Atheism is Dead: Dan Barker - Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications, part 4 of 14

Here is the fourth part of Mariano's article answering Dan Barker's allegations against the Bible. Recall that in each part Mariano refutes an allegation. This time Barker alleges that the Old Testament tells Jews to only love other Jews and kill everyone else. Read Mariano's response. It's brilliant. God is really using this guy.
Atheism is Dead: Dan Barker - Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications, part 4 of 14

Atheism is Dead: Dan Barker - Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications, part 3 of 14

Here is part 3 of Mariano's article untwisting Dan Barker's understanding of scripture. He did a great job of explaining that Barker's assertion that God wants people to kill babies (mis-reading Psalm 137) is as wrong as 2 left shoes!

Atheism is Dead: Dan Barker - Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications, part 3 of 14

Dr. James White on Molinism

On April 2, 2009, James White took a call on the Dividing Line concerning free will and molinism or Middle Knowledge. I agree with Dr. White that it is an attempt for people to "have their cake and eat it too". They want to keep a hold of libertarian free will and God being in control of everything. I think God is definitely sovereign and in control of everything. However I think that one of the ways that does exert control is manipulating events in our lives to get responses and acts that He wants from us. I have experienced this myself and we see it in scripture. But at the same time we see God actually changing the minds of people to achieve his purposes, often we do not even realizing that He has done it. Following is a clip from that web cast. I see nothing wrong with looking at it either way because God is in control, completely. I think I'll call the Dividing Line to talk to Dr. White about it. I see Dr. White's point of view that molinism doesn't answer why God just doesn't put everyone in a situation where they say "yes" to Jesus. But I think the answer is the same as to why God just doesn't make everyone repent and get saved.

FreeWill Clip - Ja...

Does the God of Christianity Exist and Does it Matter? MP3 Audio - Apologetics 315

Ever wonder what would happen if Christopher Hitchens, Doug Wilson, William Lane Craig, Lee Strobel and James Denison ever appeared together on the same stage? Well, we can see what would happen because they recently debated at the Christian Book Expo 2009. The topic was Does the God of Christianity Exist and Does it Matter? I found the link on the Apologetics 315 blog.

Does the God of Christianity Exist and Does it Matter? MP3 Audio - Apologetics 315


There is even a video linked to the Apologetics 315 blog.



This is an amazing discussion. It shows one atheist, Hitchens, versus three apologists whom I admire. This discussion really underscores the difference between Atheism and Christianity. You should watch hear this. I think that Douglas Wilson was great in the way he went toe-to-toe with Hitchens. We can see that Hitchens does not know who God is or anything about his character. God does not create us sick and then expect us to do better. We don't earn salvation. Jesus heals us. We need him.

I loved how when William Lane Craig summarized the discussion pointing out that the Christians on the panel had given 10 really good reasons for believing that the God of Christianity and that he matters. He also pointed out Christopher Hitchens had not answered any of these points. This really seemed to upset Hitchens...then Craig called him out! He told him that he hopes that Hitchens would be prepared to discuss those points in their debate April 4, 2009. I was on the floor laughing.

"Discussing the Divine Comedy with Dante"

"Discussing the Divine Comedy with Dante"
Painting by Dai Dudu, Li Tiezi, Zhang An - 2006


This is a painting of influential people from throughout History. For a list of people in the painting go here.

Click on the picture to view it bigger!

Obama Wants To Pass A Law Allowing Searching of Laptops

If this story is true I am really not happy about it. I think of my computer as personal as my underwear drawer. The idea of the government being able to search my laptops, computers, and other digital offices seems totally over the top. It should be unconstitutional. What happened to the right to privacy from the Bill of Rights and our constitutional.

Apologetics 315: Douglas Groothuis Reviews Christopher Hitchens' God is Not Great

Christopher Hitchens wrote a blasphemous book. The Apologetics 315 has audio refutation and review of Hitchen's book by Dr. Douglas Groothuis.

Apologetics 315: Douglas Groothuis Reviews Christopher Hitchens' God is Not Great

Atheism is Dead: Dan Barker - Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications, part 2 of 14

Well over at the Atheism is Dead Blog, Mariano has published his part 2 of the article Dan Barker - Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications. It is awesome. Everyone should read it!

Atheism is Dead: Dan Barker - Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications, part 2 of 14

Scrutinizing Michelle Obama...Again

People are such nit-pickers!!!!

