dr Jame White on his Dividing Line broadcast from November 21, 2019. He accused Bishop Swan of  being a black racist to Dr Michael Brown. I was confused. I felt that Dr White was dismissive and not respectful of  Swan at all. But the truth is I have followed both White and Dr Brown for years and I know the kind of men they are. Dr Brown is worthy of respect. Anyone who has spent any time listening him have to know he ain't racist. However when I looked up Talbert I found a lot in common between myself, Swan, and Dr Brown. Swan is a Bishop in the same denomination I am in, Church of God in Christ, and like us Dr Brown is Pentecostal. We agree that abortion on-demand is wrong.  The Bible is inerrant. Homosexuality is not God's best for anyone. And James White would agree with all those statements as well. What happened? If you look at what James White says in the following video, I think you can see the problem: Swan posted a Tweet that Brown responded to in good faith, but instead of a helpful dialogue it degenerated to Swan and his supporters to stop listening to Brown and instead there is more name-calling.






This started with Talbert seemingly saying that all white evangelical Christians are racists and bigotted and this was why they overwhelmingly supported Donald Trump and voted for him despite all the moral failing we can point to. Dr. Michael Brown pushed backed on that a little. He wrote an article a bout why it's wrong to equate all white Christians with white supremacy. You can read the article for yourself: The Religion of White Supremacy? In it, I notice that Dr Brown does not deny that racism against black and brown people is a problem in the church and in society. He merely points out that it's racist to think all white people are racist just because they are white. I agree with him,

To call this the religion of white supremacy rather than Christianity is to make a bigoted and biased remark.


The problem is that I think they are talking past each other because if you listen to what Talbert and most Black christians are saying about social justice, not all are trying to say that all white people are racist and need to be held accountable and punished for being racist. No, we are talking about how all American institutions are tainted by racism and bigotry and negatively affect people today inside and outside of our churches. We want justice and the system fixed because that is what God says He wants us to be working towards.

To be fair to Dr Michael Brown, I do not know how anyone can listen to him and come away think that he's racist just because he points out that he and many white Christians he knows are not racist, while he does not deny that are institutions are racists. What more could we ask of him? He is on public record working for social justice and spreading the Gospel the way God has defined them in scripture.



I think that Swan is getting the short end. Dr James White does not seem to spend much time on him outside of reading his Wikipedia page but Dr Brown did look him up and realized that they were in agreement on homosexuality but Dr White dismissed Swan because he does not look like or sound like someone whom he puts stock in. This is the kind of racism that Swan and other black people be talking about and why I would say that Dr Brown is not racist. In most circumstances Dr White does try to understand other people's viewpoint. I just do not think he did that with Bishop Swan.  We should allow people to speak for themselves. Look at what Swan has taught recently on his radio program.





It should not be an issue to listen to one another. Although Dr James White is not a racist person he does not understand Black people. He doesn't even try like Dr Michael Brown does. During the Twitter exchange, Bishop Swan retweeted something Dr James White tweeted and I think it exemplifies the issue.

This obtuse, evangelical bigot, who claims Black women “kill their unborn children” because of their “rebellious sexual ethics,” has the caucasity to do a podcast calling me racist and complaining about “Black racism” and “Black racists.”

You can’t make this stuff up. https://t.co/i9j1OLUvQQ

— Bishop Talbert Swan (@TalbertSwan) November 24, 2019

James White makes tweets like this and then wonders why black people are offended. He reason it's true after all so it's not racist. It presupposes that it mostly black unwed mothers having abortions of convenience and black men not stepping up to being fathers and husbands that we should be, The point is being made with no distinction that not all black people live like that - painting all black people with a broad brush. I get Bishop Swan's frustration, but calling James White "obtuse" and a "bigot" is not any more true as what White seemingly wrote about all black people. I'd argue that in context, White was not referring to all black people but is ignorant to how slavery still plays a part in messing up people's lives today and he refuses to learn about it. At least Dr Michael Brown is open to this. May be is has to do with the fact Dr Michael Brown is a Messianic Jew makes it easier to understand racism and oppression.

