"Blaspheming the Prophet"

James White posted the following video to showcase the idea that Muslims are calling for censoring of the South Park animated series for making fun of Muhammad. I thin free speech is important even if things are said or depicted that I disagree with. South Park does not not just insult Islam but all religions. If someone says something you disagree with, instead of shutting them up...answer them. Explain why they are wrong.




"Blaspheming the Prophet"

Apologetics 315: Essay: The Impossible Faith by James Patrick Holding

Here is another essay in a series being published by Apologetics 315. JP Holding has a great article just published that summarizes the best arguments that he finds persuasive for why Christianity is true. He came up with an argument that I had never considered before. The embarrassment and sheer shame and humiliation of being crucified could have doomed Christianity before it even started. The only way it could have  been overturned, given how contemporary people  viewed the crucifixion, was if there had been a resurrection. This is an awesome essay worth reading as is his web site at www.tektonics.org.

Apologetics 315: Essay: The Impossible Faith by James Patrick Holding

Evolution is a Fact and a Theory

I read an article that seems to explain how non-creationists define evolution.  Never let it be said that I don't post ideas alternate to my own.

Evolution is a Fact and a Theory

Real Jesus, Knowing the real Jesus

I have been pointed to this particular website that alleges that mainstream Christianity distorts Jesus' person, message, and life. I disagree. This website should have a response.


What if the image of Jesus that you have been given was completely out of touch with reality? 

Yes

Would you want to know the real Jesus?

Yes

Have you considered that for almost 2,000 years mainstream Christianity has carefully crafted the image of Jesus that has been given to the public? 

Yes, I've considered that. It's not true.

Have you considered that this image might have been crafted for a specific purpose, a purpose that might be in complete opposition to Jesus' purpose for coming to Earth? 

Watch how the article spins against the Bible.

Consider the characteristics of the mainstream image of Jesus:

Are these really what the Bible says about Jesus?

• Jesus is portrayed as being remote, distant, far away in some heaven where most people cannot reach him. In fact, access to Jesus is controlled by the official church.

• Jesus is residing in a remote heaven, and he apparently has had nothing to say to humankind for 2,000 years—no new revelation has been forthcoming (or at least hasn't been accepted by any mainstream church).
• Jesus is portrayed as being perfect, which actually means that he is pictured as a non-entity with no personality or human characteristics.

The writer of Hebrews disagrees.

 ¹⁴Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has gone through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold firmly to the faith we profess. ¹⁵For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet was without sin. ¹⁶Let us then approach the throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need. - Hebrews 4:14-16

⁵For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, ⁶who gave himself as a ransom for all men—the testimony given in its proper time. - 1 Timothy 2:5-6

We can go to Jesus without going through anyone else. These verses destroys those contentions. I'm not saying that people don't teach these things but it's not Biblical.
What is the main message spoken between the lines of this official image? It is that Jesus is not accessible to you and that he is nothing like you. Yet the real message is that YOU can never be like Jesus!!!

No we can't be like Jesus. Jesus is God. Yet Jesus is like us. He knows because he experienced human existence

¹⁶For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham's descendants. ¹⁷For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for^[a]the sins of the people. ¹⁸Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted. - Hebrews 2:16-18

This is peculiar because Jesus went out of his way to portray himself as a human being like us, generally calling himself the "son of man" to establish a connection between himself and all people.

Jesus is a human being but He is also God-made-flesh. "Son of Man" is not a reference to His humanity but to his deity. See the Book of Daniel to see what the term meant to the Jews who heard it in the first century and where it came from.

He also said that "The kingdom of God is within you," meaning that we do not need an external church and its hierarchy in order to establish a personal connection to Christ.


This not right. The Kingdom of God is not in the hearts and mind of anyone but those who are living for God. This is quoting Luke 17:21 out of context.  The NIV reads:

 ²⁰Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, ²¹nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within^[a] you."

 ²²Then he said to his disciples, "The time is coming when you will long to see one of the days of the Son of Man, but you will not see it.

Footnotes:

1. Luke 17:21 Or among

The New American Standard Bible says:

 ²⁰Now having been questioned by the Pharisees ^(A)as to when the kingdom of God was coming, He answered them and said, "The kingdom of God is not coming with ^(B)signs to be observed;

 ²¹nor will ^(C)they say, 'Look, here it is!' or, 'There it is!' For behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst."

Second Coming Foretold

 ²²And He said to the disciples, "^(D)The days will come when you will long to see one of the days of the Son of Man, and you will not see it.

