Truthbomb Apologetics: Video: What Does C.S. Lewis Say to Us Today? featuring Alister McGrath
Wednesday, July 10, 2013
Truthbomb Apologetics: Video: What Does C.S. Lewis Say to Us Today? featuring Alister McGrath
Truthbomb Apologetics: Video: What Does C.S. Lewis Say to Us Today? featuring Alister McGrath
Tuesday, July 9, 2013
Literature, CS Lewis and Conversion: Holly Ordway and Laura Miller on Unbelievable? | Hieropraxis
Literature, CS Lewis and Conversion: Holly Ordway and Laura Miller on Unbelievable? | Hieropraxis
Debunking Christianity: Atheism 101: The Null Hypothesis
The errors are many but there are two main ones. The video attempts to argue against Christian philosophers but mischaracterizes their arguments. For example. "omnipotence" does not mean God can do anything. When Christians use the term, we mean that God can do anything that is not logically inconsistent. For example, God cannot make a rock too large for God to lift because that would be a contradiction. The author of the video said he could make a rock too large for him to lift, but no human being can make a rock. Very illogical. Secondly, just because something is outside the perception of our senses does not mean it does not exist. According to this logic, the video's author denies science. Neither he or any human being have ever seen a single atom of any kind. Is one then free to conclude atoms do not exist? I don't think so Likewise you can't deny that God exist Like atoms, God can be detected in other ways We can detect God by harkening to the revelation that God has made available to us
Debunking Christianity: Atheism 101: The Null Hypothesis
Reality Check: What Atheism Looks Like
What Atheists Think They Do to Christianity:
What Atheists Really Do to Themselves:
What Atheists Really Do to Themselves:
Truthbomb Apologetics: Short Film: Cruel Logic
Truthbomb Apologetics: Short Film: Cruel Logic
Saturday, July 6, 2013
Debunking Christianity: Three Questions Facepalms Concerning the Function of Theism in the Modern World
1. Should it be an ethical mandate for science to remove a whole section of God’s creation from the face of the earth (for example, the total elimination of certain harmful parasites, germs and viruses)?
The premise should be rejected at the start. Science cannot and will not be able to eliminate anything from the face of the earth unless God allows it. McCall also fails to state what he defines as harmful. Also what ethical criteria is he using? If there is no God, then why would it be ethical to work against natural selection and evolution?
2. If no (to protect theism), should humanity be left to suffer with these divine creations as the Will of God to protect religion?
How does not eliminating harmful parasites, germs, and viruses protect theism? McCall also seems to assume he knows what the Will of God in this is while he has no clue. Guess he did not understand the Bible.
3. If yes, then should the logical next step be to eliminate God (Theism itself) as an ethical failure due to the fact that science is having to cleanup up God’s many malevolent creations?
Given that neither the first nor second "questions" are logical, it makes no sense to assert malevolence on God's part in any way. Let's let Apostle Paul help McCall out with the reason why the created order is the way it is now.
God has not eliminated the pains and suffering in this life (all due to sin) because God is waiting for all those who will be saved to be actualized. Clear now? You're Welcome, Mr McCall.
18 I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us. 19 For the creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed. 20 For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 21 that[h] the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God.
22 We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. 23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies. 24 For in this hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what they already have? 25 But if we hope for what we do not yet have, we wait for it patiently.
26 In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us through wordless groans. 27 And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for God’s people in accordance with the will of God.
28 And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who[i] have been called according to his purpose. 29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. 30 And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified. - Romans 8: 18-30
Debunking Christianity: Three Questions Concerning the Function of Theism in the Modern World
Monday, July 1, 2013
Saturday, June 29, 2013
FacePalm of the Day - Debunking Christianity: F**ked-up Heroes of the Bible: Samson (continued)
Recap: In Part 1, our hero has met a hot lady whom he wants to marry. He loses a riddle bet due some trickery by the aforementioned lady friend, and is forced to kill thirty guys so he can steal their clothes to pay the bet. He’s bummed, so he bunks out at his mom and dad’s, and while he’s gone, his disloyal fiancé marries the best man from the canceled wedding. Time for some good, old-fashioned revenge!
First and foremost, as I commented in the last post, Samson as just a man. Same frailties and kinds of sins. Wouldn't you want revenge after all of that? Fortunately we don't have to make the same mistakes Samson made. What I get most out of Samson's failures is that God is so powerful and merciful that he can use our issues to glorify Himself and help His people.
Exhibit 5:
Samson said, “This time I cannot be blamed for everything I am going to do to you Philistines.” Then he went out and caught 300 foxes. He tied their tails together in pairs, and he fastened a torch to each pair of tails. Then he lit the torches and let the foxes run through the grain fields of the Philistines. He burned all their grain to the ground, including the sheaves and the uncut grain. He also destroyed their vineyards and olive groves.Arson and animal cruelty. That’s two out of three of the psychopath indicators. Definitely not PETA-approved,and we have the deliberate destruction of private property.
