Tuesday, September 21, 2010

The FacePalm of the Day #1

A couple of weeks ago  I was challenged by Brosho7 on John Loftus' blog that I don't really follow Jesus because I've been attempting to talk to people about Christ on Loftus' blog and no body there wants to listen or hear it. I agree that many people there don't want to have their ideas or worldviews challenged. Brosho7  said that I wasn't following Jesus' words in Matthew 7:6:


 "Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces."


I asked Brosho7 if he was calling himself and all other atheists and agnostics on the blog "swine". I then told him if he was willing to admit to being swine I  would never post on Debunking Christianity again. I admit that I don't think of anyone there as being unworthy of the Gospel or as good as pigs, so I knew BroSho7 would not  go there.  And he didn't. As a matter of fact the comment hung out there for over a week without a comment form anyone. He brought it up again on Monday, and I issued the same challenge.

Much to my surprise another commenter GearHedEd wrote today. His comment wins my "FacePalm of the day" award because it's just bad.

Oh, yeah...


Oink, oink, oinkity oink, Marcus.

I'm a pig.

Now go away like you promised.

Post
a comment.

Unsubscribe
to comments on this post.


Posted by GearHedEd to Debunking Christianity
at September 21, 2010 6:17 PM

So GearHedEd would rather admit to being a pig to give himself an out rather than to continue discussions. He actually did me a favor of showing just how lost he really is. I am going to do as I promised and not post anymore comments on Debunking  Christianity anymore. I'll just keep praying for the people there that God would save them and heal them. and protect them. A mindset like that can only be changed with the grace of God.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Debunking Christianity: Quote of the Day, by Erkki

John Loftus re-posted the comments from one of the comments made by one of his readers who goes by the name Erkki. Obviously, Loftus thinks that this is a well-reasoned argument.
Punishment has to serve a purpose, other than satisfying the punisher's lust for vengeance, in order to be of use. However, the Biblegod's version of punishment means that if you don't believe, your punishment never stops. It's pure vengeance. Unconditional love means that you use punishment only to correct and reform the wrongdoer. It's still tough love enough, for punishment is always tough to go through, but of course temporary, corrective punishment for sins is "too vanilla" or "too soft on sin" to please the conservative/fundamentalist segment of Christianity, heh. There's that lust for violence in the believers who adamantly preach that anyone who doesn't believe as they believe go to hell. It's a perversion, really.
I'm an atheist and I'm opposed to any religion that teaches the monstrosity of everlasting hell. So revolting is this concept that I can't see why any rational human being could accept this fear-mongering nonsense. But I'm sure if God exists, he's much nicer than the religious fanatics portray him to be. And more willing to correct even the worst villain ever and punish him only to cleanse him of his sins altogether. Because this is true love: to redeem even the worst among humans. Otherwise Satan or whoever is responsible for making humans sin is more powerful than God himself.
There are several points here I think are missed by people who holds Erkki's view of God's nature, character, and what hell is.
1. Hell is not just about punishment. No one goes to hell for what they did but because of what they are - sinners. We all deserve to go to hell. We all have earned God's wrath because we are not holy.
2. Think about what Erkki is saying: Unconditional love means that you use punishment only to correct and reform the wrongdoer. It's still tough love enough, for punishment is always tough to go through, but of course temporary, corrective punishment for sins is "too vanilla" or "too soft on sin" to please the conservative/fundamentalist segment of Christianity, heh. Who said? How was this conclusion reached? We have a characterization of "unconditional love" given without any proof that it's correct. I would argue that God has provided the means so that we can be cleansed of sin and be with Him forever - Jesus' atoning sacrifice and resurrection. Why should God allow you to avoid hell if you reject his grace and demand that you do it your own way?
3. How is this fear-mongering? How is this nonsense? Do you let people come in your house and do whatever they want no matter what you think? Nope. We live in God's universe. Why would God not have the right to enforce His will and standards regardless of what you think of those standards? He has every right.
4. What is there to fear if you obey God? In Jesus there is no condemnation. If hell frightens you, just put your faith in Christ. Simple.
Debunking Christianity: Quote of the Day, by Erkki
Enhanced by Zemanta

Answering Muslims: Pastor Speaks the Truth about Islam

Nabeel has posted a great video of  Dr. Jeffress making comment about Islam that has not cost him a lot of insults and character assassination. I'm wondering how long will it be before the only people you can publicly and strongly disagree with will be Christians without ridicule.


