THE APOLOGETIC FRONT: Grek Koukl on "same-sex marriage"

Image via Wikipedia

I'm glad to see Greg Koukl's comments on this subject . I agree, they need to be read and discussed. It really does come down to whether or not we are going to live God's way or our own.

THE APOLOGETIC FRONT: Grek Koukl on "same-sex marriage"

Atheism is Dead: The Mad Pagan Skeptic, part 1

Friedrich Nietzsche via last.fm

Mariano has written a great essay discussing  atheism and its logical conclusions. He begins this series building on a Nietzche's  Parable of the Mad Man. It is brilliant. Here is his introduction:

Atheism is Dead will now begin a tripartite consideration of the mad Pagan skeptic whereby we will consider Friedrich Nietzsche’s virtual prophecy about what would come about due to the death of God.
We will also consider a biblical statement about humanity’s natural knowledge of God and our purposeful negation of such knowledge.
Lastly, we will consider to what atheism has come as they seek to find meaning in a meaningless universe and seek to prop up their favored ideas upon contradictions of their own making.

This essay will be parsed as follows:
1) An Exposition of The Parable of the Mad Man
2) Neo Pagan Atheism
3) The Modern Skeptic

Here is another example of a post so brilliant that i can't help but share it. I truly think that Nietzche went insane because without God there is nothing else for a human mind to do, but snap. Even atheists today, who are not insane, don't realize that they maintain conscious cohesiveness and rationality byu the whim of God.I recommend that everyone read Mariano's full article and the whole series!

Atheism is Dead: The Mad Pagan Skeptic, part 1

Dr. Claude Mariottini - Professor of Old Testament: Did Moses Have a Cleft Lip?

Image via Wikipedia

This is a great post from Dr. Claude Mariottini. I never considered that Moses could have had a medical condition. I also disagree with the rabbinical idea that God does not call people to service who have disabilities. I know that God does use people who are disabled. One of the Pastors in my denomination is blind and he is constantly used by God. He is just one of the examples I know of. Mariottini does a great job showing  how Moses' answer when God called him from the burning  bush. has been interpreted and re-interpreted.


Dr. Claude Mariottini - Professor of Old Testament: Did Moses Have a Cleft Lip?

YouTube - Hitler Finds Out Scott Brown Won Massachusetts Senate Seat

Image via Wikipedia

Gotta love YouTube. Here is another bit of creative video editing to make Hitler go on a tirade of Scott Brown winning a Senate seat and putting the Health Care bill in jeopardy.





YouTube - Hitler Finds Out Scott Brown Won Massachusetts Senate Seat

Cindy & Meghan McCain Poses for Ad Supporting Gay Marriage -- Politics Daily

It's been reported that Cindy McCain, the wife of 2008 Presidential candidate - John McCain, has appeared in an ad supporting gay marriage. It's part of a series of ads where celebrities pose with duct tape over their mouths and the words "No H8" tattooed on their faces. I want to first point out that I think these people's hearts are in the right place. I mean hating anyone is wrong and freedom of speech is important. The mistake is that gay marriage issue has nothing to do with hate or free speech. I'm surprised that so many people in our culture equivocate opposing gay marriages with subverting civil rights, hating homosexuals, and silencing free speech. This equivocation dodges the real issue. It comes down to few questions. The first two questions are: What is marriage and can the definition change just because the morals and ideas of society have changed? My worldview makes it necessary to define marriage as a union - socially, economically, emotionally, physically, and spiritually- between a single man and a single woman. Further I have to argue that definition is not mutable because of relativistic morality. This begs the next question: Who said the definition of marriage is immutable? Answer: The one who created it is the only one who has the right to define "marriage". So then we are left to the fundamental fact that God created marriage - I mean he matched Adam and Eve. I know the objection. Many object that there is no God - no absolute law giver - and that there was no Adam and Eve. Let's consider for the moment that there is a God and that He made all of us, wouldn't it matter what He had to say about gay marriage, abortion, and everything else? Given that there is a God - Lord over all - of course it would matter. So even if I don't personally care who or what one chooses to marry or have sex with, it matters because it matters to God because He wants what is best for us and has given us a standard. As for proving the existence of God or that there is a moral standard by which we are all judged I'm going to save that for another post. I'm pointing out here that if you accept that there is a God and that he has an objective moral standard, then you cannot support gay marriage and be logically consistent. It's about following God no matter what. My subjective opinion does not matter in the face of God's. Making it about hate and civil rights is a smoke screen. It's like protesting earthquakes or gravity. It's the pot trying to call the potter to the carpet and trying to change the pootter to fit what the pot thinks is right. Does not work.