There is a huge disconnect. I think we are having these issues because we are either too worried about offending others and being labeled racist or not worried enough about hurting our brothers and sisters who are not the same race as we are.

I have been listening to James White for years and just like  Bishop Swan said, he thinks that all black people who speak up for social justice think that we all want abortion and gay rights and all the unBiblical stuff society is trying to push on us. This is not true.  Bishop Swan has a book he wrote chronicling how God can deliver people from Homosexuality. He is merely asking people to look at themselves and ask are they doing enough to follow what God requires for social justice - beyond just the lip service.

To be fair, I did find a tweet from Bishop Swan that gave me pause, and I think it would require more research - regarding how Bishop Swan looks at Dr James Cone work. James Cone is considered the father of Black Liberation Theology and from what I know it's antithetical to the Gospel we should be preaching and teaching.

Newsflash: Comparing me to the late great theologian and freedom fighter James Cone is not an insult as you meant it to be. It’s an honor.

I referenced his writings several times in my sermon today.

Also, there’s no such thing as Black racism. https://t.co/MC4554HhUo

— Bishop Talbert Swan (@TalbertSwan) November 24, 2019

I think I need more understanding about what Bishop Swan means, but written some things about James Cone. You can read my posts about James Cone at the following link:

FacePalm of the Day #84 - Forsaking Paul for Jesus’ Sake

Quote of the Week: Alister McGrath | Reflections

Thanks to Dr Kenneth Samples for posting this!

The doctrine of the Trinity can be regarded as the outcome of a process of sustained and critical reflection on the pattern of divine activity revealed in Scripture, and continued in Christian experience. This is not to say that Scripture contains a doctrine of the Trinity; rather, Scripture bears witness to a God who demands to be understood in a Trinitarian manner.

–Alister McGrath, An Introduction to Christianity (Cambridge, Mass: Blackwell, 1997), 193.


Quote of the Week: Alister McGrath | Reflections


Dr McGrath is correct!

Calvinistic Cartoons: Quote of Spurgeon on "The Person"

Calvinistic Cartoons: The Person

Faithful Thinkers: Video: What About Annihilation?

Luke Nix posted another great video of an interview of Norman Geisler from the John Ankerberg show.




I would think that Annihilism would make atheists happy because they believe that is what is going to happen to them after they die. This answer is important because it deals with either viewpoint that only damned people are going to cease to exist or that everyone will cease to exist. If you are reading this and haven't watched the video yet, here is a clue: It's not true.

Faithful Thinkers: Video: What About Annihilation?

FacePalm of the Day #104 - 'God the Father' banished by mainline denomination

The United Church of Christ is attempting to change it's wording in its organizational documents. For example look at this.

 The reason?

Denomination spokeswoman Barb Powell told WND today that the change was made because the reference to "heavenly Father" was too restrictive.
"In the UCC, our language for God, Christ and the Holy Spirit … is preferred to be more open for different expressions of the Trinity," she said. "Heavenly Father is just one vision."
She told WND the denomination seeks to be "inclusive" in its language, "so therefore we will tend to change language that is more traditional to be more inclusive."
She said some of the denomination's pastors refer to God with terms such as "Creator" and "Father and Mother."
"There are a lot of people who decided, if God still is speaking to us, there is more light and truth to break forth," she said.

Read more: 'God the Father' banished by mainline denomination http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=318981#ixzz1RqeCDZ9D

The reason why Christians shouldn't change it is because the Bible uses that language. The problem was called out by David Runnion-Bareford. He said:

"Rejecting God as Father in an age of fatherlessness is unthinkable," said David Runnion-Bareford, a leader of the fellowship organization. "God acted toward us in amazing grace when He offered to be our Father through the sacrifice of his Son, Jesus Christ who offers us life in his name.
"This is not something we as humans made up in some other time. Rejecting our Father is [an] act of arrogant rebellion in the name of cultural conformity that only further alienates members, churches, but more importantly God himself."