Answering Muslims: Pastor Speaks the Truth about Islam
Enhanced by Zemanta

Pés Descalços Evangelismo - Servos de um Soberano Deus: O Cristianismo é Verdadeiro? - 23 Ensaios

Oh well I just found out from a tweet from Brian Auten that the series of essays he published and I contributed to is going to be translated to Portuguese! Wow. I never imagined. However many of the articles should be spread widely and translated to as many languages as possible.

Pés Descalços Evangelismo - Servos de um Soberano Deus: O Cristianismo é Verdadeiro? - 23 Ensaios

Use this link to read the post in English.

Brian has already made good on the promise to collecting the series into a free e-book. Here is my post on it containing a link to get it in English.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Apologetics 315: Apologist Interview: Ellis Potter

Yesterday Brian Auten posted an awesome interview. He interviewed Ellis Potter a man who came to Christ through a very interesting life path. I enjoyed listening to his testimony. I enjoyed listening to his advice also. There was so much there that I can use. I highly recommend listening to this interview!

Apologetics 315: Apologist Interview: Ellis Potter
Enhanced by Zemanta

Monday, September 20, 2010

The Mother-of-All-Demos

On December 9, 1968, Douglas Engelbart's demo displayed a whole new way of computing and unveiled the computer mouse to the world! I cannot imagine a world without any of these things.
Best remembered as the demo that introduced the world to the computer mouse, it was actually a moment when Engelbart and his team of researchers unveiled a whole new way of computing -- one that looked more like what we do in 2008 than like the punch-card-driven work that was standard back in the 60s.
The mother of all demos, which today feels like a too-long scene in a classic science fiction movie, marked the debut of both hypertext links and on-screen text editing, and it even married computing with video teleconferencing.
Engelbart's vision, stated at the time has become common place:
In the video from 1968, before starting his demo Engelbart briefly describes his vision of computing. "If, in your office, you, as an intellectual worker, were supplied with a computer display backed up by a computer that was alive for you all day and was instantly ... responsive to every action that you had, how much value could you derive from that?" he asks.
This is the basis of the internet and the whole Information Technology industry!


A 40-year-old computer demo that still amazes | Hardware - InfoWorld
Enhanced by Zemanta

Armoring Up for Spiritual Warfare

Yesterday I had the honor of preaching at my church. My subject was discussing the "full armor of God" and how it is used in Spiritual Warfare. It went well but I had a couple of technical glitches. I had a Powerpoint presentation that included videos. I have included the Powerpoint I used in the presentation on this blog post. The clip I used from Deadliest Warrior was played in the slide but to get it work through Authorstream I can only provide a link on the slide. The most important thing is that the message I was to deliver was delivered.





Enhanced by Zemanta

Sunday, September 19, 2010

Debunking Christianity: Even if Christianity Ends Up True There Would Be No Reason to Believe

