Friday, January 7, 2011

God Questions: An Atheist & Christian Dialogue - Apologetics 315

Brian Auten posted links to a dialogue between

an American Atheist Professor Carl Stecher and English Philosopher Peter S. Williams in 2001-2002. 

They discuss the question that always comes up about God. Follow the link below so that you can read exchanges on:

• Introduction
• Morality and the Biblical God
• The Problem of Evil
• Cosmological and Design Arguments
• Some Questions about Jesus
• Desire & Religious Experience
• Heaven and Hell


God Questions: An Atheist & Christian Dialogue - Apologetics 315
Enhanced by Zemanta

Arrogant Christianity? MP3 Audio by Tom Gilson - Apologetics 315

Brian Auten posted another gem recently. Here is a lecture by Tom Gilson discussing Christian arrogance. Brian wrote the following in his introduction:

Are Christians arrogant when we say we know the truth? Is it morally acceptable for us to say we have access to truth that applies to every person? Or are we being offensive and rude, trying to impose our version of truth on everyone else?

This addresses one of popular objections to Christianity. I've heard it a lot from comedian Bill Maher. This is definitely a lecture worth listening to. It intrigues me because the objection presupposes that morality and truth are relative. If they are relative how can you condemn anyone for being arrogant? Calling someone "arrogant" is making a negative claim about a person and they know it.

Arrogant Christianity? MP3 Audio by Tom Gilson - Apologetics 315
Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday, January 6, 2011

Blind Faith is not Christian Faith | Athanatos Christian Apologetics Ministry

Recently, Anthony Horvath posted a great article detailing how blind faith is not the same kind of Faith God expects from us. I think it's a shame that so many confuse the two!

Blind Faith is not Christian Faith | Athanatos Christian Apologetics Ministry
Enhanced by Zemanta

Islam and Christianity A Common Word: Biblical & Quranic approach to Peace & Violence Shabir Ally & John Gilchrist


Thegrandverbalizer has posted a debate between Shabir Ally and John Gilchrist on the different approaches to Peach and Violence from Muslim and Christian perspectives. I think debates are useful because people who don't share the same point of view can put their ideas on the table for public examination making things clear to each debater and those who watch and listen to the debate - or at least that is how it should work.







Islam and Christianity A Common Word: Biblical & Quranic approach to Peace & Violence Shabir Ally & John Gilchrist
Enhanced by Zemanta

Wednesday, January 5, 2011

THE APOLOGETIC FRONT: Atheist Michael Shermer discusses creation with AIG biologist Georgia Purdom

Mike FelkerMike Felker has posted a video in which Michael Shermer interviewed biologist Georgia Purdom who works for Answers in Genesis> I agree with Michael that it is a very interesting discussion about creaton - no name calling or insults. It is most definitely how all discussions should go. We should be able to disagree without being disagreeable. I'm shocked at Shermer's behavior because I've never thought of him as being able to carry on such a conversation in such a manner. Glad I was wrong about that. I still don't think the Biblical and scientific evidence supports a young earth but I definitely agree that God created all of it.At the same time it could have taken 6 seconds, 6 days, or 4.5 billion years - whatever God wanted to do.





THE APOLOGETIC FRONT: Atheist Michael Shermer discusses creation with AIG biologist Georgia Purdom
Enhanced by Zemanta

Refutation of Zeitgeist MP3 Audio - Apologetics 315

Brian Auten has posted a podcast in which the host does a great of explaining why the Zeitgeist movie is wrong. I liked the way he explained it and i agree with him. I felt the same way when I watched it.Follow the link to Apologetics 315.


Refutation of Zeitgeist MP3 Audio - Apologetics 315
Enhanced by Zemanta

Man's Free Will

Here is a video of Pastor John Henderson explaining that men have free will. Here is the introduction posted with the video.