As far as I know both Cindy and Meghan are Christians so it should matter to them what God thinks of gay marriage. Given that the Bible is the infallible and undeniable word of God (I'll be posing my proof on this at a latter time about how we know this is objectively true), it would be a good idea to see what Jesus is recorded to have said regarding marriage in it's perfect purposed state.

1When Jesus had finished saying these things, he left Galilee and went into the region of Judea to the other side of the Jordan. 2Large crowds followed him, and he healed them there.

3Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?"

4"Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' 5and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'? 6So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."

7"Why then," they asked, "did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?"

8Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."

10The disciples said to him, "If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry."

11Jesus replied, "Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. 12For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it." - Matthew 19: 1-12

Jesus is clear. There was an Adam. There was an Eve. And marriage should be between one woman and one man.

The McCain's involvement in the ad campaign is newsworthy  because John McCain has publicly denied the legal defnition of marriage should be changed. He did respond regarding his wife's and daughter's activities.

McCain's office issued a statement saying that the senator respects differences of opinion between his family members, but still "believes the sanctity of marriage is only defined as between one man and one woman."

It is more loving to tell people the truth rather than allow them to destroy themselves going against God. Given that anyone who tries to point out what God said is being stigmatized and ridiculed and demonized who is really being ductaped?

Cindy McCain Poses for Ad Supporting Gay Marriage -- Politics Daily

Christian Apologetics - Life and Doctrine: Trinity : Are there Other Attributes Shared by the Members of the Trinity?

Mariano has done a great post continuing his series on the Trinity. This time he focuses on various scriptures talking about the Father's, Son's, and Holy Spirit's shared attributes. This is a great post!

Christian Apologetics - Life and Doctrine: Trinity : Are there Other Attributes Shared by the Members of the Trinity?

Haitians and People With Common Sense Respond to Pat Roberston.

I found some great videos of responses to Pat Roberston's assertion's last week that Haiti is suffering because it gained its independence through making a pact with Satan. He even asserted that because of this Haiti deserves the suffering it has endured, even before and including the earthquake. I think he is even trying to say that we are qualitatively  better - more righteous - than they.  Not true! I've written more about this last week. This time I want to focus on the videos. Priceless! Especially the comments from the ambassador from Haiti. Someone really needs to pull Pat's coat tails!

Biblical Exegesis: Arminian Chronicles: Ephesians 1 Chosen "In Him"

Image via Wikipedia

Here is a great article I learned about from Brennon's Thoughts.It is a verse-by-verse analysis of Ephesians 1;2:1-10. It's from an Arminian viewpoint. Here are my comments in red, the author's are in black.

Verse by Verse Analysis

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:

God the Father is truly the Father of Christ. Christ proceeds from the Father, yet Christ is no less eternal or God.

No argument here;

The phrase “heavenly places” is in Ephesians 5 times and nowhere else in the New Testament. (Eph 1:20; Eph 2:6; Eph 3:10; Eph 6:12). In Ephesians 2:6 the believer is already seated with Christ.

No argument here;

Eph 2:6 “and raised us up with him, and made us to sit with him in the heavenly places, in Christ Jesus”

No argument here;

This could be taken as future or now but spiritually. Based on the next two verses, the future seems to be the correct understanding.