John Loftus recently wrote the following on his blog:
Bertrand Russell was asked what he would tell God on judgment day why he did not believe, Russell reportedly said: "Not enough evidence, God, not enough evidence."
So even if the Christian faith ends up being true there was still no reason thinking people should accept it, because only claims that can be reasonably justified should be embraced. You see, we have to reject a lot of true claims because they have not met their own burden of proof. This is both obvious and non-controversial. Aliens from space might have abducted someone, but without sufficient evidence commensurate with such a claim there is no reason why anyone should believe the person who asserts it. There are surely cases in which someone murdered another person but no one suspects he did the evil deed, because there is just no evidence to lead anyone to think he did. There are many hundreds of claims that we should never believe, even if they are true. That’s the case when it comes to Christianity. Even if it’s true, thinking people cannot believe it because it’s wildly improbable.
I'm amazed how short-sighted the argument is. If your child used such an excuse for misbehaving or outright disobeying you, no one I know would accepts "I didn't have enough evidence about what you said was true." Why would anyone think that such an excuse would work on judgment day? One question I would have asked Russel, or anyone who thinks that this is acceptable, would be what do you think God would say your excuse? The truth is using this excuse in telling God, that he didn't provide enough evidence to convince you. How do you think such an accusation will fly with God? What is wrong with you? There was plenty of evidence to convince other people. Maybe the problem isn't with the evidence but with you. Probability isn't enough to determine what you believe. It shouldn't be. We should believe something because it is true, not because it's probable. There are too many example of true things that don't seem probable.
Debunking Christianity: Even if Christianity Ends Up True There Would Be No Reason to Believe
Enhanced by Zemanta

"The Exclusivity of Christ" by Bruce Ware | True Freethinker

Mariano has posted a great video lecture from Bruce Ware about how Christ is unique and unavoidable.


Dr. Bruce Ware- "The Exclusivity of Christ" from Calvary Santa Fe on Vimeo.

"The Exclusivity of Christ" by Bruce Ware | True Freethinker

Stephen Hawking and God: A Response

Dr. John Lennox weighs in on Stephen Hawking's latest published book regarding what he wrote about God.


Stephen Hawking and God: A Response

Answering A Fool According To His Folly - Defining "Divine Inspiration"

At about 8:05 pm PST on September 18, 2010 one of the followers of John Loftus who calls himself GearHedEd made the following challenge in a comment on a post A Mind of Its Own: How Your Brain Distorts and Deceives.
I notice that nobody touched this with a ten-foot Crucifix...
---------------------------------
"Divine inspiration, you say?
Prove that there is such a thing as "divine". Show how it is anything more than merest speculation of men.
Can't use the Bible. That would be like saying "divine means 'with or exhibiting the quality of divinity'", which says absolutely nothing.
Also can't use argumentum ad populum (what I call "The Lemming Factor": everyone believes, so that is evidence of the object of belief).
Where's the hard evidence for
"divine"?"
---------------------------------
How about it Christians?
Divinity does not exist. I have said it.
You have one week to prove that it does.
Ready?
Go!

Answering the Challenge

To Answer the question "What is Divine Inspiration?" we must first agree on what "Divine" means and what "inspiration" is. I say this because GearHedEd admitted that he does not know what "Divinity" means.He also says that he doesn't want to bring the Bible into it. Wonder why he didn't just "google" it?
"Divine" in the context of "Divine Inspiration" is an adjective describing a kind of inspiration. So let's use the adjective definition of the word "divine".
1.
of or pertaining to a god, esp. the Supreme Being.
2.
addressed, appropriated, or devoted to God or a god; religious; sacred: divine worship.
3.
proceeding from God or a god: divine laws.
4.
godlike; characteristic of or befitting a deity: divine magnanimity.
5.
heavenly; celestial: the divine kingdom.
6.
Informal . extremely good; unusually lovely: He has the most divine tenor voice.
7.
being a god; being God: a divine person.
8.
of superhuman or surpassing excellence: Beauty is divine.
9.
Obsolete . of or pertaining to divinity or theology.
Of these I'd say we would agree that definition 3 is the one we want in context of "Divine Inspiration". So what about "Inspiration"?
–noun
1.
an inspiring or animating action or influence: I cannot write poetry without inspiration.
2.
something inspired, as an idea.
3.
a result of inspired activity.
4.
a thing or person that inspires.
5.
Theology .
a.
a divine influence directly and immediately exerted upon the mind or soul.
b.
the divine quality of the writings or words of a person so influenced.
6.
the drawing of air into the lungs; inhalation.
7.
the act of inspiring; quality or state of being inspired.
I know what you are thinking: "What does inspired mean?" Being "inspired" means being moved or influenced in such a way.
When Biblical Christians use the term "Divine Inspiration" to describe how the Bible was written we merely mean that the God inspired the 40+ human authors of the 66 books of the canonical Bible to write what they wrote. Not necessarily that God took their hands and wrote the text or that God dictated what they wrote word-for-word. No. Also not saying that sometimes they did not quote God directly. We mean that God took their personalities and the ways in which they express themselves and gave them the ideas and the points to make but the writer expressed the ideas in their own way.