Calvinists and Hard Shells do not Agree with this Video. If you are either, please do not post any hateful or harmful comments. Thank you.
-We firmly take the position that Man indeed does have Free Will and is NOT predestined to go To Hell or Heaven Before They are even Born. Does God Have Foreknowledge of What Choices each individual is going to make before they are even Created? Absolutely, He is Sovereign and Praise God He had a Redemption Plan for all of man to Reconcile with Him in His Son Jesus Christ!!
!

I want to first point out that I agree with the statement "Does God Have Foreknowledge of What Choices each individual is going to make before they are even Created? Absolutely, He is Sovereign and Praise God He had a Redemption Plan for all of man to Reconcile with Him in His Son Jesus Christ!!!" Unfortunately, the Bible does not support the definition of Free Will that Henderson is using. And it does say that we are all deserving of hell before we are even born. Look at the video and then lets unpack the statements to see if we can agree that there is no predestination to heaven.





I found the arguments unconvincing. I'm not a five-point Calvinist because I have problems reconciling "l" - "limited atonement" with a couple of scriptures Henderson does bring up. The other doctrines of grace - "Total depravity", "Unconditional Election", "Irresistible grace", and "Perseverance of the saints" have strong Biblical backing.

Here are the points to consider:
1. Pastor Henderson said that Election is unto salvation several times. He makes a difference between election and selection. I don't understand how they can be separated. If you elect someone for something you are making a selection.

Consider Romans 8:32-34 as an example:

32He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?
33Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth.
34Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us. - KJV
32 He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all—how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things? 33 Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies. 34 Who then is the one who condemns? No one. Christ Jesus who died—more than that, who was raised to life—is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us. - NIV

The word "ejklektovß" which was translated "elect" or "chosen" refers to who? The ones who believe. Who are they chosen by? God. The word was used in the KJV 23 times and always translated "chosen" or "elect". Reference

2. Pastor Henderson says that scripture teaches that man has a choice. He refers to John 5:40.

   36 “I have testimony weightier than that of John. For the works that the Father has given me to finish—the very works that I am doing—testify that the Father has sent me. 37 And the Father who sent me has himself testified concerning me. You have never heard his voice nor seen his form, 38 nor does his word dwell in you, for you do not believe the one he sent. 39 You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me, 40 yet you refuse to come to me to have life.
   41 “I do not accept glory from human beings, 42 but I know you. I know that you do not have the love of God in your hearts. 43 I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not accept me; but if someone else comes in his own name, you will accept him. 44 How can you believe since you accept glory from one another but do not seek the glory that comes from the only God?
   45 “But do not think I will accuse you before the Father. Your accuser is Moses, on whom your hopes are set. 46 If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. 47 But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?” - John 5:36-46

Jesus is directly talking to the unbelieving Jewish leaders and says that they refuse to come to Him because  they don;t love God in their hearts, He doesn't deal with their ability to come to him. A person who does not love God is unable to believe and come to Jesus but can't love God if they are not drawn by God (John 6:44)

3. Pastor Henderson refers to John 6:35-37 to explain that no one who comes Jesus will be refused

35 Then Jesus declared, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty. 36 But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe. 37 All those the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away.

Given that Jesus says that all that the father gives to Him comes it makes sense that he will never drive them off. Further, if you don't come, then the Father didn't give you. Let us not forget John 6:43-44


 43 “Stop grumbling among yourselves,” Jesus answered. 44 “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day.


We cannot come with the the Father drawing us. More than that, we don't even want to come unless the father draws us.

4. If you were elected from eternty past, why would you need to believe in Christ

 You need to believe in Jesus Christ because that is how God set up salvation.


39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all those he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. 40 For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.” - John 6:39-40

5. Pastor Henderson then references 1 Timothy 2:4 - pointing out that God wills all men to be saved

 1 I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people— 2 for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. 3 This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. - 1 Timothy 1-4
I admit it. I haven't really heard a good response justifying limited atonement and reconciling this passage. The way I understand the passage is that God desires that all people to be saved. However we know form other passages that not everyone will be saved or who will be saved.. More study is definitely needed on my part.