Judges 15:3-5 (NLT)
Again, nothing is being said that the foxes were harmed in any way and the private property belonged to people who were oppressing and subjugating his people. Samson was waging a one-man war.
The Bible is silent as to whether the Spirit helped him with his vengeful destruction. Samson’s fiery fox assault sets off a chain of events in which the Philistines retaliate and kill Samson’s ex-fiancé and her father by burning them alive. Fighting fire with fire, I guess. I don’t remember this part of the story being mentioned in my Sunday School days! I guess they didn't have any flannel graph figures of people being burnt alive that they could use. Either that or my mind blocked the traumatic memories. This, of course, makes Samson angrier and he kills a bunch of Philistines and then camps out in a cave.
So the good and righteous Philistines executed two of their own people (Judges 15:6) because they were too cowardly to attack Samson. Green seems to forget who the bad guy is.
The Philistines start hunting for him in Judah, which makes the Judahites nervous. 3000 men of Judah erop by Samson’s Flintstone abode, for a visit. They’re like “Dude, you’ve pissed off the Philistines and they’re our rulers, so now we have to turn you over to them.” And he’s like “Well, okay I guess, but just promise me that you’ll only tie me up, but not kill me.” And they did what he asked.
Many of the Israelites at the time fear the Philistines so much that they were willing to turn over one of their own to the Philistines rather than fight for their own freedom. I think this was also from God. We see God miraculously using one man to free them all in a way that it could only have been God.
Exhibit 6:
As Samson arrived at Lehi, the Philistines came shouting in triumph. But the Spirit of the LORD came powerfully upon Samson, and he snapped the ropes on his arms as if they were burnt strands of flax, and they fell from his wrists. Then he found the jawbone of a recently killed donkey. He picked it up and killed 1,000 Philistines with it.Holy Ghost tweaker Samson channels the Incredible Hulk, busting his rope bonds like they were mere spaghetti noodles. Using a donkey jawbone, he proceeds to ass-whip the Philistines to death, adding an even thousand names to his kill list. Creative weapon choice. Not what I'd pick, but hey, anything can happen in the Bible! It’s important to have faith when reading passages like this, since it’s pretty ridiculous to try and imagine how one guy playing whack-a-mole with a donkey jaw could have taken out that many men. But once you start believing some of the crazy stuff in the Bible, you’re kind of stuck with the whole truckload. Who knows, maybe the Spirit hypnotized them and they all marched up single file to get whacked.
Judges 15:14-15 (NLT)
Green obviously has not seen a donkey's jawbone and wouldn't you think that if Samson was strong enough to do all the physical feats the Bible says he did, that superhuman strength means that just about anything Samson put his hands on would be an effective weapon ? I would. Honesty would help Green a lot in understanding what the Bible says.
Samson as a hero of the faith? Well, this guy might be ideal for running a Comumbian [Columbian?] drug cartel, but certainly not a good role-model for kids. And about this energizing Spirit – somewhere between the Old and New Testaments, I guess, it switched from turning people into stone killers, to making them speak in tongues. Slight career change.
Calling Samson a "hero of faith" is not referring to everything he did or thought. Although God was using him throughout the story it wasn't about Samson being a man of faith He did what he did when he wanted to do it. God used what Samson did but it wasn't until later he could be considered a role model.
Exhibit 7:
One day Samson went to the Philistine town of Gaza and spent the night with a prostitute. Word soon spread that Samson was there, so the men of Gaza gathered together and waited all night at the town gates. They kept quiet during the night, saying to themselves, “When the light of morning comes, we will kill him.”
But Samson stayed in bed only until midnight. Then he got up, took hold of the doors of the town gate, including the two posts, and lifted them up, bar and all. He put them on his shoulders and carried them all the way to the top of the hill across from Hebron.
Judges 16:1-3 (NLT)
They shut the gates to keep him in the city. Samson carried the gate showing that they could not contain him. The hooker? Nope not a good choice on Samson's part. This is why he is not yet the man spoken of in Hebrews.
Exhibit 8:
Some time later Samson fell in love with a woman named Delilah, who lived in the valley of Sorek. The rulers of the Philistines went to her and said, “Entice Samson to tell you what makes him so strong and how he can be overpowered and tied up securely. Then each of us will give you 1,100 pieces of silver.”
So Delilah said to Samson, “Please tell me what makes you so strong and what it would take to tie you up securely.”
Judges 16:4-6 (NLT)
Finally, Samson shared his secret with her. “My hair has never been cut,” he confessed, “for I was dedicated to God as a Nazirite from birth. If my head were shaved, my strength would leave me, and I would become as weak as anyone else.”Samson should have stuck with hookers. This poor guy sure is unlucky in love! His new girlfriend keeps on pestering him, and like a fool, he tells her that his superpowers come from his magic hair. A barber’s razor is his Kryptonite. She was talking about tying him up, so maybe he thought she was into S&M and bondage. Instead of getting freaky, she sells him out, for a big payday. Not sure what moral lessons are to be gained here. Never trust a woman? Keep the details of your superpowers top secret? Kinky sex will make you go blind… but I am getting ahead of myself. Anyway, poor Delilah has gotten a bad rap all these years. Who knows, she may have really needed the money for a boob job or a new camel or something.