GearHedEd first tries to dismiss this by claiming that there is no Divinity and offers no proof that there isn't a God. I think anyone who has ever done anything as an artist that has ever touched another human being knows what "Divine Inspiration" feels like. "Inspired" means:

outstanding or brilliant in a way or to a degree suggestive of divine inspiration

Look at the word: "in" - "sprired". The very word suggested the inputting of a spirit. Being influenced by forces beyond yourself. Anyone who has ever had a brilliant idea knows this feeling. You know it was not you. You also know, if you are honest, that you can't just have similar "strokes of genius" whenever you want them or wherever you want them or even regarding what you want them about. Some people say that they were "lucky". Or that they just happened to be at the right place at the right time. Do they really stop and think about what it is they are saying? How is that any less "Spooky" or superstitious than just admitting that you got the ideas from God? It's amazing to me that most of the time God just lets people take the credit. How is being "divinely inspired" different than having an "epithany"? Given the following definition:


"a sudden, intuitive perception of or insight into the reality or essential meaning of something, usually initiated by some simple, homely, or commonplace occurrence or experience."


I'd say not much of a different other than calling something an "epithany" in the context I'm using it does not necessarily invoke the idea of God's involvement. The word has changed and evolved that way. It used to be directly connected to experiences with the divine, but I'll use it in the more modern colloquial sense here.

I know GearHedEd is attempting to ask for proof of God's existence, but that is not what he asked for. He asked for a definition for what "Divine Inspiration" is. As for proving that "Divinity" ie God does not exist, you can't make such a truth claim without proving it. As for whether my definition matches what the Bible says about itself. Yes it does.
16We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17For he received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased."[a] 18We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain.
19And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. 20Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. 21For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. -2 Peter 1:16-21

Reason behind the title of this post.

I realize some people might have a problem with the title of this post. They might find it offensive and controversial. Good. I was inspired to use this title because of the following passage:
4 Do not answer a fool according to his folly,
or you will be like him yourself.
5 Answer a fool according to his folly,
or he will be wise in his own eyes. - Proverbs 26:4-5
This passage has always intrigued me because on the surface it may seem to contradict itself. But if you look more carefully and look at other translations the meaning of these Proverbs become clearer.
Verse 4 is in the context of speaking to a fool using his context and understanding - accepting his worldview and presuppositions. You will indeed end up just like him.
Verse 5 is in the context of speaking to a fool and correcting his worldview and presuppositions so that he will not remain conceited and blinded.
And before one gets angry and and offended by the term fool, you need to find out if the Bible is referring to you or not. And guess what? The Bible tells us very clearly what makes a person a fool in the context given in Proverbs.
The fool says in his heart, "There is no God." They are corrupt, their deeds are vile; there is no one who does good. - Psalm 14:1
The Bible is not talking about only atheists or agnostics. Notice that it also adds "there is no one who does good." Not just the atheist. Being a theist is not enough.
18But someone will say, "You have faith; I have deeds."
Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do.
19You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.
20You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless? - James 1:18-20
So what does God want of us? Notice James is not saying that faith is not needed. It is. But we are saved by faith so that you can do the good works that God has predetermined for us to do!
8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9not by works, so that no one can boast. 10For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do. - Ephesians 2:8-10
What do you have to have faith in?
Jesus said in John 8:24:
24I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be, you will indeed die in your sins."
Who did Jesus claim to be? The "I Am" who brought Israel out of Egypt. The Way, the Truth, and Life. The only way to salvation from sin and death. The Son of Man (from Daniel 7). The Messiah. The Redeemer of human kind. The Promise. The Prophet. The Bread that came down from Heaven. The good shepherd. This and more. This is the Gospel. If you wanna know what the Gospel is you must follow Jesus.
I now have a challenge to issue on my own. I believe the Bible is true and divinely inspired as per the definitions I gave above. Before we can wrestle with whether or not the Bible is true we have to agree on what it says. To anyone who takes issue with anything I have written here, let us first agree upon whether or not scripture says what I have said it says. IF you agree that it does then we can discuss whether it true or not. You also have a week. I am waiting.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Saturday, September 18, 2010