Cross references:

1. Luke 17:20 : Luke 19:11; Acts 1:6
2. Luke 17:20 : Luke 14:1
3. Luke 17:21 : Luke 17:23
4. Luke 17:22 : Matt 9:15; Mark 2:20; Luke 5:35

The text says that the Kingdom is among us but it does say that we don't need a church to get to God. We can go to God through Jesus. The point of the church is not to be our mediator with God. 

And most importantly, he said that we can do the works that he did, even greater works.

Jesus did say that we can do what he did  and greater but he did not say that we could do it apart from Him.


For those who are willing to question the official image, the conclusion is clear. The official image is meant to make you dependent upon an outer church and its human hierarchy, preventing you from discovering Christ within yourself. 

Christ is not within you by default.  You can only come to Jesus if you are drawn by the Father. (John 6:44)

The reality of what Jesus taught and did is that he came to Earth as an example, not as an exception. 

The Bible tells us that all have sinned and fallen short of God's standards, but Jesus. He was without sin. 

Jesus does not want to be elevated to some superior status that sets him apart from us. He wants us to see him as an example who came to show us that we have the same potential that he demonstrated.

Jesus claimed to be God and said

 ²³But he continued, "You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. 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."- John 8:23-24

You can't get higher than that.

The real message of the real Jesus is that we too have the potential – an inherent potential given to us by God, a potential that no power on Earth can take away from us (unless we let them) – to manifest the Christ consciousness. WE TOO CAN BECOME THE CHRIST! 

Okay here is the heresy. There is only one Christ. One Lord.  One Messiah. One Annointed One. Not me. Not you. Only Jesus of Nazareth. It is only By him we are saved!

Through the Christ consciousness we then become the open doors for the power of God, as Jesus demonstrated. We too can become sons and daughters of God, letting God work through us and bringing his kingdom into manifestation on Earth.
As Jesus said, "The kingdom of God is at hand!" Let us simply walk away from the official fraudulent image of Jesus and embrace him as our brother, teacher an wayshower. Let us take back our power to be who we really are and become instruments for bringing a better society into manifestation, a society built on the reality of Christ rather than the many illusions of anti-christ.

These are the words of the Anti-christ. Jesus DID NOT teach this. What did Jesus say?

 ¹⁶"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. ¹⁷For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. - John 3:16-17

Real Jesus, Knowing the real Jesus

Brennon's Thoughts: Quick Concise Explanation of John 6 and 10

I know I'm late with this one, but i don't think I can add anything to the discussion. I think the post and the comments are important and iof you are interested in human free will and responsibility when it comes to salvation and day-to-day life, then  I would highly recommend thisd post and the comments.

Brennon's Thoughts: Quick Concise Explanation of John 6 and 10

I heart Comics! | Godless Girl

I am amazed how many people see God. Often when people object to the existence of God, its because of a misconception. They can't possibly know who it is they are rejecting. This image, while funny in some respects does not match the God as revealed in the Bible. This is a character that I completely agree does not exist. It makes God seem like the wizard in Wizard of Oz - a small man who only pretends to be all powerful using special effects. A god who creates ourt of nothing woould have no need for any of those dials. And anyone who considers this a good representation of the Bible, does not understand who God is or why he decreed things like diet. Isn't it interesting that the diet instituted is a good one? One that doctors prescribe today. If this ia human document how did the author know? Did he/she get lucky? Nope. God told Moses.

I heart Comics! | Godless Girl

YouTube - Adam and Eve

Here is a neat animated clip of the story of Adam and Eve from the beginning of the Bible.

YouTube - Adam and Eve

Are Black People Cursed?

I found a tweet from an atheist containing a link to with the title "Are Black People Cursed?". I immediately thought that I wouldn't like this because the tweeter is an atheist and I wasn't sure what the intent of the tweet was. I am glad I read the post. It's a Slide presentation showing how no way can you get slavery, racism, or that black folk are cursed by God out of the Bible. I agreed with almost everything in the presentation and I recommend that everyone read it and give the information and view point presented some thought.

Are Black People Cursed?

View more presentations from Pastor Irby Johnson.

Are Black People Cursed?

YouTube - Jesus animation - John 14

There is a member of YouTube how has been using 3D animation software (Poser and CrazyTalk) to make life-like movies of people reading Bible verses. Here is Jesus speaking John 14. I love this. It is extremely well done!