Judges 16:17 (NLT)
Delilah deserves the bad rap she betrayed Samson for money. However Samson was an idiot. Twice, he lied to her about the source of his strength and twice he woke up with her trying to take his strength away. Why was he dumb enough to trust her a third time? How many times have you done something stupid just to make a love interest happy? We all know what's that like. Again Samson is not the man referred to in the Book of Hebrews...yet! In addition the lesson here is to obey God and protect your relationship with God. Samson's hair was not the source of his power - God was. Samson's hair was a symbol of his covenant with God. When he cavalierly told Delilah about his hair he threw his relationship with God under the bus.
I’d also like to take a moment and point out that it seems God got confused, or changed his mind. According the Apostle Paul:
Isn't it obvious that it's disgraceful for a man to have long hair?Hmmm…, so Samson’s long hair was mandated by God, and was the source of blessing and power. Come the New Testament, it’s disgraceful for a man to have long hair. I guess maybe God’s grooming taste changed, somewhere along the way.
1 Corinthians 11:14 (NLT)
Green should have read further:
13 Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? 14 Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, 15 but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering. 16 If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice—nor do the churches of God. - 1 Corinthians 11:13-16
Therefore no where is God saying that men should never have long hair. Remember the Nazirites in the the Book of Numbers? Remember, kids, context matters.
Delilah lulled Samson to sleep with his head in her lap, and then she called in a man to shave off the seven locks of his hair. In this way she began to bring him down, and his strength left him.
Then she cried out, “Samson! The Philistines have come to capture you!”
When he woke up, he thought, “I will do as before and shake myself free.” But he didn’t realize the LORD had left him.
Judges 16:19-20 (NLT)
So the Philistines captured him and gouged out his eyes. They took him to Gaza, where he was bound with bronze chains and forced to grind grain in the prison.Well, our hero of faith has hit a small setback. Blind, shackled, and doing hard labor. Fortunately for him though, the Philistines are dumbasses who forgot to keep his magic hair shaved. And his hair is growing… Hair grows! Who knew?
But before long, his hair began to grow back
Judges 16:21-22 (NLT)
I wonder if Green actually understood the story. Maybe a different translation would help. Samson was allowed to be brought so low so that he would get closer to God. He was not so stupid not to get closer to God in those weeks and months when he was blind and shackled and doing hard labor. I bet he was praying longer and harder than he ever had in his life. God didn't leave Samson Samson left Him. Samson had begun to think that the power was his and he could just go out like before and kick Philistine butt. He had began to think that he didn't need God. Same mistake that Atheists like Green continue to make.
Our man is down, but not out. The Samson saga will have a grand finale in which our hero goes out in a blaze of glory, thus securing his place as an MVP in the Faith Hall of Fame!
The Philistine rulers held a great festival, offering sacrifices and praising their god, Dagon. They said, “Our god has given us victory over our enemy Samson!”
When the people saw him, they praised their god, saying, “Our god has delivered our enemy to us! The one who killed so many of us is now in our power!”
Half drunk by now, the people demanded, “Bring out Samson so he can amuse us!” So he was brought from the prison to amuse them, and they had him stand between the pillars supporting the roof.
Samson said to the young servant who was leading him by the hand, “Place my hands against the pillars that hold up the temple. I want to rest against them.” Now the temple was completely filled with people. All the Philistine rulers were there, and there were about 3,000 men and women on the roof who were watching as Samson amused them.
Then Samson prayed to the LORD, “Sovereign LORD, remember me again. O God, please strengthen me just one more time. With one blow let me pay back the Philistines for the loss of my two eyes.” Then Samson put his hands on the two center pillars that held up the temple. Pushing against them with both hands, he prayed, “Let me die with the Philistines.” And the temple crashed down on the Philistine rulers and all the people. So he killed more people when he died than he had during his entire lifetime.
Judges 16:23-30 (NLT)
Our tale finishes out with a heartwarming ending. The evil Philistines gather to worship their god, Dagon and to gloat over Samson’s capture. Samson braces himself against the pillars of the temple and sends up a prayer to God asking for strength one last time, for vengeance. Yes boys and girls, if there is ever a pr or Dirty Harry proud. The Good Lord grants Samson’s request (being pleased that his magic tresses had regrown), empowering our righteous warrior to literally bring down the house, snuffing all 3,000 men and women. To put it into perspective, Samson’s final act was equivalent to the September 11th terrorist attack on the Twin Towers, killing roughly the same amount of people. And yes, it was a suicide mission.