Defending the Resurrection by James Patrick Holding

Here is a link to the table of contents of JP Holding's work on defending the fact of Jesus' Resurrection. This is definitely one I would like to read!


Defending the Resurrection Hub Page

Friday, September 17, 2010

Apologetics 315: How to Get Apologetics in Your Church: Cultivating a Local Church Apologetics Ministry

I highly suggest reading Chad Gross' article in the Apologetics 315 "How to Get Apologetics in Your Church?" essay series. He summed up the importance of Apologetics very well with these words:


Enthusiastically, I began sharing some of this evidence with fellow Christians and (to my surprise) the majority of them had little knowledge of it! I remember thinking, “How can these people believe that a man came back from the dead without any evidence?” Understandably, the believer possesses experiential evidence, but if that experience does not correlate with available evidence, I believe the authenticity of the experience should be called into question. Further, what about the person who has questions and has not experienced God?

It seemed to me that if we had sound evidence to believe that God existed and that Jesus rose from the dead, we should be fairly excited about it and want to tell others!


I agree with Chad completely. He also offers a lot of advice about how to get started.


Apologetics 315: How to Get Apologetics in Your Church: Cultivating a Local Church Apologetics Ministry
Enhanced by Zemanta

"The Forgotten Trinity" by James White | True Freethinker

I appreciate Mariano for posting this video. I love to hear Dr. James White discuss the subject of the Trinity and why we believe it and how the Bible teaches it.


Dr. James White- "The Forgotten Trinity" from Calvary Santa Fe on Vimeo.

"The Forgotten Trinity" by James White | True Freethinker

Apologetics and the Age of the Earth

Here is a great posting from Jamen Hubner discussing the age of the earth - dating Genesis. I really enjoyed this article!

Apologetics and the Age of the Earth
Enhanced by Zemanta

Iron Sharpens Iron: Jamin Hubner: The Atheist vs. Christian Debate on 'Is the New Testament Evil': One Christian's Analysis

I really enjoyed listening  to Hubner's comments on the debate. I wish i had been there but I guess i will just watch the video.

Iron Sharpens Iron: Jamin Hubner: The Atheist vs. Christian Debate on 'Is the New Testament Evil': One Christian's Analysis
Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday, September 16, 2010