Here is the actual text  of John 14 (NIV)

YouTube - Jesus animation - John 14

Can This Condom Keep You From Being Raped? « TheGloss

What does it say about men that women have to go to the extreme of  wearing a female condom that cuts into a man when he forces himself on her?  It's a shame!  I hate it.  I mean "No" should be good enough. a woamn has the right to be able to say "No" and that should be respected. 

Can This Condom Keep You From Being Raped? « TheGloss

Richard Dawkins vs. The Pope | True Freethinker

Mariano has posted a link to an article about Richard Dawkins calling for an investigation in order to determine how much the Pope knew about the flood of sexual misconduct of Roman catholic priests. I haven't got a problem with that. but I've got to wonder why Richard Dawkins is outraged. I mean is it on;y wrong when clergy do it? Mariano said:

Now, is the outrage and call for arrest really coming from the very same Richard Dawkins who argues that some are merely “gentle pedophiles” and that too much is made of some cases of pedophilia??

I agree with Mariano. I hate double standards. Raping children is wrong no matter who does it and under all circumstances.

Richard Dawkins vs. The Pope | True Freethinker

New Season, New Blood, New Warriors

Okay, I have found out when the next season of Deadliest Warrior starts - Tuesday, April 20, 2010 and I can't wait. I know the show has got some flack for not being historical or scientific "enough" but I like it. The history presented agrees with other sources I have learned and to me the most questionable science is how the computer program that is used to simulate the fights seems a little vague and hand wavy but I still can't wait to see the next shows.
Warrior match-ups for Season 2!


SWAT vs. GSG-9

Attila the Hun vs. Alexander the Great

Aztec Jaguar vs. Zande Warrior

Jesse James Gang vs. Al Capone Gang
Persian Immortal vs. Celt

Roman Centurion vs. India's Rajput Warrior

Somali Pirate vs. Medellin Cartel

Nazi SS vs. Viet Cong

KGB vs. CIA

Vlad the Impaler vs. Sun Tzu

Ming Warrior vs. Musketeer

Comanche vs. Mongol

Navy Seal vs. Israeli Commando


New Season, New Blood, New Warriors

YouTube - The Authenticity of the Bible - Debate

This was really interesting. This was an three-on-three discussion. Dr. Jamal Badawi, Mr. Hamza Abdul Malik, Dr. Hussein Morsi argued against the authenticity of the Bible. Dr. Gleason Archer, Dr. Robert Douglas, Mr. Keith Smith argued for the authenticity of the Bible. I think that the debate was weighted towards the Muslims but the Christians on the panel did a great job responding in most respects. I really liked this debate because when most Christian opponents bring up "problems" in the Bible, these things are almost never addressed. In this debate there were some responses. I would have liked to have seen more interaction between the two sides. One thing that came up for me is why the Muslim's on the panel's double standard? I mean why is it okay to accuse Christians of monkeying around with the Bible and putting words in Jesus' mouth that He never said yet deny the possibility of the same thing with Muhammad and the Qur'an? I will go as far as saying that Muslims can make the same claim about the Qur'an as I do as the Bible: That we know exactly what the Bible and the Qur'an was meant to say. That being given, which one is the Word of God. They conflict. They both can't be completely true. You have to either accept one or deny both as the Word of God. As for me, I believe the Bible is the Word of God because it corresponds with reality better. I say this because the Bible and History say that Jesus was crucified and died but the Qur'an says He wasn't. What?  That does not add up.




YouTube - The Authenticity of the Bible

Confident Christianity: The Merits of Debate

Christian Apologist Mary Jo Sharp, who has a couple of good successful debates behind her, has written a great post about what debate is and it's place in apologetics and ministry. It's a good article. I agree with her.

Confident Christianity: The Merits of Debate

YouTube - Jesus Walks on Water - Anime Jesus

Here is an interesting video I found on YouTube. An animation of Jesus walking on water using a Japanese animated (Anime) style. So why did Jesus walk on water? Was He showing off? Was He just trying to get to the boat?  Jesus was validating his deity. Job 9:8 says:

He [God] alone stretches out the heavens
       and treads on the waves of the sea.

You can read the accounts of Jesus walking on water at the following links:

Matthew 14:22-36
Mark 6:45-56
John 6:16-24



YouTube - Jesus Walks on Water - Anime Jesus

Dr. Robert Price's Reason for Accepting the CRI Debate Challenge

As you may already know that Dr. James White is debating Dr. Robert M. Price very soon. This debate will be important because Price is one of the rare scholars who completely deny that all of scripture and just about all claims of Christianity, period. He must be answered because he's not a stupid, uneducated, ignorant, nor inarticulate by human standards. He's not even mean. He doesn't seem demonic at all. People like him seem to be reasonable and willing to discuss the issue. Thankfully in one of his most recent blog posts Dr White quotes Price about why he has accepted this debate and how he thinks of debates in general. I think that it is important that you read this post so you can see stupid a mind can become without God.