Green manages to be highly controversial here. The 3000 people in the Temple of Dagon were not innocent. They were there to disrespect God. They were there to mock God and God's people. They literally deserved what they got. What about the people that died in the 9-11 terrorist attacks? They were killed by people in the name of the wrong god. A god that does not exist. The God that empowered Samson was and is and will always be. Everything is God's and God can do anything God wants in any way God wants. That's the difference
As the Bible helpfully points out, Samson killed more people in his death than he did in his life. It would appear that despite a personal life worthy of extensive National Enquirer coverage, Mr. S was ensconced in the Faith Hall of Fame because of this ‘redeeming’ factor: He murdered a lot of people who worshiped a different god than he did, and if we know anything about the Lord, we know that he is a jealous god. Kids, if you are willing to kill for God, then you too can be famous! Remember how Samson did his god’s dirty work and got his name in lights. Or at least, that’s how the story goes… if you can believe the Good Book.
Written by J. M. Green
Green is profoundly wrong. Samson is not in the "roll call of faith" in Hebrews 11 because he managed to kill a bunch of people. He is in the Faith Hall of Fame because God elevated Samson above his own frailties and he learned to trust God. Samson did not live the kind of life he was supposed to do but he didn't become part of the roll call of faith until he lost everything and got closer to God! You can do the same.
Debunking Christianity: F**ked-up Heroes of the Bible: Samson (continued)
Facepalm of the Day - Debunking Christianity: New Puzzles About the Divine Attributes by Moti Mizrahi
The first puzzle he presents about omniscience purportedly shows that the divine attribute of omniscience is incoherent. The second puzzle about omnibenevolence and omnipotence shows that these two divine attributes are logically incompatible. The third puzzle about perfect rationality and omnipotence shows that these two divine attributes are logically incompatible. See what you think:
Before we jump into the puzzles, I wonder if Mizrahi understands what the Bible says about omnibenevolence, omnipotence, and omniscience.
Could an omniscient being know what it is like to be finite?
1. Either God can know what it is like to be finite or God cannot know what it is like to be finite.Good start and I don' t see anything wrong at this point.
2. If God can know what it is like to be finite, then God is not omniscient (since to know what it is like to be finite, God must be finite).Off the rails here. Who says that knowing what it means to be finite means that you are finite? Finiteness is part of being a human being. We all agree that no human being is omniscient so how do we know what an omniscient being does know and does not know. Mizrahi is sloppy here IT seems that he is conflating two types of knowledge: know of something versus experiencing something. God knows everything - that is what being "omniscient" means. If you wanna be picky and say that God does not know what it is like to be finite because God does not experience finiteness but this is fallacious. God did experience finiteness - it's called the incarnation - God became man without loosing his divinity. Surely an omnipotent God can do that.
3. If God cannot know what it is like to be finite, then God is not omniscient (since there is something that God cannot know, namely, what it is like to be finite).Nope. Again Mizrahi does not explain what he means by "knowledge" - what kind of knowledge? He also has not proven that God cannot know what it is like to finite.
4.(Therefore) Either way, God is not omniscient.Not even close.
Could a being that is both omnipotent and omnibenevolent choose the lesser of two evils?
1. Either God can choose the lesser of two evils or God cannot choose the lesser of two evils.This one is flawed from the first premise and devolves from there. God does not make decisions based on "the lesser of two evils". That is how human being do things and not the way God does because God is sovereign over everything and is not restricted by options presented to God God determines God's options. For example look at the story of Joseph in Genesis. How did God get Joseph into position as the second most power man in the world at that time? Joseph was betrayed and sold into slavery by his own brothers, falsely accused of attempted rape and thrown into prison! Could God have done things differently? Sure but Joseph recognized that God was behind everything that happened to him and summed it up when he told his brothers:
2.If God can choose the lesser of two evils, then God is not omnibenevolent (since God can choose evil).
3. If God cannot choose the lesser of two evils, then God is not omnipotent (since there is a possible state of affairs that God cannot bring about).
4.(Therefore) Either God is not omnibenevolent or God is not omnipotent.
15 When Joseph’s brothers saw that their father was dead, they said, “What if Joseph holds a grudge against us and pays us back for all the wrongs we did to him?” 16 So they sent word to Joseph, saying, “Your father left these instructions before he died: 17 ‘This is what you are to say to Joseph: I ask you to forgive your brothers the sins and the wrongs they committed in treating you so badly.’ Now please forgive the sins of the servants of the God of your father.” When their message came to him, Joseph wept.
18 His brothers then came and threw themselves down before him. “We are your slaves,” they said.
19 But Joseph said to them, “Don’t be afraid. Am I in the place of God? 20 You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives. 21 So then, don’t be afraid. I will provide for you and your children.” And he reassured them and spoke kindly to them. - Genesis 50:15-21
Could a being that is both omnipotent and perfectly rational form a belief on the basis of
fallacious reasoning?
1. Either God can form a belief on the basis of fallacious reasoning or God cannot form a belief on the basis of fallacious reasoning.LINK.
2. If God can form a belief on the basis of fallacious reasoning, then God is not perfectly
rational (since God can reason fallaciously).
3. If God cannot form a belief on the basis of fallacious reasoning, then God is not omnipotent (since there is a possible state of affairs that God cannot bring about).
4. (Therefore) Either God is not perfectly rational or God is not omnipotent.