6. God so loved the world not just the elect.
Pastor Henderson is correct John3:16 does not say god only loves the elect or that Jesus came for only the elect. then whole world John 3:16 is one of these verses that everyone knows but do you kknow what the succeeding verses say? They offer clarification and context..


14 Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, 15 that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.”
 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. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. 19 This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20 Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed.- John 3:14-20
Check it out. Jesus is far from alleging that the whole world is saved. He tells us that only those who believe are saved. Further saved or not - God loves the world. Jesus even tells us what holds us back from belief - loving darkness instead of the gift God has given us - Jesus.
 
7. Pastor Henderson said that Calvinism denys men's responsibility to God for our sins. He seems to think that if our decision to believe has its source in God it takes away the accountability. I disagree. Remember the "T" in"TULIP"? "T" is "Total Depravity" which mean that man is hopelessly  helpless without God -indebted and enslaved to sin and hostile to God. We hate God because of what we are and who He is. I think the KJV translation makes it really clear:


 5For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
 6For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
 7Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
 8So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
 9But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
 10And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
 11But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.- Romans 8:5-11

8. Jesus gave himself as a ransom for all

 5For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
 6Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
 7Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, and lie not;) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity. - 1 Timothy 2:5-7

Amen. Again, I'm not going up against that. One way to begin looking at it is that I don't think there is any Christian who would deny that Jesus is the savior of all because the is no one else by which we can be saved. Dr. James White bring up the question does Jesus mediate on the behalf of those who are in hell or for those who deny Him, given that hew knows who's saved? I've never heard an anti-Calvinist give a good answer to this one. The truth is that God does sometime bless people who constantly and consistently deny Him and hate Him - knowing that they are going to go hell.  And maybe his blood sacrifice covered them too but because they don't believe they will never get the gift applied to them..We may never know.

9. Pastor Henderson referred to 2 Peter 3:9 to appeal to the idea that God do0esn't want anyone to go hell so no one can ca be predestined,


9The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance

I think people like Dr James White bring up  an important point.  Who is it that the verse says is not desired to perish?  Given that God's patience is described to be directed towards us - believers - it must be saying that God doses not want believers - to perish. That's not saying he wants non-believers to perish, only that the passage cannot be applied to all humanity. I've heard Dr. James White apply this logic to understand 1 Timothy 2:4 in a much similar way. I think it works for 2 Peter 3:9 but not very well for 1 Timothy 2:4

10. Pastor Henderson said that he opposes Calvinism because it  makes salvation depended on God..What is wrong with salvation being depended on God? Who better to trust your eternal soul with?

11.Pastor Henderson quoted 1 John 2:2 to explain that Jesus is the propitiation for the whole world.

And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

Here is the problem. I think that Pastor Henderson would agree with Substitutionary Atonement  - the doctrine that Jesus took our place and received the wrath of god we deserved in our place. That is why scripture says Jesus is our propitiation - satisfying the wrath - doing for us what we could not do for ourselves. Was that for the whole world or just the elect? It is through that atonement, we have peace with God. The unrepentant sinner does not have true peace with God or anyone else - not even themselves. There is a lot more going on this passage. than mot people think. More study and prayer is definitely required..
 
12. Pastor Henderson said  that God has elected to save those who choose to believe in Christ. He said that it's up to that individual's will. My question is given the fallen nature of human beings, how do you even begin to do that withoout God? Scripture says, you can't.

14. Pastor Henderson said that God has chosen to save those who choose Him, If ?I would sum up the message he is making. I don't think that is what the Gospel is.  It puts the emphasis on man and not where it belongs. We love God because he first loved us. When Jesus told his disciples " I have chosen you," (John 6:70) I believe that it's just a true for every believer as it was for the disciples - even Judas Iscariot (but I'll leave that one alone (John 17)

15.Pastor Henderson said that if man is not responsible or accountable to God by his will or choices that he makes, then God is unfair to punish a man for something he can't prevent. I kind of like to know who was it that said the we are not accountable or responsible. God said we are.  End of story.  The objection reminds me of the objection Paul raised in his letter to the Romans.