I think it means that it is now true spiritually and will be a physical reality in the future because Paul describes it in the past tense referring to the point at which we were saved.

We are blessed in Christ Jesus. Our blessings are from and through and in Him. God the Father’s purpose of salvation was in Him. Only through union with Him is the Church blessed.

The “us” Paul refers to is the Church. Paul, a Jew, is uniting himself with his Gentile audience. In Christ, they are united.

At this point we we know "us" refers to the church. What is the church? Them that believe is the church - past, present, and future.

4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

God’s choice, from eternity past, was to save the Church, those united to Christ, through Christ’s work. Election is in Christ. Christ is not simply the means to save those the Father elects. Rather, Christ is eternal and the very foundation of election.

We will be holy (positive) and without blame (negative). God will completely forgive those that are in Christ Jesus. God has decided to save those united to Christ. The phrase holy and without blame appears also in Colossians 1:22-23:

Col 1:22 yet now hath he reconciled in the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and without blemish and unreproveable before him:
Col 1:23 if so be that ye continue in the faith, grounded and stedfast, and not moved away from the hope of the gospel which ye heard, which was preached in all creation under heaven; whereof I Paul was made a minister.

Here in Ephesians ending up holy and without blame is certain, unconditional and caused by God. In Colossians ending up holy and without blame is contingent and conditional based on our continuing in the faith. Here in Ephesians the Church is being addressed as a body. In Colossians, the individuals are addressed. The Church will never fail, but individuals may or may not be joined with or remain within the Church.

I think we have a problem here. The church cannot be saved unless the individuals who make up the church are saved. I've got to disagree that Ephesians is just referring to an organization. Paul writes "us" - the people who believe are loved and chosen. Because the people who make up the church are chosen - the church is chosen. If a person continues in faith it is because God has predestined him/her.

5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

God pre-arranged that the Church would become His children, through Christ. His plan is certain, and even though we are still on earth, we might as well be in heaven seated with Christ.

Did God predestine us or did he predestine the plan of salvation? God predestined us not a plan. Does a plan get adopted like children? Does a plan get seated in heaven? No, 

Corporate Election

Was it necessary for Christ to come and redeem us? Were the incarnation and atonement simply means of accomplishing God’s preexisting plan? This passage teaches that Christ’s role is both instrumental and all-inclusive in election.

Amen

The incarnation and redemption were indeed necessary. God’s very character of justice requires that sin cannot be ignored or go unpunished. There could not have been any salvation without redemption through Christ’s blood, which provides the forgiveness of sins. God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself (2 Corinthians 5:19-21). God loved the world so much that He gave his only begotten Son (John 3:16), He spared not His Son but delivered Him up for us all (Romans 8:32) and Christ’s death was foreordained before the foundation of the world (1 Peter 1:20).

Amen

With that in mind, God’s election was based on Christ and His work. Election could not have been otherwise. God could not have chosen to save sinners apart from redemption in Christ Jesus. God’s holiness would not allow salvation through other means.

Amen

Christ was established by God’s choice to be the foundation of salvation. By His blood, sinners would be saved. But in the establishment of Christ as the Savior the Church is implicitly chosen. Those that are in Christ and united to Him have been established by God’s plan. All in Christ are elected to salvation and apart from Christ, no one is elected to salvation.

Amen. God knows who will be saved. 

The election is not of certain individuals whether or not they are united to Christ. It is all those and only those who are united to Christ. The election does not unite people to Christ. Rather it adopts them to God through their union to Christ. We are united to Christ by grace through faith.

I agree election is not of certain individuals whether or not they are united to Christ. I have never heard or read James White, RC Sproul, John MacArthur, John Piper or any Calvinist say that it was.

Is it possible to be elected to adoption and not be united to Christ. No way! You can't be adopted as a child of God  without being united with Christ through faith. The thing is that all those who are united with Christ are elected.

