Debunking Christianity: Nightline Face-Off: "Does God Have a Future?"

John Loftus has posted a video that shows a discussion that aired on Television. It wasn't most of a debate. Samuel Harris and Michael Shermer wanted to argue that the God of Christianity, Islam, and Judaism is irrelevant and need to be forgotten. Deepak Chopra and Jean Houston agree! They disagree that religion and spirituality need to be cast off. Exclusivity of truth needs to be destroyed,according to all of them. I really disagree with all four of them!   When it comes to the Bible and God's sovereignty thay agee with one another. I wonder why they Christians, Jews, and Muslims were excluded from the conversation?

Debunking Christianity: Nightline Face-Off: "Does God Have a Future?"

Debunking Christianity: What is the Difference Between an Education and Indoctrination?

I recently read a post by John Loftus on his blog about the differences between being educated and being indoctrinated. I find that I agree completely with his viewpoint. Knew I'd find something on his blog worth supporting.

As I have said before, if a Christian reads through my book and his faith is strengthened then it did him no harm. In fact, it did him good. If however, reading through it destroys his faith, then that faith was not worth having in the first place.

Become educated. If all you ever do is read Christian apologetics books in response to the arguments of atheists like me, then you are not being educated. Here's an example of what I mean. Look at my friend Dr. Norman Geisler's review of my book (the former self-published edition, Why I Rejected Christianity), and what I wrote about his review. There is no comparison between reading his review of my book and reading it yourself, as I've said before.

Again, become educated, not indoctrinated.

I find the post interesting because on one hand, Loftus argues that its wrong to present information from one side and not present the truth that many intelligent people interpret the information differently and why they see it that way, yet many atheist refuse to even discuss intelligent design and think that it should never be taught in our schools. By Loftus' and my own definition of indoctrination - Macro Evolution is not being taught to our students, they are being indoctrinated. To be fair to Loftus, I don't know if he denies ID should be taught along side macro evolution.in the classroom, but I know a lot of atheist don't think it should be. Who is indoctrinating whom?

Debunking Christianity: What is the Difference Between an Education and Indoctrination?

Line of Fire » Blog Archive » March 23, 2010: Brown vs Buzzard pt 2

Image by Zombie Inc. Wholesale zombies for over 20 years via Flickr

This was a great discussion. I liked it better than the first one. I think Anthony Buzzard is sincere. I just totally disagree with him when it comes to the deity of Christ and the Trinity. I think his sticking point is that He argues that God is a person and not just a being. This leads him to reject the pre-existence of Jesus. and reinterpret a lot of scriptures in a way no one in orthodox and historic Christianity understood. This one is definitely worth listening to.

Line of Fire » Blog Archive » March 23, 2010

Memorable Keys to the Greatest FEAT in History

I've found this great page from the Christian Research Institute that allows you to read a short book by Hank Hanegraaf that explains and defends Jesus' Resurrection.. You can even buy a print copy if you want.  I like this. It concisely explains the most importantly part of Christianity.

Adnan Rashid vs. David Wood: The Satanic Verses

This was an interesting debate. It's over a specific text in the Qur'an (Surah 53) that apparently came from Satan not Allah that Muhammad spoke. Rashid attempts to prove that there are no Satanic verses and David Wood argues that it is really a part of Islam casting suspicion on the whole text. Listen to Rashid's argument about why the Qur'an is more reliable than the Bible. He used the same faulty arguments against the Bible that has been refuted (look at the other posts on this blog on his debates). This debate is definitely about that  reliability of the Qur'an because if Muhammad had delivered a text from Satan that disqualifies him as a prophet. I think David wood was able to prove his point without lying about the reliability of Qur'an while Rashid said things about the Bible that I know is not true.











Adnan Rashid vs. David Wood: The Satanic Verses (Part One of Four)

Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: DavidW on Gnosticism and Calvinism

Rhology.has posted a very interesting article discussing the relationship between Gnosticism and Calvinism - in other words no relationship at all! The post does a good job in explaining the differences views on predestination.

Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: DavidW on Gnosticism and Calvinism

Dr. Claude Mariottini - Professor of Old Testament: Unicorns and Dragons in the Bible

Image via Wikipedia

Dr. Mariottini has given us a great post giving us two important links regarding mythical creatures in the Bible. The KJV translates some words as "unicorn" and "dragon" but neither of these are given modern translations. These are great information. I mean did the writers of the Old Testament have the creatures depicted below in mind? Nah. Read the links below.


Dr. Claude Mariottini - Professor of Old Testament: Unicorns and Dragons in the Bible

On Unicorns, Rhinoceros And Wild Oxen

Danielle Belton's The Black Snob - The Snob Blog - President Obama Signs Health Care Reform Into Law

I wonder what legacy will we see behind this? I like the idea of some people who need medical help who hopefully will be able to get it.



Danielle Belton's The Black Snob - The Snob Blog - President Obama Signs Health Care Reform Into Law

Apologetics 315: Apologist Interview: Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason

Greg Koukl was interviewed by Brian Auten of Apologetics 315. It is awesome. I've grown to really like Greg Koukl and his ministry. He offered great advice to any one for witnessing and studying and engaging with the culture. I really liked this interview.