 19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” 20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’” 21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?
 22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory— 24 even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?- Romans 9:19-24

Dr James White might have a point: if you are raising the same objection raised against an apostle in scripture, you might wanna check your theology. Aslo to be fair, Pastor Henderson does not refer to himself as an Arminian which is why I used the term anti-Calvinist. The underlying object I'm hearing here is that Henderson seems to think that Calvinists are saying that a person can want to be saved but won't be because they are not one of the elect. That's impossible. You don't wanna be saved unless you are one of the elect. Another problem seems to be the thought that if you are predestined for heaven then others must be predestined for hell. I don't think so because hell is default. That's where you are going just by definition without Christ - no one is morally neutral or clean (I'm not going there on babies or the mentally challenged -that is for another post).I don't think it is a conclusion we should draw from scripture. We should preach the Gospel like we have been told to do it and let God handle after-life travel itineraries.


But in your hearts revere 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, - 1 Peter 3:15
Enhanced by Zemanta

Tuesday, January 4, 2011

FacePalm of the Day #43 - Islam and Christianity A Common Word: The Demise of the Trinity

I think it's important to listen to views that oppose your own and consider their validity as much as you can. It's important to check to see if what you think is true is true or not.  It is important to not let traditions get in the way of finding the truth.  When I saw this video posted on thegrandverbalizer's blog, I resisted the facepalm that I knew was coming because maybe the man in the video might have convincing evidence that might show me my understanding of God is all wrong. Maybe he'd be able to demonstrate that there is no way Jesus could be God. Then I watched the video, It does nothing to challenge the Trinitarian understanding of God.  However the man in the video is right that if the Trinity is not true we should not teach it or believe it. The problem is he didn't show that it was false. Muslims and Atheists not believing it is no big deal  because they reject the cores of Christianity anyway. No surprise there.  I find it interesting that someone can claim to be a Christian and not explain why they think it is wrong. To be fair, maybe the point of the video was not to show that the Trinity is not real but instead to explain what it means because it's not true. However, the man seems to just assume that the Trinity is not true and build his video on that claim.  Thegrandverbalizer seems to think that this is enough to just throw away the doctrine and not believe it.  I would tell people to not be so fast in that conclusion. What evidence does the man in the video have that the Trinity is not true? Does he accept the Bible as the infallible word of God? I'd bet he doesn't.. I was expecting much more than that. Follow the link below to see the video and the link below that to see the post from thegrandverbalizer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zgDRGNtbTs&feature=related

Islam and Christianity A Common Word: The Demise of the Trinity
Enhanced by Zemanta

Apologist Interview: Stephen Notman - Apologetics 315

Yesterday, Brian Auten posed a real gem of an interview with Stephen Notman. Stephen was a formal atheist and he explains how God revealed himself to him and why and how he does Apologetics. I also have to agree with Wintery Knight comment about how sanctification is an on-going process. I know people who were delivered from drugs and alcohol and promiscuity and smoking. When they got saved God took the very desire from them . They didn't do rehab or see a psychologist. However, I know people who are saved but went they through recovery programs. It's all God. The ones who didn't go through rehab are not more saved than the ones who did. It's a different process for everyone. No matter what you are miraculously delivered from, there are still many more thing that you will struggle with and will grow to overcome. Other things you will struggle with until you leave this earth. Just like Stephen says in the interview being a christian isn't easy. Jesus never promised anyone that it would be. Not one of us is perfect but we should be all tying to.be obedient to the one who saved us  Please follow the link below and here this wonderful testimony about just how God is.