The Gift of Faith

Ephesians 2:8-9 “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.”

Faith is a gift from God and through this gift, we are united to Christ and thereby saved. ¹ A gift implies a giver and a receiver. If the receiver does not want the gifts, they may be rejected and returned. Gifts are never earned or deserved. They are given freely.

How is faith returned? Either a person has faith or doesn't. Is it possible for a man to have faith yet reject Jesus. I don't see how.

So in what sense is faith a gift? First we must understand what faith is. In Hebrews 11 we read that:

Hebrews 11:1-3 Now faith is assurance of things hoped for, a conviction of things not seen. For therein the elders had witness borne to them. By faith we understand that the worlds have been framed by the word of God, so that what is seen hath not been made out of things which appear.

Normally we assent to truth as soon as we see and understand the proof. That’s the difference between a belief and an opinion. The proof is the evidence of the truth. Often the truth is its own proof, or rather; it is self evident. In faith, we hold a conviction of something not seen. Faith itself is the assurance. Faith itself is the evidence. Faith acts as the proof in convicting us of a truth we have no other proof for.

I can agree with that.  But how does that prove that faith is a gift that can be rejected? If faith is rejected it seems more like it was never given. Is there a passage of scripture that says that saving faith is given to all people in the same proportion?

Once we understand basic math, believing that 1 + 1 = 2 is not really a choice. Once it’s understood, it can not be rejected. The evidence forbids it. Believing or not believing is not volitional. The evidence, not our will, moves us to assent to the truth.

Faith is like opinion in that we don’t have evidence moving our mind to hold a conviction. Rather, we choose to do so, voluntarily. In contrast to the math equation example where the evidence moves our mind to hold a conviction, our will moves our mind to hold a conviction. Faith differs from opinion in that faith is the substance or assurance. Faith itself causes us to accept the truth.
So faith is a gift from God, in that He moves our wills to assent to the truth of the Gospel, which we have no other proof of. He starts our will moving towards believing the truth, and as long as we don’t resist His grace, He carries us through to fully assent to the truth of the Gospel.

Look at what is commented: 

Once it’s understood, it can not be rejected. The evidence forbids it. Believing or not believing is not volitional. The evidence, not our will, moves us to assent to the truth.

I see the point and agree.  However he also wrote 

So faith is a gift from God, in that He moves our wills to assent to the truth of the Gospel, which we have no other proof of. He starts our will moving towards believing the truth, and as long as we don’t resist His grace, He carries us through to fully assent to the truth of the Gospel.

How can God move our will, yet we can resist His grace? How? I have talked to several Arminians who agree that without God we are unable to come to the truth of the Gospel but if God only nudges us to the point to which we can decide why doesn't God push us all to the point that we accept the Gospel? Free will doesn't answer the question because God had to violate our will so that we would even begin to consider the Gospel. Everyone is going to hell by default. God has chosen to predestine some of us to unite with Christ and be reconciled to Himself. - the elect.

By way of example, let’s say a dog is stuck in a house, unconscious and the house is on fire. Rubble falls on the dog and breaks its legs. The dog will certainly die. A man runs into the house and wakes up the dog. The dog gets scared, but doesn’t know how to escape. The man shows the dog the way out, but the dog can’t follow because of its broken legs. The man picks up the dog and runs to safety.

If the dog had bitten the man when he ran for safety, the man may have dropped the dog and it would have died. But if the dog doesn’t resist, we still wouldn’t say that it saved itself.

In the same way God carries our wills to assent to the truth of the Gospel.

I think that the analogy fails to illustrate what is really happening. Let's and it real and say that it's a man. in the burning house. The man has just raped and murdered everyone in the house and set it on fire. a piece of concrete falls and knows the man unconscious and breaks all of his limbs. The king of the country runs into the burning house and carries the man out  and sets his broken bones and allows him to live in the palace, pardoned and free of condemnation..  This more accurately illustrates what God has done for us. We were dead in sin and trespasses. We didn't want to be saved. We didn't even know we needed a savior. Nor do we deserve it. Yet, the king of all reality swoops in saves us, heals us, and forgives us, transforming our very nature.  That is how God brings us to the truth of the Gospel.