Debunking Christianity: A Mind of Its Own: How Your Brain Distorts and Deceives


John Loftus wrote the following post:
In her book A Mind of Its Own: How Your Brain Distorts and Deceives, Cordelia Fine cautions us when it comes to the conclusions of our brains. I claim that believers ought to take special heed of this and become agnostics. Believers retort that my brain may be deceiving me too. Let me say two things in response:
One) Okay let's all agree with the scientific data and become agnostics. I'm game if you are, otherwise dispute the data. Two) I do not affirm any religious beliefs. I am a non-believer. I don't think the evidence is there to believe in a three headed eternally existing God who created this particular world and became one of us to die on a cross for our sins in one lone part of the ancient world who subsequently bodily resurrected from the grave but was only seen by a few handfuls of people, thereby leaving the rest of us to take their word on what they saw or spend an eternity in hell because we did not see this event for ourselves or believe their written testimony since we were born in a different time and place and were taught to believe differently based on our own upbringing. Again, I do not believe this. It does not represent an intelligent plan from a perfectly good, all powerful God. If our brains deceive us when it comes to important issues like this then it's best not to be gullible and to demand evidence, hard evidence, positive evidence before we'll believe, especially since there are so many other believers in this world who are certain they are right about such matters too. Since there are so many different people all certain they have the answers to existence I can look at them all and say that until one of them steps up to the plate and offers something more by way of evidence than the others do then I cannot believe in any of them, and that's what I do.
I want to say I agree with Loftus. There is no "evidence is there to believe in a three headed eternally existing God who created this particular world and became one of us to die on a cross for our sins in one lone part of the ancient world who subsequently bodily resurrected from the grave but was only seen by a few handfuls of people, thereby leaving the rest of us to take their word on what they saw or spend an eternity in hell because we did not see this event for ourselves or believe their written testimony since we were born in a different time and place and were taught to believe differently based on our own upbringing." Christians don't believe in a three-headed, eternally existing God. And we don't expect you to take their word on what they saw. You have no excuse you can know the resurrected Lord for yourself. This cuts through time and space and culture. No Christian is asking Loftus or anyone to believe the quote. Of course you should demand evidence and follow it. What the quote shows is a distinct misunderstand of what the nature of God is and what Christians believe. If you want to disagree with what the Bible says is fine...just stop misrepresenting what the Bible says. The Pictures on this blog post are accurate as to what God looks like.


Debunking Christianity: A Mind of Its Own: How Your Brain Distorts and Deceives
Enhanced by Zemanta

Answering Muslims: Nabeel Qureshi and Mufti Sulaiman Hashim: Who Is Jesus?

Nabeel debates Mufti Sulaiman on who Jesus is.








Answering Muslims: Nabeel Qureshi and Mufti Sulaiman Hashim: Who Is Jesus?

Quick Report from Santa Fe

Dr. White posted some cross examinations of his debates with Robert Sungenis from September 10th 2010.






Quick Report from Santa Fe

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
Enhanced by Zemanta

He Lives: I'm so glad I missed the Battle of Armageddon

David Heddle had a very interesting post on his blog where he explains the dispensational view that the Armageddon described in Revelations already happened and that the book was really written before 70 AD. The view is that the devastation Israel experienced is referring to the Romans destroying Israel as a nation in 70 AD. I'm not sure I agree. I know that isn't the way I've been taught to look at Revelations, but on the other extreme the "Left Behind" version has many, many problems. I don't quibble much on eschatology because in the final sense it's moot. Either you are saved and going to heaven or you are going to hell and nothing but Jesus can change the fact no matter who is right.

He Lives: I'm so glad I missed the Battle of Armageddon
Enhanced by Zemanta

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

He Lives: If we traded him for future considerations, I don't think we'll get much


I heard about this conference from David Heddle's blog. I agree Robert Sungenis is really crazy! A conference arguing that the earth is the center of the universe?! And people are willing to pay $50 to get in?!
I find it interesting that the tag line was that Galileo was wrong and the Church, as in Roman Catholic Church  - not the Bible - was right! In a time where it can  be clearly demonstrated that we are not in a geocentric solar system - let alone universe. No where does the Bible tells us everything revolves around the earth. It was a presupposition of the Roman Catholic Church and not remotely true,. It makes sense though because Robert Sungenis' ultimate authority is not truth or the Bible but the Roman Catholic Church - its tradition and papal edicts - no worry that there is contradictions and mistakes.
He Lives: If we traded him for future considerations, I don't think we'll get much
Enhanced by Zemanta

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Answering Muslims: Burqa Banned in France

Burqa are the ceremonial robes worn by Muslim women. France has moved to ban women from wearing burqas in public. I think it's wrong to tell women how they should dress. I do think that full burqas that restrict a woman's vision is dangerous. I mean I've heard that many women who dress that way believe they should be allowed to drive. I find it interesting that many of these women who live in Europe want to have all the rights that women there have yet wear full burqas when in Muslim countries they can wear full burqas but don't have the same rights and privileges as men.