Apologetics 315: Apologist Interview: Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason

Iron Sharpens Iron: Martin Fromm: Jews With No Temple: Where is Their Sacrifice? Where is Their Hope? (Christ Our Passover)

Image via Wikipedia

On a recent interview from  Iron Sharpens Iron, Martin Fromm was interviewed and presented why as a Jew he accepts Jesus as Lord and Savior. It is really interesting.  He says that if you honestly search the Old Testament, you can to no other conclusion that Jesus is the Messiah Jews have been looking forward. He explains it really well. I love it. We see that without a Temple and the sacrifices Jews don't have a way to follow the scriptures as they have been laid out without a Temple or Blood sacrifices. Fromm also pointed out that the Messiah had to come before the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD because we would have no way to apply the prophecies to validate His identity. Awesome!

Iron Sharpens Iron: Martin Fromm: Jews With No Temple: Where is Their Sacrifice? Where is Their Hope? (Christ Our Passover)

Related articles by Zemanta

• Lamb of God (anointedplace.wordpress.com)
• DNA of Jesus-era shrouded man in Jerusalem reveals earliest case of leprosy (scienceblog.com)

YouTube - Bible Prophecies About the Advent of Muhammad

Image via Wikipedia

Here is a lecture from Adan Rashid in which he tries to show that the Bible foretells the advent of Muhammad. I am amazed that he says that now that we have the Qur'an we don't need the Bible. Rashid spends quite a bit of time in the video trying to show a tradition Muhammad is prophesied in the Bible.  He ends up arguing that the Bible is proof that Muhammad is what the Muslims say heas and that he had to get his knowledge from God because he could not read and did not have access to other books that he is accused of copying.  I agree. Had he had access to those books, then maybe the Qur'an would not contain errors in describing the same events the Bible does or Christian theology. Then Muhammad turned around and taught that Muslims should revere the Torah, the Prophets, and the Injil (New Testament) and had he know how different his message was I doubt that he would have told his followers to read and understand them. If a Muslim is going to obey Muhammad, then he/she can't throw out the Bible. so what does the Muslim to do to reconcile this? Some ignore it, others like Rashid attempt to reconcile the Bible and the Qur'an bytrying to find events and persons from Islam in the Bible text. How well does this work?




Unfortunately, not very well. I'm not an Islamic scholar and I am willing to give Rashid some credit because he was attempting to cover a lot quickly. Let's look at two of the Bible passages he cited and see if his exegesis can bear any weight.

Isaiah 29:12

12 Or if you give the scroll to someone who cannot read, and say, "Read this, please," he will answer, "I don't know how to read."

Rashid said that this passage is referring to Muhammad because the prophet could not read. He interprets the scroll as the being the Qur'an. Two problems that jump out at me is I thought Muhammad dictated the Qur'an and was not handed a scroll. The other problem I have is context. The chapter is about punishment on Israel. Does Rashid really want to take verse 12 out of it's context and apply it to someone who it is not addressed to? Guess so.

Isaiah 42
Jews see the first part of this chapter as talking about the promised Messiah. Christians say it is Jesus. Rashid is arguing that it's talking about Muhammad. He seemed to focus on verse 1 - 9 so i will too.

6 "I, the LORD, have called you in righteousness;
I will take hold of your hand.
I will keep you and will make you
to be a covenant for the people
and a light for the Gentiles,

7 to open eyes that are blind,
to free captives from prison
and to release from the dungeon those who sit in darkness.

How does that describe Muhammad. There are no recorded miracles of Muhammad healing blind people...but Jesus did.

Using

4 he will not falter or be discouraged
till he establishes justice on earth.
In his law the islands will put their hope."

Rashid argues that the passage refers to Muhammad because at it height Islam reached the peninsula on which Spain and Portugal sit. He said that that a peninsula is the same as an island and that's not true. This just does not work. You will also notice Rashid creatively uses geography to show his point. That is also a stretch.

I noticed that Rashid's audience does not know the Bible and he basically expects them to accept him as an authority, but I hope that they look themselves to see if he is correct...because he's not.

YouTube - Bible Prophecies About the Advent of Muhammad

Video: Bill Kristol | The Daily Show | Comedy Central

Image via Wikipedia

Jon Stewart pawns Bill Kristol!

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Bill Kristol
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Reform

Video: Bill Kristol | The Daily Show | Comedy Central

YouTube - President Obama On the Passage of Health Reform

YouTube - President Obama On the Passage of Health Reform

Related articles by Zemanta

• President Obama On the Passage of Health Reform (downes.ca)
• What Does Win on Health Reform Mean for the Democrats? (usnews.com)
• Health Care Reform (timesunion.com)

Truthbomb Apologetics: Free Online E-book: Letters to a Mormon Elder by James R. White

I have heard of this book but I haven't read it. Here is a wonderful opportunity. I've been following Dr. James White's ministry since 2003 and I have heard of this book. It's a chance to read what Dr. White would say when he witnesses to a Mormon!