Answers to Calvinist Objections

Based on this passage three arguments in favor of unconditional election have been asserted:

Argument 1: He chose us to be holy, not because we were holy
Argument 2: The choice happened before the foundation of the world and not at the moment individuals come to faith
Argument 3: No further reason was given other than the good pleasure of His will

The Calvinist view breaks down into two major varieties. The first called supra-lapsarian states that God predestined some for glory, others for destruction before considering man as fallen or in Christ. The second, infra-lapsarian states that God predestined some for eternal life and passed by the rest after considering man as fallen and in sin.

The first argument does not support the supra-lapsarian (pre-fallen mankind) position. In fact it opposes it. Those that were predestined were unholy. They were sinners. But Adam, before he fell was not a sinner in need of saving grace. Verse 6 states that predestination is to the praise of the glory of His grace. Grace is given to sinners so a reference to grace here seems to consider man in a fallen condition. Further, the passage states that we are made accepted in Christ, but we must first be considered rejected because of our sin. This is evidence that God considers men as sinners prior to predestination.

I agree while we were yet Sinners Jesus died for us (Romans 5:8).

The infra-lapsarian (post-fallen mankind) position does not have this problem. They concur that man was considered as sinners when they are predestined to salvation. The mistake is not that the election is made prior to individuals believing, but that the election relates to individuals and not the group. Also the election is in Christ, not unto union with Christ.

I don't believe the author has been able to prove that there is a difference between being elected in Christ and being elected into union with Christ. 

Verse 4 describes the individuals as “in Him” but only believers are united to Christ. Because Christ is the foundation of salvation, no one could be predestined to salvation apart from union with Christ.

Agreed

Further, the “us” in verse 1 is “the faithful in Christ Jesus”. Verses 13 & 23 indicate that the reference is to a group and not individuals. In verses 22 & 23 those that are “in Him” are named the Church, but the Church is a group of believers not “individuals without being considered believers”. In verse 13 only after believing did the gentiles join the Jews who first believed and were officially added to the group by the Holy Spirit who sealed them.

First verses 13 does not refer to group but to the same individuals who believe.  Look at its context.

¹¹In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, ¹²in order that we, who were the first to hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory. ¹³And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, ¹⁴who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession—to the praise of his glory.

The "you" is the same "us" Paul has been discussing. Second, I agree that the Holy Spirit seals us. 

when we believed The question is if we are sealed how is it that we can become "unborn again"? We can't. If you get into union with Christ by your own free will....why isn't your free will enough to get you out? Because it's not anything we do, it's a gift. If a person rejects that gift...they never received it.

Paul is saying is that God before the foundation of the world chose to save believers through Christ and predestined them to heaven. Basically, this is the formulation of the gospel before the foundation of the world. God did not have to choose to save anyone at all. Believers do not earn salvation through faith. God out of the good pleasure of His will, graciously chose to save believers.

Yes, Amen! The point of disagreement is how does one become a believer? Can you just choose to believe without any intervention from the Father. John 6:44 knocks that possibility out. So if you can't believe on your own, how is it do you come to faith? God saves us despite ourselves.

Conclusion

Ephesians 1 teaches that God before the foundation of the world chose to save believers through Christ and predestined them to heaven. God does not accept sinners nor does he choose anyone to eternal life except in Christ and for the sake of Christ. "He hath chosen us in Him," verse 4; "wherein He hath made us accepted in the Beloved," verse 6. This demonstrates that man’s condition prior to election was fallen and in need of saving grace. This grace is in Christ and provided through faith which unites us to Him.

I agree with the conclusion. However I can't see how if God is doing the choosing how is it that we can reject. Jesus said of his disciples that the father gave Him, none of them he lost (John 17:12). Why would Jesus be a butterfingers now and some of His followers be lost?  No way!