Most importantly, Dr. White has given his own reasons for doing this debate and all the debates he engages in:

I listen to the Crossans and Ehrmans and Prices of the world not because I enjoy the exercise (I would much rather be listening to something uplifting and edifying), but because I seek to honor the truth, and the only way to do that is to do the work necessary to accurately represent your opponent in debate, for the benefit of the widest possible audience. So while Dr. Price will be seeking to "reach" only a small sliver of the audience in an attempt to push them over into agnosticism, I will be seeking to reach a much wider group: I wish to reach the unbelievers by demonstrating that the faith can stand in the presence of radical unbelief without compromise; I wish to reach the believers by modeling how they may provide an answer to those attacking their faith. And of course, another major difference between us is that Dr. Price has only the weapon of his own doubt to use. I have the Spirit of God, who raised Jesus from the dead, to make the truth to come alive in the hearts of His people.

I agree with Dr. White. Debates don't change everyone but it does help some people and it's a tool God uses.If only only one person is ultimately saved through a debate it is worth it,.



Dr. Robert Price's Reason for Accepting the CRI Debate Challenge

Apologetics 315: Terminology Tuesday: Exegesis, Eisegesis

Here is a great post from Apologetics 315! It defines "exegesis" and "eisegesis". This is exactly the definition I use asnd I wish people wouldf do exegesis and not eisegesis.


Apologetics 315: Terminology Tuesday: Exegesis, Eisegesis

Apologetics 315: Historical Reliability of Jesus' Resurrection MP3 Audio by Jürgen Spieß

Brian Auten has been a blessing once again. He has posted a lecture of a German historian arguing for the resurrection. I am grateful for this because a lot of times people like Bart Ehrman try to say that professional historians deny Jesus' Resurrection I usually point to Paul Maier as a credible historian but Brian has helped me by being able to point out another. I fid it interesting that his arguments are similar to William Lane Craig's and Gary Habermas' presentations. Here is Brian's descriptions.

Jürgen Spieß (PhD in Ancient History) presents this lecture on the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus. This talk (given at the European Leadership Forum, and hosted by bethinking.org) covers the importance of the resurrection, historical research, historical sources, and the evidences for the resurrection

Apologetics 315: Historical Reliability of Jesus' Resurrection MP3 Audio by Jürgen Spieß

In Defense of the Faith Apologetic Ministry » Blog Archive » Evans vs. Ehrman: Does the New Testament Misquote Jesus?

A few days ago I posted this debate but now here is the video.




In Defense of the Faith Apologetic Ministry » Blog Archive » Evans vs. Ehrman: Does the New Testament Misquote Jesus?

Positive Atheism's Big List of Richard Dawkins Quotations part 1

Richard Dawkins via last.fm

This is first in a series of blog posts where I would like to take a quotation of  Richard Dawkins and examine it. What I hope to do is stir discussion. If anyone think i'm being unfair or taking something out of context, they can correct me in the comments. The quotes will come from the following link and in no particular order:

Positive Atheism's Big List of Richard Dawkins Quotations

What has happened is that genetics has become a branch of information technology. It is pure information. It's digital information. It's precisely the kind of information that can be translated digit for digit, byte for byte, into any other kind of information and then translated back again. This is a major revolution. I suppose it's probably "the" major revolution in the whole history of our understanding of ourselves. It's something would have boggled the mind of Darwin, and Darwin would have loved it, I'm absolutely sure.
-- Richard Dawkins, Life: A Gene-Centric View Craig Venter & Richard Dawkins: A Conversation in Munich (Moderator: John Brockman) "This event was a continuation of the Edge 'Life: What a Concept!' meeting in August, 2008." [sic]

I like this. I think Dawkins does understand how truly revolutionary genetics truly is. What amazes me is how much like our digital technology is but on a much more complex level. My question is...where does it come from?  Dawkins believe that it was natural process of evolution...blind and unguided. How? It's like saying Windows 7 evolved from Windows 3.11 tom Windows 95 to Windows 98 to Windows 2000 to Windows XP (Millennium and Vista being dead ends). Does that make sense? Or how about the evolution form 8 bit Nintendo to the Wii? Code does not write itself.