Read more: 'God the Father' banished by mainline denomination http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=318981#ixzz1RqfLdDv9

I'm glad God has put people in the Unite Church of Christ to stand against such heresy. The denomination is very broad and have a wide variety of viewpoints. The article talks a lot about Jeremiah Wright and the way his church embraces Black Liberation Theology. I really dislike Black Liberation Theology because it is not Jesus centered. You can read my post on Black Liberation Theology,

'God the Father' banished by mainline denomination

Related articles

• Jesus IS Lord in Ephesians and Philippians (defendingcontending.com)
• Paul's Testimony (injesus.wordpress.com)
• Colossians 1:2 - Father (stmikesyouth.wordpress.com)
• Building a House Church (savoringscripture.wordpress.com)
• False teacher tips his hand. Again. (wolfsheep2.wordpress.com)

Faithful Thinkers: Book Review: Chosen But Free

Luke Nix has written a really good review of Norman Geisler's Chosen But Free. I read the book and I think it has problems. I think one of the problems is that Jesus' sacrifice does not make us saveable. Jesus truly saved us - turning away the wrath of God and taking it upon himself.

I'd suggest that anyone who reads Chosen But Free should read Potter's Freedom by James White. And take a listen to James White's webcast from June 30, 2011
to hear Dr White talk about his personal experience in this on-going debate with Norman Geisler. See also James Swan's Reflections on Geisler's Chosen But Free.
.

Here is Luke Nix's review
Faithful Thinkers: Book Review: Chosen But Free

Author Interview: David Lamb - God Behaving Badly - Apologetics 315

Brian Auten's interview this week was with Dr. David Lamb It was a great interview. I thoroughly enjoyed it. He gave some really good answers to some questions about how the Old Testament and New Testament relate to one another and how God  This is a must-listen!

Author Interview: David Lamb - God Behaving Badly - Apologetics 315

Related articles

• God Behaving Badly: Is the God of the Old Testament Angry, Sexist and Racist? (zwingliusredivivus.wordpress.com)
• God Behaving Badly - InterVarsity Press (wisecounsel.wordpress.com)
• God Behaving Badly: Is the God of the Old Testament Angry, Sexist and Racist (zwingliusredivivus.wordpress.com)

FacePalm of the Day #84 - Forsaking Paul for Jesus’ Sake

I came across a two part article by Caleb Wilde on his blog. In the first post, he talks about a story from Howard Thurman’s book, “Jesus and the Disinherited.” [Thurman is pictured on the left].He provides the following quote:

During much of my boyhood I (Howard Thurman) was cared for by my grandmother, who was born a slave and lived until the Civil War on a plantation near Madison, Florida. My regular chore was to do all of the reading for my grandmother — she could neither read nor write. Two or three times a week I would read the Bible aloud to her. I was deeply impressed by the fact that she was most particular about the choice of Scripture. For instance, I might read many of the more devotional Psalms, some of Isaiah, the Gospels again and again. But the Pauline epistles, never — except, at long intervals, the thirteenth chapter of First Corinthians. My curiosity knew no bounds, but we did not question her about anything.
When I was older and was half through college, I chanced to be spending a few days at home near the end of summer vacation. With a feeling of great temerity I asked her one day why it was that she would not let me read any of the Pauline letters. What she told me I shall never forget. ”During the days of slavery,” she said, “the master’s minister would occasionally hold services for the slaves. Old man McGhee was so mean that he would not let a Negro minister preach to his slaves. Always the white minister used as his text something from Paul. At least three or four times a year he used as a text: ‘Slaves, be obedient to them that are your masters …, as unto Christ.’ Then he would bless us. I promised my Maker that if I ever learned to read and if freedom ever came, I would not read that part of the Bible.’”