Now this is truly funny. God is not rational because God cannot believe something that is not true and cannot reason wrongly? So God is not rational or omnipotent because God does not share our limitations. Now that is an example forming a belief on the basis of fallacious reasoning. I would not serve a God that would do anything on the basis of fallacious reasoning. That means that God would be fallible and not omnipotent or omniscient. The God of the Bible does not move on belief. Why would he? He knows everything. There is nothing He does not know. That means that this reasoning is completely silly
My problems with this whole line of reasoning is that 1) we need to first ask what kind of evidence there is for such a being out of the many others that supposedly exist, 2) why such a being isn't to be found in the Bible since that's the raison d'etre of their faith, and 3) theists will simply gerrymander around these puzzles by changing what they believe about the divine attributes (which, if that happens is at least something).
Loftus should have more problems than these. He seems to have missed the fact that Mizrahi is granting that God exists for the sake of argument and then tries to argue against a god that's not present in Judaism or Christianity. Well, I have to give Loftus some credit: the god Mizrah is discussing is not in the Bible.
Debunking Christianity: New Puzzles About the Divine Attributes by Moti Mizrahi
Is Math a Feature of the Universe or a Feature of Human Creation? | Idea Channel | PBS - YouTube
Is Math a Feature of the Universe or a Feature of Human Creation? | Idea Channel | PBS - YouTube
In the interest of presenting multiple viewpoints, this discussion was brought up on the Debunking Christianity. Many atheists are committed to the proposition that mathematics has no transcendent existence beyond the human brain. I can see why. If they grant that mathematics is true whether or not there are people then what about morality? Are some thing moral and immoral no matter the society, time, or place? I would say that this is the truth.It allows them to try to sidestep God. Getting back to math for a moment. was Calculus true before Newton and Leibniz? I would say for sure: yes! This got to be such a big deal on Debunking Christianity that John Loftus posted a full article on this that he says comes from a mathematician:
In the beginning, people like you had a rock. The idea of "one" was invented to describe the number of things you had. Then later, you found another rock, and the idea of "two" was invented to describe the situation for when you had one rock and added another rock to your pile. It was realized that the same applies not just to rocks, and numbers were given abstract meaning of their own. Arbitrary symbols, though not arbitrary like "A+A=B" (really, you embarrass yourself) for these numbers were eventually assigned.
A lot of time passed, and a lot of effort was involved in trying to understand how things work, but for a lot of it, like the different "eye combinations" on "dices" it just comes down to counting. If you're careful, you can count 36 ways that any distinct "eye combinations" on (two) "dices" can occur, and you can also count how many of them are a particular "eye combination," e.g. "snake eyes," which can occur in one way only. Baby probability theory hypothesized (propensitist approach) that 1 out of 36 possible outcomes, each equally likely, implies "snake eyes" has a 1/36 chance of happening, and when rolling two "dices" many, many times over, that's what we see (frequentist approach). Eventually the two approaches were connected, but not married.
That you think the dice are following some magical mathematical rules is sheer nonsense. The mathematical rules (counting and proportions, in this case) were invented painstakingly over millennia for people to better describe what they experience. The laws are descriptive, not proscriptive.
Mathematician Dr. James Lindsay Explains How Math Originated
I disagree with him. Mathematics is more than just symbols. Those symbols are definitely agreed upon by people, but not the mathematics theory or concepts themselves. 3 + 6 = bob is really no different than 3+6=9 because we could have been counting like 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8, bob. However the underlying concepts is only being symbolized.
Thursday, June 27, 2013
Truthbomb Apologetics: Why isn't God More Obvious?
 |
| Cover of Ravi Zacharias |
Truthbomb Apologetics: Why isn't God More Obvious?
Wednesday, June 26, 2013
"Gay Christianity" Debated
"Gay Christianity" Debated
Tuesday, June 25, 2013
Answering Muslims: Douglas Murray on the Myth of Islamophobia
Answering Muslims: Douglas Murray on the Myth of Islamophobia
Monday, June 24, 2013
Truthbomb Apologetics: Article: The Spiderman Fallacy by Robin Schumacher
Chad, of the blog Truthbomb Apologetics blog, has pointed out an article countering a common atheistic objection against the validity of the Bible. It's called the Spider-Man Fallacy. It's defined as follows: The article was written by Robin Schumacher. I think it's worth checking out. One of the things that bother me about the argument is that if there is no discovery of any element of a story is found to be true or had existed, most are comfortable concluding that the story is fiction. However skeptics are unwilling to think that it's not valid evidence for the Bible. A little honesty would be nice.Archaeologists 1,000 years from now unearth a collection of Spiderman comics. From the background art, they can tell it takes place in New York City. NYC is an actual place, as confirmed by archaeology. However, this does not mean that Spiderman existed.Often used to illustrate the flaw in the assertion by evangelical Christians that archaeologists unearthing biblical cities today "proves" that the Bible was written by a supernatural force.The Spiderman Fallacy is committed any time the discovery of a mundane element from a myth, legend, or story is taken to mean that ALL other parts of that story, even the supernatural, are also true."