Apologist Interview: Stephen Notman - Apologetics 315
Enhanced by Zemanta

Regis Philbin Smacks Nicki Minaj's Butt (VIDEO)

Recently Nicki Minaj appeared on Regis Philbin and Kelly Ripa's daytime talk show. After she sang one of her tunes, Regis Philbin smacked her on her butt. I don't think she liked it and it bothered her. The Huffington Post (from where I got this story) asks its readers to weigh in about if it was "inappropriate". Last I checked, if a man smacks a woman on the butt and makes off color jokes about how she is dressed and it's unwelcomed, it was called "sexual harassment". If it was Taylor Swift or Jessica Simpson, I think Philbin would be profusely apologizing for his behavior. Why? Just because Nicki does hip hop music does not mean she should be degraded in anyway. Is it just the music? Or is it latent racism? The racism is not only on the part of Philbin, but also on the part of the Huffington Post who value Minaj so little that such behavior may be only "inappropriate".




Regis Philbin Smacks Nicki Minaj's Butt (VIDEO)
Enhanced by Zemanta

Monday, January 3, 2011

Prescription or Description? Deuteronomy 20

I recently posted a link to an article by Anthony Horvath on how to read the Bible.  Ryan Anderson had an interesting comment

I will say, in regards to the section on "Prescription versus Description", he's right in theory, but seems to be glossing over the fact that some of those less than flattering things were in fact prescribed by God, not merely a description of bad Hebrew behavior.
Notice, to his credit, he tacitly agrees that Horvath is right that sometimes some texts are taken out of context where people say that the Bible is commanding violence  when it really describes something that will or did take place not giving a command to do it. However he then suggests that God does command that his followers do "less than flattering things" (read evil and morally bankrupt). I challenged Ryan Anderson  to give an example of such a text and I also asked that he provide a response explaining why the standard response do little in explaining why God said what he said. Ryan Anderson responded as follows:

Deut 20 comes to mind, but that's assuming you believe Moses was actually speaking for a God.

Notice he didn't interact with the reasons we give to understand Deuteronomy 20, but he did provide an example. I expect he really doesn't mean the whole chapter. The verses people seem to have a problem with are verses 14-17. They ask "How could God be moral if he allows women to be raped and their men killed? How can God be good if He tells Israel to kill all the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites? However let's look at the whole chapter in its historical and theological contexts and see what it shows of us as God's character because God - YHWH - did speak through Moses.
1 When you go to war against your enemies and see horses and chariots and an army greater than yours, do not be afraid of them, because the LORD your God, who brought you up out of Egypt, will be with you.2 When you are about to go into battle, the priest shall come forward and address the army. 3 He shall say: “Hear, Israel: Today you are going into battle against your enemies. Do not be fainthearted or afraid; do not panic or be terrified by them. 4 For the LORD your God is the one who goes with you to fight for you against your enemies to give you victory.”
The context of the chapter is the rules Israel was supposed to follow when they waged war. God starts with words of encouragement. Most of times through all the recorded wars in the Bible they are outmatched in almost every conceivable way. The priest is to remind the people that God is with them. The fact that theses are enemies presupposes the context of Israel acting in it's own defense and not as aggressors trying to take what does not belong to them. God is always with you - no matter the challenge.
 5 The officers shall say to the army: “Has anyone built a new house and not yet begun to live in it? Let him go home, or he may die in battle and someone else may begin to live in it. 6 Has anyone planted a vineyard and not begun to enjoy it? Let him go home, or he may die in battle and someone else enjoy it. 7 Has anyone become pledged to a woman and not married her? Let him go home, or he may die in battle and someone else marry her.” 8 Then the officers shall add, “Is anyone afraid or fainthearted? Let him go home so that his fellow soldiers will not become disheartened too.” 9 When the officers have finished speaking to the army, they shall appoint commanders over it.
How is this for raising an army? If you had just gotten property, about to get married, or just too scared - you was exempt from serving. I'm willing that mast Israelites would not take fear option to avoid the embarrassment. But that does not sound like something people do. In most drafts you have to go no matter what you feel or your personal circumstances. God is caring - your government is not.
 10 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. 11 If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. 12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. 13 When the LORD your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the LORD your God gives you from your enemies. 15 This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby.
When dealing with other nations, they were first to make an offer of peace. Give them the chance to surrender. If the enemy surrenders they weren't  supposed to kill anyone. If they resist, kill all the men. All educate people know that Slavery in ancient Israel was not the same as slavery Europeans used in their imperialistic crusades from 1492 AD onward. Not only could you get your freedom you were never to supposed to be thought of as being less than human. I'm not saying that people did not treat their slaves like cattle in ancient times also, but you can't equate the two systems. You weren't enslaved because of your skin color in ancient times.  As for the women given as spoils of war - where is rape implied? Where is forced marriage? No one should be so naive to think that it never happened in Israel, but it was not sanctioned. Given how the Torah says men should treat their wives, the rights wives had - unprecedented in the region - I would find it hard to believe that many of the women would join the community willingly. It's not in this text (See Deuteronomy 21:10-14), but the women were supposed to be given time to mourn their family and friends if they lost them. You could not just marry them the next day. And you you did marry such a woman you could not just discard her like garbage when you were through with her - you know like men do today - running around from bed to bed leaving broken hearts, live, and children in their wake.
 16 However, in the cities of the nations the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. 17 Completely destroy them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the LORD your God has commanded you. 18 Otherwise, they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshiping their gods, and you will sin against the LORD your God.