I am sensitive on this issue being a descended of African slaves myself. Although I am several more generations removed from slavery than Howard Thurman, all African-Americans have to answer the contradiction between what the Bible says and what the white American slavemasters told us it says. The Bible is infallible, but those claiming to be following Christ are not. my maternal side, I am six generations removed from slavery and she was kept in chains because her masters were afraid of her - she had too much spirit and personal power. She was the last woman from that side who was a slave that I am blood descended from. On my father's maternal lineage, I am four generations removed from slavery. Mary Lucas was her name. She endured the hardships and suffering of slavery, even having her husband sold away from her. By the grace of God, she was reunited with her husband after the Civil War and my great-grandmother Cynthia was born after that. Mary and her husband founded a church after they were free and thanked God for their freedom. I don't know how they understood Ephesians and Colossians passages about slavery, but I could talk to them today, or Thurman's grandmother, and explain how the following scriptures were corrupted and that there is no reason to avoid reading Paul's letters in the slightest. First the passages those racist heathens butchered are:

⁵ Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. ⁶ Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. ⁷ Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not people, ⁸ because you know that the Lord will reward each one for whatever good they do, whether they are slave or free. - Ephesians 6:5-8

²² Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to curry their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord. ²³ Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for human masters, ²⁴ since you know that you will receive an inheritance from the Lord as a reward. It is the Lord Christ you are serving. ²⁵ Anyone who does wrong will be repaid for their wrongs, and there is no favoritism. - Colossians 3:22-24

If you were a slave, unable and prevented to become literate yourself, if someone just read this to you in context of course you would take Thurman's grandmother's position. I don't know what my great-great-grandmother Mary thought about these passages, but I'm sure it occurred to many slaves, as it does to me, the question as to why it was important that slaves did not learn how to read? One of the reasons was that the slave masters did not want the slaves to know what Paul said about slave masters. This is what I would want to tell Thurman's grandmother.

1 Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. ² “Honor your father and mother”—which is the first commandment with a promise— ³ “so that it may go well with you and that you may enjoy long life on the earth.”
⁴ Fathers, do not exasperate your children; instead, bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord.
⁵ Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. ⁶ Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. ⁷ Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not people, ⁸ because you know that the Lord will reward each one for whatever good they do, whether they are slave or free.
⁹ And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him. - Ephesians 6:1-9

I'm willing to bet money that the majority of slaves were not allowed to hear the whole passage. Paul is saying that slave-masters are accountable to God. God is their Master just like the slaves. Paul said that slaves should not be treated any kind of way. Notice that why slave-masters were trying to condemn slaves for wanting to be free and were rubbing the Bible in their faces, the Bible itself condemned them. Is the Bible wrong? No. Is there a need to put Jesus' teaching against Paul's and make a choice as to which one is right? No. I'm saddened for Thurmon's grandmother because some of the most grandiose and beautiful passages in the Bible were penned by Paul and she missed out on them because of a lie.

Forsaking Paul for Jesus’ Sake

The second post deals further with point Wilde tried to raise with the Thurmon's grandmother. He is making the point that for African Americans systematic theology and Biblical inerrancy and infallibility doesn't mean much to the religious experience of African Americans.

There’s a larger issue for grandma than the infallibility of the Bible. While the issue of infallibility might be one of the largest issues for us evangelicals who have labored to build up buttresses against supposed attacks from liberalism, we must remember that infallibility was our fight and not grandma’s fight.
Her struggle was against the white oppressors that tore families apart by selling black husbands and fathers to new slavemaster. Her struggle was against the stronghold that she was worth less than her white slave master. Her struggle was seeing her people beaten, mistreated and abused by men who claimed to be followers of Jesus.

The thing that is missing from this conversation is that if you allow the Bible to speak for himself and ignore the wicked slave master bent on controlling and dominating other human beings, you can see what the Bible is really saying and that it does have an answer for our people who are and were "beaten, mistreated and abused by men who claimed to be followers of Jesus." The Bible makes it clear that these men are not followers of Christ.

I also found it amazing that Wilde quotes from the works of  Dr. James Cone [pictured on the right], who is credited with starting Black Liberation Theology.

James Cone (to listen to his perspective, click here) makes a relevant statement. He writes that the Black community

“have not been preoccupied with definitions of inspiration and infallibility … it is as if blacks have intuitively drawn the all-important distinction between infallibility and reliability … how it is the true and basic source for discovering the truth of Jesus Christ. For this reason there has been no crisis of biblical authority in the black community” (102).