Truthbomb Apologetics: Free Online E-book: Letters to a Mormon Elder by James R. White

YouTube - Creflo Dollar Says CHRISTIANS Have 2 YEARS LEFT To GET RICH! (wealth transfer/debt cancellation)

My wife recently asked me to find the proof that Creflo Dollar has preached a heretical error. It took me literally 5 minutes to find this (3 of which to boot up and log on to the Internet). The contention is that Dollar has claimed that because God promises his people riches that Jesus cannot return until all of God's people are rich. He went as far as trying to tell that Jesus will return by 2012. Where to start? I'm leary of anyone trying to tell us when Jesus will return. Second, Jesus said "The poor will be with you always." (Mark 14:7) Therefore we cannot interpret Proverbs 13:22 as saying that we must become rich if we will be righteous. This video does a great job discussing the subject.




YouTube - Creflo Dollar Says CHRISTIANS Have 2 YEARS LEFT To GET RICH! (wealth transfer/debt cancellation)

Iron Sharpens Iron: Eric Redmond: When Your Theology Costs You Your Pulpit: An African American's Journey into Reformed Christianity

Iron Sharpens Iron is a wonderful broadcast. Pastor Eric Redmond was a guest talking about how he came tom accept Reformed Theology. I could really identify with him. He used to have the same problem I have with "Limited Atonement". He talked about how your theology can cost you your pulpit if people don't like your theology. It is an awesome interview.  There was a call from a man who was part of the Church of God in Christ from Canada. That was interesting being I'm from that denomination.

Iron Sharpens Iron: Eric Redmond: When Your Theology Costs You Your Pulpit: An African American's Journey into Reformed Christianity

Dr. Claude Mariottini - Professor of Old Testament: Proverbs 29:18

Dr. Mariottini has given us a great post on Proverbs 29:1 and I love the way he brings it out. Check it out!

Dr. Claude Mariottini - Professor of Old Testament: Proverbs 29:18

Unbelievable? 10 Jan 2009 The problem of suffering - Ehrman & Swinburne

Bart Ehrman appeared on Unbelievable broadcast. The second time he was on Ehrman discussed his book on The Problem of Evil. Read the introduction of the broadcast:

Bart Ehrman lost his faith altogether when he confronted the problem of how a loving, powerful God can allow suffering.  In his new book "God's Problem" he states that the Bible contains different and unconvincing explanations to the issue.
Richard Swinburne is a reknowned Christian philosopher.  He answers Bart's objections with arguments from his own book "Providence and the Problem of Evil".

Ehrman is wrong our suffering does not invalidate God's existence. I disagree with what he said about Job. God does answer his question about suffering. Sometimes it is to punish evil....sometimes we deserve it....and sometimes it's for a purpose.  I agree with Ehrman that free will does not answer the question. I agree with Swineburne that some suffering is for God to show or teach something. He's God....He can do that. God has every right. Ehrman is wrong the Bible does show God is in control over the evil forces that cause evil and Swineburne got him for that.  This was a great interaction. Go to the link below to listen to it.

Unbelievable? 10 Jan 2009 The problem of suffering - Ehrman & Swinburne

Dr. Claude Mariottini - Professor of Old Testament: Moses and His Crocodile

Image via Wikipedia

Dr. Mariottini has posted a great article about the Hebrew word "tanin" and how it has been translated in many place s int Bible. Sometimes it's translated "monster" or "dragon" or "snake" or "crocodile". It's used in the story where Moses' rod becomes tanin before Pharaoh. Very interesting!

Dr. Claude Mariottini - Professor of Old Testament: Moses and His Crocodile

Unbelievable? 3 Jan 2009 "Misquoting Jesus" Ehrman & Williams

Image via Wikipedia

I'm fascinated by the work of Bart Ehrman. How can he do such very good scholarship deciphering textual criticisms yet come to such different conclusions about how reliable the Bible is than Peter Williams, Dan Wallace, or James White? Why does he overstate the differences the textual variants make? These variants have been known for centuries, why would it only matter now? If Christian theology rose and fell on these variants,  why hasn't it affected Christian doctrine. The funny thing is that most of the cults and theological differences giving rise to so many different generations are not based on the important differences in manuscripts. Ehrman's arguments are based on the New Testament because there are far fewer textual variants of the Old Testament. Ehrman is also not willing to apply the same rules for accepting historical documents for other historical documents than he does for the New Testament. Ehrman also ignores the wide spreadness of the manuscripts and there are more than one line of transmission,

One thing that is very interesting  in this discussion centered around Mark 1: 41. Ehrman argues that a few manuscripts say Jesus became angry instead of  Jesus being filled with compassion and that shows the manuscript was changed.  I liked how Peter Williams answered that. I think that Williams is right.

Unbelievable? 3 Jan 2009 "Misquoting Jesus" Ehrman & Williams

Related articles by Zemanta

• 2 reviews of Bart Ehrman (Christian fundamentalist to liberal Christian) (rateitall.com)