Truthbomb Apologetics: Article: The Spiderman Fallacy by Robin Schumacher
Saturday, June 22, 2013
Golden Rule - Superman Style
FacePalm of the Day - F**ked-up Heroes of the Bible: Samson
16 Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person is powerful and effective.17 Elijah was a human being, even as we are. He prayed earnestly that it would not rain, and it did not rain on the land for three and a half years. 18 Again he prayed, and the heavens gave rain, and the earth produced its crops. - James 5:16-18
F**ked-up Heroes of the Bible: Samson:
This article by J.M. Green attempts to show that heroes in the Bible should not be looked up but failed to be heroic. It seems that this is meant to be a series of articles. It will be interesting to see if he can explain why the people he choose to spotlight weren't heroic and why he seems so very angry at the suggestion that they are worthy of being looked up to. I do admit that in Sunday Schools, an incomplete picture of these people are shown to children and the Biblically illiterate. Terrible things about their character and actions are glossed over and no discussed although they are clearly in the Biblical text. This is not a good thing. However presenting those things out of context and with no understanding, as Green does, is equally silly.
Today’s example: Samson, who even has been immortalized as an children's action figure.
Pretty Cool but I doubt he dressed like that.
Samson’s sordid saga is detailed in Judges, chapters 13 through 16. It is like one long and violent soap opera. For the sake of brevity, we’ll just hit the low-lights as I present evidence that this hero of the faith (Hebrews 11:32) was just a scoundrel living the thug life.
Wow. Tough words. I think terms like "scoundrel" and "thug" are unwarranted. I'd like to see what about Green makes him better than Samson. Anyone who knows Samson's story would agree that he was not the most moral or best person ever. Samson made a lot of bad decisions. But before going on remember what Hebrews 11:32 says about why Samson was a "Hero of Faith"
32 And what more shall I say? I do not have time to tell about Gideon, Barak, Samson and Jephthah, about David and Samueland the prophets, 33 who through faith conquered kingdoms,administered justice, and gained what was promised; who shut the mouths of lions, 34 quenched the fury of the flames, and escaped the edge of the sword; whose weakness was turned to strength; and who became powerful in battle and routed foreign armies. - Hebrews 11:32-34
Let's compare what Green says with what the Bible says and what "faith" is.
First of all, let me set up the story by saying that in chapter 13 of Judges, we find out right away that Samson is going to be special because his mom is infertile and the ‘angel of the Lord’ shows up and informs her that she is going to have a baby. There is a definite pattern throughout the Bible of women turning up pregnant after a visit from an angel. Ladies, just to be on the safe side, if you are ever visited by an angel, keep those knees together!
Yes Green tries to be funny...and fails. The angel does not touch Samson's mother at all in the text. Reduced to lying on angels....well Green has to use what he has in absence of any real arguments.
Anyway, his mom is told that he is not to have booze, forbidden foods, or haircuts. He gets the rock star look, without the partying. But, he will get the chicks, oh yes he will!Hmmm...wonder if Green knows what a Nazirite is? Does he know what it signified in the Laws of Moses? Guess not He should have read Numbers 6
One day when Samson was in Timnah, one of the Philistine women caught his eye. When he returned home, he told his father and mother, “A young Philistine woman in Timnah caught my eye. I want to marry her. Get her for me.” His father and mother objected. “Isn’t there even one woman in our tribe or among all the Israelites you could marry?” they asked. “Why must you go to the pagan Philistines to find a wife?” But Samson told his father, “Get her for me! She looks good to me.” His father and mother didn’t realize the LORD was at work in this, creating an opportunity to work against the Philistines, who ruled over Israel at that time. Judges 14:1-4 (NLT)
Basically, Samson is a horndog who dates pagan women. He has all the charm of a cave man: “Me want woman!” Not the best example for Christian children. But happily, our hero’s desire for bad girls is all part of God’s secret plan to ass-whip the Philistines.
Evidence for Samson being a "horn dog"? He is going to marry a woman who want to marry him. His parents knew the trouble it would cause him, that is why they did not want her to pursue this. It is funny how some atheists complain that God does not intervene in human affairs and yet here is one clear case where God did and God intervenes today. And here is Green complaining about God about to deliver Israel from the Philistines just because he does not like the way God is doing it. Whine much?
Exhibit 2:
As Samson and his parents were going down to Timnah, a young lion suddenly attacked Samson near the vineyards of Timnah. At that moment the Spirit of the LORD came powerfully upon him, and he ripped the lion’s jaws apart with his bare hands. He did it as easily as if it were a young goat. But he didn’t tell his father or mother about it. When Samson arrived in Timnah, he talked with the woman and was very pleased with her. Judges 14:5-7 (NLT)
It is widely known that torturing animals is a warning indicator that you just might be a psychopath. That, along with lighting fires and late bedwetting. The Bible is silent as to whether Samson had incontinence problems, so we’re two out of three on the psycho checklist. But, it’s all good because it was the Spirit of the Lord that made him do it. As you will see, every time Samson is touched by the Spirit, he clicks into Viking berserker mode and death and destruction are unleashed. Anyway, the Philistine chick was indeed one hot mamma, and that made Samson happy.