Cone’s distinction is helpful for those who find themselves wanting to talk back to grandma, as it helps us remember that she wasn’t reading the Bible to find all of its infallible truths so that she could arrange them in a systematic array of scholastical beauty; no, she was reading the Bible so that she could be lead closer to the One the Bible speaks of: Jesus.

I disagree with much of Cone's work because he changes the Gospel. Of course God hates sin and racisim and sexism, but the Jesus did not die on the cross for just the oppressed but also the oppressor. Because of sin, sometimes - depending on the circumstances - you are the oppressor and sometimes you are the oppressed. No one is better or worse than the worst slave holder. We all deserve hell and if weren't for Jesus we would all be going to hell. This is what Liberation theologies twist and distort. The Bible's infallible truth are not just scholastic beauty, it is also truth good practical life that leads us to the one the Bible speaks of - all the Bible speaks of Jesus! Jesus said:

"You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me," - John 5:39

That is why I read the Bible - all of it.


Forsaking Paul for Jesus’ Sake: Part 2

Related articles

• How the Bible was used to justify slavery, abolitionism (releasingreligion.blogspot.com)
• First Nazis, Now Confederates: Tarantino's Slave Movie (andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com)
• Would somebody please explain why so many black people in America convert to Islam? (barenakedislam.wordpress.com)

YouTube - Theology Matters: May God Grant You an Interview

Here is a video Dr. James White posted before I started my blog. It is a response to Dr. Bart Ehrman's book God's Problem, in which Ehrman lays out how the existence of evil and suffering lead to him becoming an agnostic. It is a great response.




YouTube - Theology Matters: May God Grant You an Interview

Iron Sharpens Iron: James White: Love Wins by Rob Bell Examined & Critiqued

Last Monday, James White was a guest on Irons Sharpens Iron. The subject was an examination and critique on Rob Bell's new book "Love Wins". Rob Bell has some serious problems in this book. James White has already spoken out but it's good to hear it in the context of an interview. Bell's errors must be pointed out because it's a different Gospel than what the Bible promotes and teaches. Follow the link to hear the interview.

Iron Sharpens Iron: James White: Love Wins by Rob Bell Examined & Critiqued

Related articles

• Sorry Rob Bell, But You Are A Theologian. (provocativechristian.wordpress.com)
• Rob Bell is Right about Hell (emmilglenn.wordpress.com)
• Rob Bell, Heaven, Hell and us (connorbryandotcom.wordpress.com)
• Love Wins: A 'Theological' Conversation on Rob Bell's New Book at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (rodiagnusdei.wordpress.com)
• More on Rob Bell (godsmustardseed.com)

Iron Sharpens Iron: DANIEL WEST: "ONENESS BY DECEPTION, WON BY THE TRINITY: The Testimony of a Former 'Oneness' ('Jesus Only') Pentecostal" PART ONE (Encore Presentation)

This was a great interview of Daniel West who goes over exactly how Oneness Pentecostalism is different from traditional Christianity.  During the interview there was a very interesting call from a woman who had never heard the theological definition for the Trinity or heard the doctrine defended exegetically from the Bible. The more familiar you are with Biblical truth, the more you will be able to recognize untruth.

Iron Sharpens Iron: DANIEL WEST: "ONENESS BY DECEPTION, WON BY THE TRINITY: The Testimony of a Former 'Oneness' ('Jesus Only') Pentecostal" PART ONE (Encore Presentation)

Related articles

• Trinity as Perfect Community (achorusofehoes.wordpress.com)
• Catholics are NOT Christians... Really!? (acatholicdad.wordpress.com)
• An Intro to the Philosophy of Religion, Ch. 3 (theisticnotebook.wordpress.com)

My Common Sense is Tingling - Debunking Christianity: Let's Talk Turkey About the Evidence for Christianity

John Loftus has posted yet another article that I think has a few problems. My comments are in Bold.

Tell me if I'm missing something. It's time to sum up the evidence for Christianity and see what it is.