-------------------------------------------------
¹ Some people object that faith itself is not the gift here, noting the gender of it and faith are different in the Greek. They prefer to understand that salvation or the economy of salvation through faith as the gift. The Greek is inconclusive and has been read either way. Though I prefer the understanding that faith is the gift, either read is permissible. But the concept that we need God’s grace to believe is clear from many passages of scripture, such as John 15:5 (without me ye can do nothing), Acts 18:27 (he helped them much that had believed through grace) and 2 Timothy 2:25 (if peradventure God may give them repentance unto the knowledge of the truth).

In case you are wondering, I agree with the footnote too.

Arminian Chronicles: Ephesians 1 Chosen "In Him"

Truthbomb Apologetics: 'Religion-free' Haiti Relief Fund

This is a great post from Chad over at Truthbomb Apologetics. I join him in congratulating Dawkins and other atheists in raising money for Haiti. I thank God for their help and I also agree that it's silly and wrong to argue that atheists are incapable of doing good things and caring about other people. They clearly can and do. However, Chad is correct, atheism does not explain how or why we should care about what happened in Haiti. I want to quote Chad's closing because I think it sums up the only way a Christian can respond to this move by the Atheists.

In closing, I want to once again commend Dawkins and his fellow atheists for providing relief for those in Haiti; and, it is indeed wrong to say that atheists cannot be good or live ethical lives. However, from the atheistic worldview it is unsustainable why it is better to help the Haitians than to not help the Haitians.

It's really a major issue for me because my wife is Haitian. She was  born in Port-au-Prince and still has many relatives and friends there, including her father. Miraculously, they all survived the earthquake, but lost their homes. Even more, I find even more miraculous is their attitude. They like every single survivor that I have heard speak credit and thank God for their survival and for the help of the world. My father-in-law and his wife actually experienced the hand of God preserving them and bringing them out of the wreakage of their home that collapsed on top of them. He said he knows that God saved their lives. He said he heard a voice tell him how to lead his wife out, crawling out of the house. He knows it was God. And my wife's cousin  escaped her house collapsing on her and her baby by mere seconds. When she realized that there was an earthquake she grabbed her baby and left the house.  There are other miracles. Other examples of God's grace and power in the face of devastation. We were praying and continue to pray. No way can we say that prayer does not do anything. The survivors themselves disagree with the worldview of the atheists. Those who actually are suffering are holding on to God while some of those who are rejecting God are wondering why would a loving God allow such a thing. The contrast is striking. Note: the picture is of my father-in-law, Marion-Phillip with my daughter, Makayla from when he visited the States in 2007.

Truthbomb Apologetics: 'Religion-free' Haiti Relief Fund

Apologetics 315: Sunday Quote: Frank Tipler on Cosmology

A very important quote has been posted on Apologetics 315 by Frank Tipler.

"When I began my career as a cosmologist some twenty years ago, I was a convinced atheist. I never in my wildest dreams imagined that one day I would be writing a book purporting to show that the central claims of Judeo-Christian theology are in fact true, that these claims are straightforward deductions of the laws of physics as we now understand them. I have been forced into these conclusions by the inexorable logic of my own special branch of physics." - - Frank Tipler

Why is this so important. Tipler is a word-renowned physicist and mathematician. He started out trying to prove that Judeo-Christianity is false but ended up a believer! I'm planning to read his book The Physics of Christianity. I realize that his work, since he became a Christian, has been dismissed and he has been ignored by some and endorsed by others. I truly believe that the Judeo-Christianity is the only worldview that makes sense with the evidence from science and history. Apparently, Tipler has come to the same conclusion.