Reading comprehension appears to be a lost art in this case. The text clearly says that the lion attacked Samson and Samson was defending himself! I'm assuming that Green is hot and bothered about Samson tying torches and foxes together and setting Philistine fields on fire and accusing Samson of being an arsonist. Has Green ever heard of scorched earth tactics in warfare? The Philistines had subjugated and oppressed his people. Granted that wasn't why Samson began to fight them, but God used Samson's personality against Israel's enemies Additionally, how does Green know that that the foxes were hurt in anyway? He doesn't. Do I think I should behave and think like Samson did? Nope. But was Samson psychotic? Double Nope.
Exhibit 3:
Later, when he returned to Timnah for the wedding, he turned off the path to look at the carcass of the lion. And he found that a swarm of bees had made some honey in the carcass. He scooped some of the honey into his hands and ate it along the way. He also gave some to his father and mother, and they ate it. But he didn’t tell them he had taken the honey from the carcass of the lion. Judges 14:8-9 (NLT)
Okay, so the dude is now scooping honey out of the rotting lion corpse, and giving it to his parents to eat. Creepy and sick! His depravity knows no bounds. This Bible hero is a psycho, for sure.
Unsanitary? Maybe. Some Bees made a hive in the lion corpse. It wasn't even the same day that Samson killed the lion. Depraved? Nope. Depravity is exampled by rejecting God. Psycho is hurting yourself and others when there is a way out of your servitude to sin and death.
Next, Samson makes a riddle-bet with thirty young gentlemen. If they solve the riddle, then he has to buy them all some fancy new designer togas. They end up putting the pressure on Samson’s bride, who worms the info out of him. They then give the correct answer to Samson, and boy, is he pissed. Apparently the Spirit of the Lord was pissed too, as we shall see.
Samson is just a man. He behaved poorly. This part of the story is clearly describing what happened not prescribing how you or I should behave.
Exhibit 4:
Then the Spirit of the LORD came powerfully upon him. He went down to the town of Ashkelon, killed thirty men, took their belongings, and gave their clothing to the men who had solved his riddle. But Samson was furious about what had happened, and he went back home to live with his father and mother. So his wife was given in marriage to the man who had been Samson’s best man at the wedding. Judges 14:19-20 (NLT)
Hello! This is just all kinds of wrong. Samson goes and kills thirty strangers so that he can steal their clothes and pay the riddle-winners. We can only hope he at least laundered the clothes before he gifted them, but the Bible doesn’t really say. Apparently, murdering strangers in order to steal their clothes was perfectly alright in this case, because the Spirit of the Lord empowered him to do it. When God moves us to kill and steal, who are we to argue with him – right? After all this ruckus, he is so butt-hurt that he decides to move back in with mom and dad. The final humiliation? Samson’s best man scores his bride. Needless to say, Samson is not a happy camper when he finds out.
Samson killed thirty Philistines who were part of the people and were oppressing them? Do you really want to go there? Really? It wasn't murder. It doesn't say that these guys were innocent in the slightest. Again should I do as Samson did? No way. Of course Samson went back to his Parents. Was he supposed to stay and live in Philistine town with a woman whom he cannot trust. I find it way more creepy and stupid to think that was a good idea than eating honey from a lion carcass
That's all for now, kids. The amazing story of our Bible hero Samson will be continued in Part 2.
Written by J. M. Green
Oh goodie! More fail.
Truthbomb Apologetics: Article: Joyce Meyer by Matt Slick
Truthbomb Apologetics: Article: Joyce Meyer by Matt Slick
No Black women or Asian women found or wanted in Muslim heaven - YouTube
No Black women or Asian women found or wanted in Muslim heaven - YouTube
Belief and Science
The same thing is true about God! His existence, Laws, and Power are completely independent of what you believe Best to believe the reality than your imagination of it
Presuppositional vs Natural Theology
Presuppositional vs Natural Theology:
Jeff DownsSome of you will already be aware of this, but the latest edition of Unbelievable, features Scott Oliphint and Kurt Jaros. This is a discussion regarding apologetic methodology.
"Scott believes that the best apologetic method is to assume that Christianity is true and show why a non-Christian is suppressing that truth. Atheists presuppose the existence of God even to argue against Him. This approach is called presuppositional or covanental apologetics.
Kurt Jaros believes that method is flawed and argues for the primacy of Natural Theology (or evidential apologetics) in presenting the case for Christianity to non-believers."
As of writing this, I have not had a chance to listen, so I can not share my thoughts. To listen click here.
I have some reservations about going to this conference, but I would love to attend these two particular sessions. I believe we need more scholarly discussion (audio) on apologetic methodology. Such as the one between Greg Bahnsen and R. C. Sproul.