Christians have the poor evidence of historical evidence and that's it. I have a chapter on it in Why I Became an Atheist. Then they have an argument from ignorance, the god of the gaps. You either argue for this god or you don't. If you do it's a fallacy of ignorance--although I grant with Robert Larmar that this is a legitimate argument so long as science does not progress. But it most emphatically does progress!!! If you do not argue for the god of the gaps then you merely have a sustaining creator of the universe that looks indistinguishable from a universe without a god at all!

Okay so far?

Not even close to "Okay". See what Loftus did. He admits that there is historical evidence but calls it "poor". Given that in science, when it is done right, leads to far more questions than it answers it doe not make sense to argue that understanding anything means that we don't need God. We can explain where lightning comes from, but science will never be able to explain why a bolt lightning hits one area but not another or why it kills this person or another. Science will never be able answer why the Nazis did not discover how to make a U-235 bomb before the Allies did or for that matter why any historical event happens instead of an alternate event. In addition how is a sustaining creator (which Loftus and Richard Dawkins admit is possible) is indistinguishable from a universe with no God at all? Think about it. All the science that we have shows us that the universe cannot sustain itself. We can't sustain ourselves. Entropy can never decrease. Something is slowing down the universe from complete heat death. We have nothing that explains why we exist instead of nothing. I don't think that is a question science can answer. Without that agency holding reality together we have nothing. Let's bring it home. What is it that keeps your heart beating and the synapses in your brain functioning? We don't know. Can science help us understand those processes? Yup. Will science be able to explain and predict when those processes will stop and why? No.

Then we have philosophical arguments that the universe is not a necessary being and that we need a God for reason. I think those arguments are bad and fail to be supported by the evidence from evolution. And none of them can lead people to believe that the god of these arguments is trinitarian by nature, became incarnate in Jesus, atoned for our sins, resurrected from the grave, and so forth. These beliefs depend entirely on the poor evidence of historical evidence, you see. And I mean it's poor evidence if it can be considered evidence at all! Keith Parsons walked away from the philosophy of religion because these philosophical types of arguments have met devastating counter-replies.

I guess Loftus rejects revelation as a valid source for information about reality. Agreed that without divine revelation we can't know all the things about God's character and nature in as great a detail as we claim to know. I want to know why that is a problem. If God is truly as other as he would have to be to have accomplished making all of reality out of nothing , does anyone really think that our finiteness could ever hope to comprehend much of anything about God beyond Deism? God has chosen to reveal himself to humanity though direct and personal relationship. That is the claim of Christianity. Beyond that...God wants to have a personal relationship with you. We can't cross the chasm of infinite distance between us and God. In order to be in relationship with us, God had to condescend and bridge that chasm himself with himself. If you think you can just approach God and what he does and who he is without his help and under your own power you greatly overestimate yourself and your mental powers.

Again, am I missing anything?

Yes, a lot.

That's all ya got. Little or nothing. End of story. See ya.

So, Loftus admits that there is historical evidence (yet doesn't think its convincing) and neglects the very evidence of our own existence as proof of God being and doing what He has said He is and had done. This is far from the end of the story. Without God it is impossible to even begin understand Him and even then obedience is going to be the closest you can get. Without God, it's not a matter of missing the forest because of the tree. Without God, you don't even know you exist or even recognize trees.

Debunking Christianity: Let's Talk Turkey About the Evidence for Christianity

Evidence for Christianity by J.P. Moreland - Apologetics 315

Brian Auten has posted a lecture by Dr J.P. Moreland that is well-worth listening to. A link to the video and the audio was posted on his blog at Apologetics 315. Please visit his blog post to get the links.

Evidence for Christianity by J.P. Moreland - Apologetics 315

Related articles

• Learn apologetics (geneveith.com)
• EPS Apologetics Conference! (swallowingdinosaurs.wordpress.com)
• Apologetics 315 (xercised.wordpress.com)

Answering Muslims: Trinity or Tawheed?

A debate on the Trinity between Abdullah Kunde and Samuel Green. Granville, NSW, Australia. 10th of December 2010.




Answering Muslims: Trinity or Tawheed?