Answering Muslims: Burqa Banned in France
Enhanced by Zemanta

Monday, September 13, 2010

ID.Plus: Hawking, God and Philosophy

Here is a great blog that I'm going to begin following. I heard about it from one of Brian Auten's tweets. He has post several talks and resources from Dr. Peter Williams. They have been very useful! In this blog post Dr. Williams weighs in on the comments that have been made by Dr. Stephen Hawkings regarding the origins of the universe. I think it's counterproductive for scientists to look down on philosophers and vice versa. Its not possible to get a clear and accurate understanding of reality without science, philosophy, and theology together.


ID.Plus: Hawking, God and Philosophy
Enhanced by Zemanta

Apologetics 315: Apologist Interview: Bruce Little

This week Bruce Little was interviewed by Brian Auten of Apologetics 315. I can't recommend the site or this series high enough. I've heard quite a few helpful talks and lecture of Bruce Little through this blog. I think the subject matter of Theodicy is great importance. I would love to know why when this subject shows up in the media or on the history channel why they never interview scholars like Dr. Little. You know....people who know what they are talking about! Take a listen to this interview

Apologetics 315: Apologist Interview: Bruce Little
Enhanced by Zemanta

Tawapologetics: Response to Common Sense Atheism's Response to 'Does God Exist?'

How do you know when you've made waves and caused people to think? I think one way to be able to tell is by how strong the backlash is. As you may remember last April, Brian Auten over at Apologetics 315 had a vision of about 23 bloggers coming together and writing essays giving the most convincing arguments they know of why Christianity is true. I was blessed to be one of the contributors. As it turns out that the series is still generating controversy given that there some thoughtful articles being published against it. Luke over at Common Sense Atheism is posting a series of articles to rebutt the essays published at Apologetics 315. He started with Tawa's essay Does God Exist? A Brief Blog Essay Bad idea. It's a very strong essay and well-done...however Luke does write an essay worthy of response with Tawa gives at the link below.
Tawapologetics: Response to Common Sense Atheism's Response to 'Does God Exist?'
I'm not sure if Luke plans to try to rebutt and answer all 23 essays, but if he does I'm sure that all the original contributors are more than able to stand by what they have written. This is going to be interesting.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Saturday, September 11, 2010

Peregrinations: Church Fathers and Age of Creation

Here is a great blog post that I think gives a great answer to the charge that the Bible tells us the earth is only 6000 years old. I agree with the author. I don't think you can prove that the Bible says earth is 6000 years old without making a few untenable presuppositions.
1. "Yom" means six 24-hr days in Genesis 1
2. The geneologies completely list every single human from Adam to Abraham when we know that ancient Genealogies did not do that.
He makes the point that it really wasn't until the 17th century that people started saying the Bible teaches that the earth was 6000 yrs old. I have to ask "Why?" My Answer: People knew that was not what Bible was saying. So why then? I think many heresies and misinterpretations come from people desiring to have a new revelation that no one has had before and they'll even take ideas that can't be Biblically supported or outright contradict the Bible. The Blogger quotes Augustine and I think it's a great quote. It's a warning against holding a view of facts that can be shown not to line up with reality. I think in these cases we must take the opinion that the Bible is true, but we are wrong in how we understood what it affirms.
Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world... and his knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men. If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? (from The Literal Meaning of Genesis)
Peregrinations: Church Fathers and Age of Creation
Enhanced by Zemanta