Embedded video from CNN Video

Easter Is Coming

Well it is that time of year again. Easter and Christmas is the time when critics of Christianity attacks Jesus with reckless abandon. Fortunate God has given us the antidote for our minds and amminition to fight with. Here is a two part video from the John Ankerberg Show where Dr Gary Habermas and Dr. Craig Evans answer the claims of the following:

1. Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code
2. Bart Ehrman's Misquoting Jesus
3. Michael Bagent's The Jesus Papers
4. James Tabor's The Jesus Dynasty
5. the ancient gnostic Gospel of Judas.

What if Atheist Ruled The World?

I came across the following video. Some might say that it's just irreverent humor. I think that it must be commented upon because it's an apologetic for atheism. A group of young men act as fundamentalist Christians making some of the most ridiculous claims against evolution imaginable. The YouTube posts that it's based on real comments made by Christians. I have to admit that they have a point...some of the comments are stupid showing at best ignorance at worst...lies.





It amounts to "Christians" attacking a carachature of evolutionists and atheists. Their arguments are misrepresented. The producers are saying that Christians are too stupid to even understand what evolutionist believe let-alone argue against it. And they are saying that Christians think that anyone who does not believe the way we do are immoral and are bad parents. It's interesting how the producers of this video are arguing against a perceived stereotype against themselves with their own stereotypes of Bible-believing Christians. Truly pathetic.

Peanut Butter Jelly Time!!!!

I recently heard this humorus song. You may have heard it. Turns out that my daughter, Makayla loves it. Peanut Butter Jelly Time



Credits:

Created By: Ryan Etrata
Inspired By: Kevin Flynn

Song: Peanut Butter Jelly Time
By The Buckwheat Boys

Lyrics:

It's Peanut Butter Jelly Time!
Peanut Butter Jelly Time!
Peanut Butter Jelly Time!


Where he at?
Where he at?
Where he at?
Where he at?

Now, there he go!
There he go!
There he go!
There he go!

Peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly!

Do the peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly with a baseball bat!

Do the peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly with a baseball bat!


Now, where he at?
Where he at?
Where he at?
Where he at?

Now, there he go!
There he go!
There he go!
There he go!

Now, peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly!

Do the peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly with a baseball bat!

Do the peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly with a baseball bat!


Now, break it down and freeze!
Break it down and freeze!
Now, break it down and freeze!
Break it down and freeze!


Now, where he at?
Where he at?
Where he at?
Where he at?

Now, there he go!
There he go!
There he go!
There he go!

Peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly!

Do the peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly with a baseball bat!

Do the peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly with a baseball bat!


Now, tic tac toe, Uh-huh!
Tic tac toe, Let's go!
Tic tac toe, You got it!
Tic tac toe, Let's ride!


Where he at?
Where he at?
Where he at?
Where he at?

Now, there he go!
There he go!
There he go!
There he go!

Peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly!

Do the peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly with a baseball bat!

Do the peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly!
Peanut butter jelly with a baseball bat!


Now, freestyle,
freestyle, freestyle,
freestyle, freestyle,
Your style!

Freestyle,
freestyle, freestyle,
freestyle, freestyle,
Your style!


Where he at?
Where he at?
Where he at?
Where he at?

Now, there he go!
There he go!
There he go!
There he go!

Atheism is Dead: Dan Barker - Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications, part 1 of 14

I'm gearing up for James White's debate against atheist Dan Barker. I am certain that it will be interesting and awesome. I want people to hear the Gospel out of the event. I'm sure that God will use Dr James White in such a mighty way that many people will hear the truth who would have not heard it.

I've been listening to a lot of debates recently in which Barker has ineptly defended atheism, (It's not all his fault, atheism has no defense.) and I have often thought about deconstructing one of his favorite arguments against Christianity: "Bible contradictions" - an oxymoron for sure but Barker thinks its a big gun. It's more like an annoyance. However one of my brothers in Christ, Mariano, has beat me to doing such a series on his blog. Find the link below:

Atheism is Dead: Dan Barker - Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications, part 1 of 14

I heartily recommend everyone read his blog and this series of articles he's writing. It's awesome. The introduction is thoughtful and so well-written. One of the things I learned from reading his introduction is that Barker has a so-called "Bible Quiz" people can take, get a score and get his answers. I scored 38 out of 50. I'm so unimpressed and even offended at how her twisted the bible to make God look as "bad" as possible to the modern unregenerate American mind. He has personal hostility against God. Pathetic. One day, I may try to cover some of those problems he brings up here. In the mean time, get him, Mariano.