Related articles

• Trinity 101 (catholicanalysis.blogspot.com)
• To the Holy Trinity (catholicsview.wordpress.com)

Smallville and Friedrich Nietzsche — Superman and the Ubermensch | True Freethinker

Image by xploitme via Flickr
I enjoyed this post by Mariano so much I had to link to it. I do understand exactly what he means because I saw the latest episode of Smallville and Nietzsche's philosophy was brought up and endorsed.
Mariano wrote:

In the most recent episode Carter Hall aka Hawkman refers to Friedrich Nietzsche, “To him, the true hero was the person who embraced the life that he or she was given and made it better. He called that person ‘ubermensch” to which Lois Lane states, “A Superman.” Yet, along with the concept it is stated that, in essence, we can all be an ubermensch.

I like science fiction and fantasy because you can explore themes and ideas that can't be reasonably done in other genres. This is a good example. I think we should be careful in embracing Nietzche's ideas because while he did have some good ones that can be spun positively as it has on Smallville, his philosophy was also an inspiration for the Nazis. Also I don't think Nietzsche thought all people could be ubermensch - only the elite. And when you look at how Nietzsche's ubermensch is described by Nietzche himself do you really wanna be that kind of person? Mariano wrote:

I do not know if they realize that whist to the unlearned in this area this sounds very nice—I can be Superman, after all—to Friedrich Nietzsche the ubermensch were merciless and uncompassionate iron fisted survival of the fittest domineers. Keep in mind that uber is translatable as "super," "above," "over," etc.

I most definitely don't want to be that kind of person if that is what an ubermensch is supposed to be.
Smallville and Friedrich Nietzsche — Superman and the Ubermensch | True Freethinker

Related articles by Zemanta

• "Reconsidering Nietzsche" (andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com)
• Reconsidering Nietzsche - Six Questions for Julian Young (3quarksdaily.com)
• 'Smallville' Season 10, Episode 2 Preview: 'Shield' (splashpage.mtv.com)

Debate: "The Bodily Assumption of Mary" Robert Sungenis vs. James White | True Freethinker

Wow, Mariano has been busy. He introduced the debates held in Santa Fe, New Mexico in which James White debated Robert Sungenis. This post I'm linking to gives links to both debates and Mariano's lecture on Rabbinic Judaism and The Baha'i Faith. Great stuff!!!!


Debate: "The Bodily Assumption of Mary" Robert Sungenis vs. James White | True Freethinker

Related articles by Zemanta

• The Historical Date of the Assumption of Mary (cantuar.blogspot.com)
• Is There Anything That Can't Be Denied? (unreasonablefaith.com)
• Observations on a parallel universe (crookedtimber.org)
• Baha'i Leaders Sentenced to 20 Years in Iran (beliefnet.com)
• Assumption is antidote to belief in reincarnation, explains Spanish bishop (catholicnewsagency.com)

Apologetics 315: Terminology Tuesday: Pantheism

In continuing his awesome series on giving the terminology of theological terms, Brian Auten posted a definition of "panthesism" last Tuesday.  God cannot be equated with the universe because God has always existed and the Universe came into existence. Further, God transcends the universe - time and space - matter and energy - and keeps it together..Therefore it cannot logically follow that you can be a Christian and a pantheist simultaneously.

Apologetics 315: Terminology Tuesday: Pantheism

Fundamentalist Theologian, Richard Carrier, Speaks Out About the Resurrection | True Freethinker

Mariano has written a great post reminding us about a time where Lee Strobel spoke with Richard Carrier regarding the Resurrection of Christ. His essay is in light of the following video. I suggest watching the video and reading his essay.




Fundamentalist Theologian, Richard Carrier, Speaks Out About the Resurrection | True Freethinker

Theology at the Movies and on Television, part 2 of 2 | True Freethinker

Mariano's second part in a two-part series examining the theology in movies and television. This one focuses on two television shows: Reaper and Supernatural.