I have heard the discussion between Dr Bahnsen and Sproul, but I haven't listened to the one Jeff points us to from the Unbelievable radio program yet I look forward to hearing it
Ravi Zacharias on Teaching Our Youth
Ravi Zacharias on Teaching Our Youth:
"The Bible reminds us to guard our doctrine and our conduct. Our youth know firsthand what the world has to offer. They need to be reached at a younger age because of the world of the Internet that ravages young minds sooner than ever before. Building their faith is not a prime strength in our churches today. We seem to think that we need to entertain them into the church. But what you win them with is often what you win them to. They can see through a hollow faith in a hurry. Their minds are hungry for coherence and meaning. They long to think things through. They long to know why the gospel is both true and exclusive. None of these issues are often addressed within their own reach. I believe this is the most serious crisis of our church-going youth today. Their faith is more a longing than a fulfillment. We have a special burden for the youth. We will keep at it as we try to reach them. It’s a tough world for the young."
Courage and Godspeed,
Chad
HT: The Poached Egg
Courage and Godspeed,
Chad
HT: The Poached Egg
Friday, June 21, 2013
Choice And The Moral Universe Of 'Man Of Steel' [Opinion] - ComicsAlliance | Comic book culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews
Choice And The Moral Universe Of 'Man Of Steel' [Opinion] - ComicsAlliance | Comic book culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews
Article: "Is Noah's Flood Simply a Retelling of Prior Mythologies?" by J. Warner Wallace
Article: "Is Noah's Flood Simply a Retelling of Prior Mythologies?" by J. Warner Wallace:
In this featured article, apologist J. Warner Wallace addresses the question, "Is Noah's Flood Simply a Retelling of Prior Mythologies?"
Wallace contends, "Moses' version of the Noahic Flood was not borrowed from a prior mythology; it is an accurate account of an ancient event later retold by people groups across the globe."
You can checkout the entire article here.
Further, I highly recommend Jim's blog. It is constantly updated with relevant, encouraging and challenging articles that will aid you in becoming a more effective Christian Case Maker.
Courage and Godspeed,
Chad
Wallace contends, "Moses' version of the Noahic Flood was not borrowed from a prior mythology; it is an accurate account of an ancient event later retold by people groups across the globe."
You can checkout the entire article here.
Further, I highly recommend Jim's blog. It is constantly updated with relevant, encouraging and challenging articles that will aid you in becoming a more effective Christian Case Maker.
Courage and Godspeed,
Chad
Monday, June 17, 2013
Google Trials Internet by Balloon | Geeks are Sexy Technology News
</ br></ br>
Google Trials Internet by Balloon | Geeks are Sexy Technology News
Sunday, June 16, 2013
Is Man of Steel all about Jesus? Warner Bros hopes Christians think so
Warner Bros. paid a theologian, Pepperdine University's Craig Detwiler, to prepare a nine-page set of "sermon notes" for ministers who want to preach about Man of Steel, titeld "Jesus: The Original Superhero." The sermon notes ask, "How might the story of Superman awaken our passion for the greatest hero who ever lived and died and rose again?" And then the sermon includes stuff about the themes and ideas of Man of Steel, after which the pastor is encouraged to say, "Let’s take a look at the trailer for Man of Steel."
The comments made on the article are also interesting. The issues here are very central. Is a movie like this just symbolizing Jesus, or are the artists that created this movie just using themes and concepts familiar to western civilization? Does art in this way bolster the message of Christianity or in some way cheapens it? To be clear, the makers of Man of Steel or Superman in general are not in anyway trying to inspire people to be come Christians like C.S. Lewis intended through his work in Chronicle of Narnia. Given the other films made by Zach Snyder it makes sense that Man of Steel would have some Christian iconography. Big surprise. Even the earlier Superman films included many allusion to "Savior" and "Messiah". It kind of goes with the character.
Let's not forget that Superman's first creators were young Jewish men who were inspired by Samson and Moses - which are according to Theology archetypes and predecessors who foreshadowed Jesus Christ. As the character grew through the years, Superman became more Christ centered. I won't give examples from the movie to avoid spoilers but there were at least 4 that I thought that were very blatant examples of making Superman look like Jesus.
I would avoid reading the following article until after you see the movie, but it is good to bear in mind that using Christian iconography and concepts to point an audience to Jesus Christ is a good thing. There is a danger of actually trying to equate Jesus with Superman. That's a problem. I don't think the film-makers do that and as a rule the comics books and cartoons don't. Superman clearly does not consider himself above humanity or better than humanity and certainly not a god and not divine. He does not consider himself worthy to determine who lives and who dies so he tries to save and help everyone. This isn't bad but a good and moral ethic to live by. It is one of the tent poles for Christian ethics.
Is Man of Steel all about Jesus? Warner Bros hopes Christians think so
I'd be remiss if I didn't point out two of the darker sides of this. Some folks make a serious error (sometimes tongue-in-cheek) in trying to argue that Superman is better than Jesus Christ and that like Superman Jesus is fictional. Really dumb, but there you go. I wrote an article about this while ago. Read it here: 10 Reasons Why there is No Comparision Between Jesus and Superman. And my brother -in-Christ, whom I really respect and if you haven't read his work you should, posted a video about the occult symbolism in Man of Steel. If you look our culture is steeped in it and many of our movies have them in them. You should be aware. Check out his video.
Saturday, June 15, 2013
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)