Apologetics 315: Sunday Quote: Frank Tipler on Cosmology

The MLK that's never quoted....EVER! #2 - BlackScienceFictionSociety

Martin Luther King, Jr. via last.fm

Yeah...obviously this insight from Dr. King is almost never discussed! No way will this video show up on CNN or any mass media. Martin Luther king Jr. Understood that the truth is the racism was a smokescreen for the classicism and economic structure designed to keep power and influence out of the hands of the masses. The goal was/and is to keep the rich rich, if not increase, and keep the poor poor. Not just here in this country but around the world. MLK understood this. Malcolm X realized this too. It was for this reason why they ware assassinated. If this truth caught hold and people really got angry we would have a revolution. The problem is i have no idea what we could replace the current system with. Which is why I think the best we got is to trust God and know that He is gonna sort out all of this. We must also not add to this by insulting, maiming, and killing others who are in the same boat with us!







The MLK that's never quoted....EVER! #2 - BlackScienceFictionSociety

Atheism is Dead: Bart Ehrman, Interrupted - on the Bible and Christianity

Mariano has post a great article about how Bart Ehrman tries to wiggle out of his responsibility of his conclusions concerning the Bible. He seems to believe that one can be a Christian and have a low opinion of scripture. Ehrman thinks that scripture doesn't have to true  in order for  Christianity to be worth living. He seems to have forgotten the he credits his path to agnosticism as beginning  with his rejecting the Bible as the word of God. This is a wonderful article and you should read it if you think that the Bible does not matter. It's contents are profoundly relevant especially if you see yourself as a Christian. As Mariano wrote, how can you call yourself a  follower of  Christ if you don't endorse what Jesus endorsed, do the things he said, or live the way he said if you don't know what the Bible says about him?

Atheism is Dead: Bart Ehrman, Interrupted - on the Bible and Christianity

Review: Tyler Perry's "I Can Do Bad All By Myself"

Last September, Tyler Perry's latest movie was released. I didn't see it. And it appears few people did because it wasn't out long. I heard almost nothing about it.  Last week it came out on DVD/Blu-Ray. It is probably one of his best movies. I really enjoyed it! It was most definitely from a Christian worldview about .not being selfish and what it means to love others. It was good. Madea was in it. While I have been going back and forth about how I feel towards a man portraying her, I would  rather a woman play Madea. If you are black you know  a real woman like her in real life -  this is why we like His movies so much. Music is really important to the story. Gladys Knight, Marvin Winans, and Mary J. Blige are all in it and they got solos! I think people should see it. Here is one of the songs from the field:

Apologetics 315: In Intellectual Neutral: William Lane Craig MP3 Audio & Video

Over at Apologetics 315 is an interesting lecture by William Lane Craig calling for Christians to become intellectually engaged in our society today! I agree! For example, people are asking today if Christians believe that Haiti endures so much disasters and problems because they are under the wrath of God? We should be able to answer "No!" and explain why! People are asking why do bad things happen to the innocent? God answers all of these questions. They are in the Bible. We ought to be able to give an answer - reasons why we trust God! Read the post to get the links to the audio and video.


Apologetics 315: In Intellectual Neutral: William Lane Craig MP3 Audio & Video

Trinity : Does the Bible Teach Theological Subordinationism?

Here is Mariano latest post on his series about the Trinity.  In this one he shows that Muslims and those who deny Jesus' equality with God  really miss an important point. Here is a quote:

Jesus said that the Father was greater than Him, He did not say that the Father was better than Him. The president of the United States is greater than I am, but he is not better.
When Jesus came to Earth He humbled Himself and became obedient, He became a little lower than the angels, He came as a man in the service of the LORD and therefore, called the Father His God (see Philippians 2:8; Hebrews 2:9; John 20:17). This refers to position and not to ontology.

 This is an important post and you really should read the rest of it! Check out the graphic he included on the left that illustrates what you have when you reject the Trinity and Mariano does a great job explaining it in the article.

Trinity : Does the Bible Teach Theological Subordinationism?