Pastor Stewart's Closing Remarks from 03-29-09

Here is a test of posting a part of our church service. It was taken on my cell phone. It's only a test, but the message given is far too important to be ignored


Audio

Pastor_Stewart_Clo...

Guess Who?

Who is this passage talking about:



He grew up before him like a tender shoot,
and like a root out of dry ground.
He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him,
nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.

He was despised and rejected by men,
a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering.
Like one from whom men hide their faces
he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

Surely he took up our infirmities
and carried our sorrows,
yet we considered him stricken by God,
smitten by him, and afflicted.

But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon him,
and by his wounds we are healed.

We all, like sheep, have gone astray,
each of us has turned to his own way;
and the LORD has laid on him
the iniquity of us all.

He was oppressed and afflicted,
yet he did not open his mouth;
he was led like a lamb to the slaughter,
and as a sheep before her shearers is silent,
so he did not open his mouth.

By oppression and judgment he was taken away.
And who can speak of his descendants?
For he was cut off from the land of the living;
for the transgression of my people he was stricken.

He was assigned a grave with the wicked,
and with the rich in his death,
though he had done no violence,
nor was any deceit in his mouth.

Yet it was the LORD's will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the LORD makes his life a guilt offering,
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand.

After the suffering of his soul,
he will see the light of life and be satisfied;
by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many,
and he will bear their iniquities.

Therefore I will give him a portion among the great,
and he will divide the spoils with the strong,
because he poured out his life unto death,
and was numbered with the transgressors.
For he bore the sin of many,
and made intercession for the transgressors.

Who is this? Who is the Passage Referring to? Moses Muhammad Jesus Krishna view results

Where is it? Is the above quoted from the Old Testament and New Testament? Old Testament New Testament view results

Mathematics and Theology - the Age of the Earth

Most science books who accept macro evolution teach that the earth is something like 4-5 Billion years old. Scientist typically arrive at this number using geologic dating of rocks and fossils on earth. Did you know that physics actually has a calculation that requires no more than simple algebra to arrive at a similar number for the age of the earth. The calculation depends on comparing on the relative concentration of Uranium isotopes in the earth's crust. The isotopes we used in my sophomore Physics class were U₂₃₈ and U₂₃₅. Both of these flavors or Uranium are radioactive. U₂₃₅ is used in simple nuclear weapons like the bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima in 1945. U₂₃₈ is used in our nuclear reactors. If we know about how many atoms of Uranium 235 and 238 are in the earth crust today and we know the half-life of both Isotopes then we should be able to figure out how old the earth is. The half-life of radioactive material is defined as the amount of time it takes for 1/2 of the material to decay into another kind of element. The equation we use to define the number of atoms (N) after time t, where is the half-life and N_i is the initial number of atoms:





So let's apply this idea for ration of U₂₃₅ to U₂₃₈. Remember that:


N_U235 is the number of U₂₃₅ atoms currently.
N_U238 is the number of U₂₃₈ atoms currently.
N_iU235 is the number of U₂₃₅ atoms initially.
N_iU238 is the number of U₂₃₈ atoms initially.
_U235 is the half-life of U₂₃₅ atoms. = years
_U238 is the half-life of U₂₃₈ atoms. = years




When I first got this problem in a problem set back in school I tripped out because they told me what the current ratio of U₂₃₅ to U₂₃₈ is: 0.0072516316. And I also had the numbers for the half-life. I knew I wanted to find t - the time it took for both isotopes to decay to the current ratio. So I tripped out. Got scared because I didn't know how much of each uranium isotope was in the earth's crust at the time the earth formed until I realized that I was supposed to assume that the earth had the same amount of each kind of Uranium in the beginning! what this means is that N_iU235 = 0.0072516316 N_iU238 and that means that you don't need to know the initial amounts of Uranium because those numbers cancel out - old algebra trick. When I plugged in all the numbers and solved the equation for t, I got 4 and half billion years back then.















Using the numbers I found off Wikipedia which slightly differ from the numbers I used in college and the scientific calculator add-on for Firefox I now get


years or years


4.18 Billion is close to 4.5 Billion (four-and-a-half) that I'm certain that I did the calculation accurately. Thank God!