Thing were different with the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites Why? God said that Israel was going to be His instrument of wrath and judgment on them for the evils and sins that they did. Yes, God is love and mercy, but he is also a god of justice and wrath. Did they deserve such judgment? Yes. They practiced human sacrifice of their children and babies to idols! God gave them 430 years to change and they refused (Genesis 15:12-14). Are we any better than they no? We eliminate babies and neglect or elderly all for the sake of convenience. Do you really think we, as a people and nation, won't have to pay for that? I don't think so. Verse 18 tell us why Israel were told to destroy everything and everyone. God knew that if they didn't, Israel would end up doing the same things as the people they displaced. This is exactly what happened.

 19 When you lay siege to a city for a long time, fighting against it to capture it, do not destroy its trees by putting an ax to them, because you can eat their fruit. Do not cut them down. Are the trees people, that you should besiege them? 20 However, you may cut down trees that you know are not fruit trees and use them to build siege works until the city at war with you falls.
Finally, we see God telling Israel that we should never use up natural resources irresponsibly to fuel a war.

We see God cares about His people, their enemies, and his creation. I find it difficult to see what is so immoral in what He told them to do. I find it amazing that Ryan Anderson defends the relativity of morality  but refuses to give God the same right to define morality that he says everyone has even when they are in conflict. I suspect the reason why is because, by definition , God's moral standards would have to supersede all others because that is what being God means. Therefore one who denies or doubts the existence of such a being can't afford to allow for that being's moral standards to have weight in their lives. Doesn't matter if they give it weight or not - that is the standard by which we will be judged apart from Jesus Christ who was given as our propitiation because none of  us could ever hope to measure up to that absolute standard.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Sunday, January 2, 2011

Truthbomb Apologetics: Article: If You Cannot Scientifically Prove Your Belief, Is It Meaningless? by Paul Copan

Chad posted an interesting article by Paul Copan about science and proving your beliefs. Follow the link to his blog to get the link to Dr Copan's article.