Theology at the Movies and on Television, part 2 of 2 | True Freethinker

Related articles by Zemanta

• 'Supernatural' Creator Eric Kripke Is Leaving The Show (screenrant.com)
• Supernatural Season 6 Confirmed to Premiere this Fall (aimosi.blogspot.com)
• Supernatural Spinoff Ghostfacers Brings Funny, Lacks Freshness (newteevee.com)

Comparison Chart: Christianity vs. Islam - ReligionFacts

Here is a great chart I found on the Internet. It summarizes Christianity and Islam.

History & Stats	Christianity	Islam
date founded	c. 30 AD	622 CE
place founded	Palestine	Arabian Peninsula
founders & early leaders	Jesus, Peter, Paul	Muhammad
original languages	Aramaic and Greek	Arabic
major location today	Europe, North and South America	Middle East, Southeast Asia
adherents worldwide today	2 billion	1.3 billion
adherents in USA	159 million	1.1 million
adherents in Canada	21 million	500,000
adherents in UK	51 million	1.6 million
current size rank	largest in the world	second largest in the world
major branches	Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant	Sunni, Shiite
Religious Authority	Christianity	Islam
sacred text	Bible = Old Testament (Jewish Bible) + New Testament	Qur'an (Koran)
inspiration of sacred text	views vary: literal Word of God, inspired human accounts, or of human origin only	literal Word of God
status of biblical prophets	true prophets	true prophets
status of Jewish Bible	canonical	noncanonical but useful as a (corrupted) inspired text
status of Jewish Apocrypha	canonical (Catholic); useful but noncanonical (Protestant)	noncanonical
status of New Testament	canonical	noncanonical but useful as a (corrupted) inspired text
summaries of doctrine	Apostle's Creed, Nicene Creed	Six Articles of Faith
religious law	canon law (Catholics)	Sharia
other written authority	church fathers, church councils, ecumenical creeds (all branches); papal decrees, canon law (Catholics)	Hadith
Beliefs & Doctrine	Christianity	Islam
ultimate reality	one creator God	one creator God
nature of God	Trinity - one substance, three persons	unity - one substance, one person
other spiritual beings	angels and demons	angels, demons, jinn
revered humans	saints, church fathers	prophets, imams (especially in Shia Islam)
identity of Jesus	Son of God, God incarnate, savior of the world	true prophet of God, whose message has been corrupted
birth of Jesus	virgin birth	virgin birth
death of Jesus	death by crucifixion	did not die, but ascended bodily into heaven (a disciple died in his place)
resurrection of Jesus	affirmed	denied, since he did not die
second coming of Jesus	affirmed	affirmed
mode of divine revelation	through Prophets and Jesus (as God Himself), recorded in Bible	through Muhammad, recorded in Qur'an
human nature	"original sin" inherited from Adam - tendency towards evil	equal ability to do good or evil
means of salvation	correct belief, faith, good deeds, sacraments (some Protestants emphasize faith alone)	correct belief, good deeds, Five Pillars
God's role in salvation	predestination, various forms of grace	predestination
good afterlife	eternal heaven	eternal paradise
bad afterlife	eternal hell, temporary purgatory (Catholicism)	eternal hell
view of the other religion	Islam is respected as a fellow monotheistic religion, but Muhammad is not seen as a true prophet	Christians are respected as "People of the Book," but they have mistaken beliefs and only partial revelation
Rituals & Practices	Christianity	Islam
house of worship	church, chapel, cathedral, basilica, meeting hall	mosque
day of worship	Sunday	Friday
religious leaders	priest, bishop, archbishop, patriarch, pope, pastor, minister, preacher, deacon	imams
major sacred rituals	baptism, communion (Eucharist)	Five Pillars: prayer, pilgrimage, charity, fasting, confession of faith
head covered during prayer?	generally no	yes
central religious holy days	Lent, Holy Week, Easter	Eid-al-Fitr, Eid-al-Adha, month of Ramadan
other holidays	Christmas, saints days	Mawlid, Ashura
major symbols	cross, crucifix, dove, anchor, fish, alpha and omega, chi rho, halo	crescent, name of Allah in Arabic

Comparison Chart: Christianity vs. Islam - ReligionFacts