The God Centered Gospel vs. a Man Centered Gospel

Here is a great discussion from Dr. James White discussing the difference between a message centered around God and His character and His Glory, juxtaposed with one with humanity at its focus. He makes great points. I've found that we need to be careful not to change what Bible really says. Yes, Jesus came to save us. Yes, God loves us. Yes, God values us. Yet we must not value our perceived needs greater than glorifying and obeying God. He truly is all that matters. God is not obligated to save anyone....I'm just grateful He has decided to save those whoput their faith in Him. As I have. Take a listen to Dr. White's arguments for why it matters and how some protestants, not just official Roman Catholic theology changes what the Bible says.

Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body. Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body. - 1 Corinthians 6:18-20

The God Centered Gospel vs. a Man Centered Gospel

Help Haiti! Pray!!! Donate what You Can!!

Christian Apologetics - Life and Doctrine: Jewish / Judaism : the Psalm 22 Controversy, part 4 of 4

Here is the fourth part of  Mariano's series talking about Psalm 22 and how Jew and Christians view it using various scholars. Very important stuff because it's a messanic text fulfilled by Jesus.


Christian Apologetics - Life and Doctrine: Jewish / Judaism : the Psalm 22 Controversy, part 4 of 4

Comic Pros Form 'Heroes For Haiti' To Help Earthquake Victims - ComicsAlliance | Comics culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews

 Comics Alliance is reporting that some comic creators are banning to gather money together for the relief effort to Haiti. Follow the link  to find out how you can help them to make a difference.

Comic Pros Form 'Heroes For Haiti' To Help Earthquake Victims - ComicsAlliance | Comics culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews

Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: Common Questions about Islam and Muslims

 Beggars All is one of my favorite blogs and it has a great post on it answering specific and common questions concerning is Islam. It is definitely worth a look!

Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: Common Questions about Islam and Muslims

Biblical Exegesis: Revelation 3: 4 & 5

Image via Wikipedia

It's come to my attention that Revelations 3:5 is sometimes viewed as saying that it is possible for a person to loose his or her salvation. Instead of just looking at verses 3 and 4.

⁴Yet you have a few people in Sardis who have not soiled their clothes. They will walk with me, dressed in white, for they are worthy. ⁵He who overcomes will, like them, be dressed in white. I will never blot out his name from the book of life, but will acknowledge his name before my Father and his angels.

Jesus is talking here. It seems to me, from the context, that Jesus is not talking about those who are not in the Book of Life. Instead, Jesus is talking about the characteristics of those in the Book of Life. Jesus is not telling us that people who overcomes the suffering and tribulations of life get to be in the Book of Life. Jesus is saying that a characteristic of those who overcome will be that they will not be erased from the book. This means that they will be in that book. No where in scripture do we see an example of someone who becomes "unborn again". Someone who is written in the Book of Life and then dropped. We did not save ourselves, why would we think that we can loose what we did not gain on our own. Therefore an apostate wold never have been in the Book of Life in the first place.

Atheism is Dead: Friedrich Nietzsche Nails Richard Dawkins

Mariano has posted a great article exploring Nietzsche's published thoughts about the logical conclusions of what Atheism  gets you. It's well-written and worthy of consideration. Nietzsche was an atheist, but he thought through the decision he was making and what it really meant! I think that is why he lost his mind. He truly saw what happens when a man totally disconnects from God. It isn't really pretty. So why don't more atheists loose their minds? One word...Grace. Even though they let go of God, God does not always let go of them. I don't think they truly see what Nietzsche saw. If they did they would abandon their silly worldviews, but they have convinced themselves that they are good without God.

Atheism is Dead: Friedrich Nietzsche Nails Richard Dawkins

TimeTravel Experiments, Parallel Universes, Stargates, 2012 and New Revelations

Here is a documentary trying to combine science and science fiction. Take a look and see what you think. I think that they tried to combine too much stuff and tried to tie things together that aren't really related.




TimeTravel Experiments, Parallel Universes, Stargates, 2012 and New Revelations