A lot of people look at that and go...see the earth is as old as macro evolution shows that it should be. End of story. But this calculation depends on several assumptions that I never got proof that we should assume. I was just taught that the following assumptions were reasonable.

a. That the amounts of U₂₃₅ and U₂₃₈ were equal when the earth first formed. I mean other than it makes the math work out, I don't see why we need to assume that.
b. That half-life of U₂₃₅ and U₂₃₈ have always been constant. This one I'm willing to let them have as reasonable.
c. How did they determine that the ratio of U₂₃₅ to U₂₃₈ is 0.0072516316 in the earth's crust? How do we know it's the correct estimate?

I think that assumption "b" is reasonable, but "a" and "c" happen to seem convenient and I will need to do more research to really decide if they are reasonable. The best I can say is that it makes the math work out. When I was in school, I took their word for it and no proof was offered. Now, I think I would like to find out how they came up with their assumptions.

Mathematics and Theology - the Resurection

I remember often in my pre-college education, while sitting in mathematics courses, wondering what was the use of spending all that time wading through theoretical mathematics. Of course during college and through my professional career I have learned that theoretical mathematics becomes practical very quickly. Who knew? A good example is that it becomes useful even in the field of apologetics and there isn't any need to get real deeper than algebra. William Lane Craig argued for the resurrection of Jesus again Bart Ehrman very effectively using the probablistic calculus. You can read his argument in it's entirety on one of my previous posts and a you can watch the video here. I really like the argument he used.

Let X equal the probability that Jesus supernaturally was raised from the dead.
Let Y equal the probability that there are naturalistic explanations for what happened to explain the historical facts that although Jesus was crucified, that the tomb was empty 3 days later and people claimed to have seen him alive later, following religion based on His teachings and person.

The total probability that Christianity is correct can be mathematically represented as the following equation.

P(X,Y) = X /(X + Y)

Dr. William Lane Craig then pointed out that as Y becomes smaller and smaller, the probability function becomes closer and closer to being equal to 1. A probability of 1 means that its a certainty and most definitely true. Craig in the debate argued that the Biblical conclusion is most probable because it most adequately answers:

a. Why the Tomb was empty?
b. Why did Jesus' brothers and disciples start claiming Jesus was alive again and that He is God when before the Crucifixion and the aftermath his brothers didn't believe at all and his closest followers lost faith?

Ehrman tried to argue that there are other explanations without appealing to the idea that Jesus was supernaturally raised from the dead. He failed. Craig quoted the above mathematics from a leading mathematician, Richard Swineberg from Oxford University, and even more amazing gave the exact place for more research because X and Y can actually be numerically evaluated. The name of the book is The Resurrection of God Incarnate. If you plug in the numbers you get a number: 0.97; in math and physics a probability of 0.97 means more than likely. It means that it's a proven conclusion! Look at Ehrman's reaction. Research it for yourself!

Siku is back!

I have just heard that Siku has published a manga called Manga Jesus Volume 1. I have not read it yet, But I can't read it yet. I read the previous Manga Bible. I loved it. I wrote a post about it a long time ago: http://mmcelhaney.blogspot.com/2008/08/manga-bible-review.html and I can't wait to read the book. Here is a video from National Geographic.




Here is an interview from NPR

Another Reason To Get A PS3

I've found another reason why I should buy a PS3 as soon as God enables me to get one:
Ninja Gaiden Sigma 2

Athanatos - Apologetics Education

I have just found out about online Christian courses that are being offered at Athanatos in Apologetics. Some of the classes are being taught by world famous scholars such as Dr. Gary Habermas. Gary Habermas is an expert on explaining and resurrection the historicity of the Resurrection. There are many different classes being offered for free to about $30. On of Habermas' classes is The Problem of Pain and Suffering. He is perhaps one of the best people to teach this class. You see, Habermas was one of the scholars who was interviewed in Lee Strobel's The Case for Christ and he said that when he lost his wife to cancer, leaving him to care for their two young children alone, it was the truth of the Resurrection that carried her through her illness and he through the pain and suffering of loosing her.

Oops. I apologize. I forgot to define apologetics. It has nothing to do with apologizing but the woards are related. Apologetics comes from the word apologea in kione Greek. It means "make a defense". It's the same word translated "answer" used in 1 Peter 3:15 (NIV)

But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,

It's also the same word translated "excuse" used in Romans 1: 18-20

The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse

Therefore, Paul is saying that there is no defense - no reason - deny the existence of God.
One more point I've go to bring up is that the Greek word "athanatos" is a great name for an Apologetics class. It means "God-breathed". This is the word used by Paul to define what scripture is in 2 Timothy 3:16 which says:

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,