Truthbomb Apologetics: Article: If You Cannot Scientifically Prove Your Belief, Is It Meaningless? by Paul Copan
Enhanced by Zemanta

Sunday Quote: Tim Keller on Doubting Your Doubts - Apologetics 315

Brian Auten has posted a quote from Tim Keller about the fact that people should be just as willing to examine their doubts about Christianity as they are in demanding proof for why they should believe. I find the quote very appropriate given the number of instances of most atheists attempting to dodge the challenge of proving what they believe by saying that the burden of proof is on solely on the believer. They balk and backpedal saying that they are not making any claims as to what is real and what isn't real. To say that there is no God - no creator - and the Bible is wrong is making a claim about reality just as much as it is to say that the Bible is true, there is a God, and Jesus rose from the dead. Extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidence is their mantra - except when it come time to show that they right. Here is what Tim Keller said:

"The only way to doubt Christianity rightly and fairly is to discern the alternate belief under each of your doubts and then ask yourself what reasons you have for believing it. How do you know your belief is true? It would be inconsistent to require more justification for Christian belief than you do for your own, but that is frequently what happens. In fairness you must doubt your doubts. My thesis is that if you come to recognize the beliefs on which your doubts about Christianity are based, and if you seek as much proof for those beliefs as you seek from Christians for theirs – you will discover that your doubts are not as solid as they first appeared."

- Tim Keller, The Reason for God, pg. xix



Sunday Quote: Tim Keller on Doubting Your Doubts - Apologetics 315
Enhanced by Zemanta

Saturday, January 1, 2011

The Inarguable Sovereignty of God: Romans 9 and the Arminian Objection

Jamin Hubner has written a great article answering objections Arminians raise against Calvinist interpretations of Roman 9. Check it out!

The Inarguable Sovereignty of God: Romans 9 and the Arminian Objection
Enhanced by Zemanta

Tips that Atheists can use for Understanding the Bible | Athanatos Christian Apologetics Ministry

Anthony Horvath has posted a very interesting article. He summarizes key information about the Bible that many people don't know which leads them to misunderstand what the Bible says.

Tips that Atheists can use for Understanding the Bible | Athanatos Christian Apologetics Ministry
Enhanced by Zemanta

Friday, December 31, 2010

Radio Free Geneva on Today's Dividing Line

Yesterday, Dr White did another "Free Radio Geneva" edition on the Dividing Line you can find link at his blog post linked below. I like these programs because he honestly tries to interact with folk who disagree with him but won't interact with him. Well everyone has to deal with that, I suppose.

Radio Free Geneva on Today's Dividing Line

Calvinistic Cartoons: Classics #10

This one is too funny not to share

Calvinistic Cartoons: Classics #10

Thursday, December 30, 2010

Responding to Saint Brian the Godless

One who calls himself Saint Brian the Godless has been trying to help Ryan Anderson out trying to stand against one of my blog posts regarding Noah's ark and the flood. During the course of discussion, Saint Brian the Godless finally made this appeal against Christianity. Rather than just dash off a comment I decided to take a whole post truly dissect what he said because this is about what the Gospel truly is. Also I wanted to move away from the heat because in the midst of it I could respond in a mean, defensive way and I truly want this post to help others because I know there are many people who think the way he does. He said the following:

You were a child once, that did not know to believe in God. Then your parents taught you about God. They learned it from their parents, and so on, back two thousand years. It was always a lie. Right from the start. Yo cannot (WILL NOT) consider that, not ever. You've been taught so much FEAR and RESPECT and even LOVE for God, that you can't even consider the possibility that, at least as regards the Christian version of God, there is no such thing at all. Oh sure, maybe tere's some sort of deity, who am I to say... but it's EASY to see that whatever it may be it it exists, one thing it most certainly is NOT, is your God. Sorry. Too many contradictions. One thing even your God cannot do, is to contradict logic. A loving God, for instance, would never have created hell. Period. No, shut up, it's really PERIOD. Nor would he have bet with the devil and tortured Job, nor would he have done a thousand other things that the bible says that HE DID. The mere existence of the book of Leviticus, totally INVALIDATES your whole faith.
So, you're screwed here, believing in a total malicious, life-negating lie. Again, my condolences.

There are many things in this comment. Let's try to enumerate his points...seriously consider if he is making good points or not.None of these are new. I will list them and give a response to each one.

1. The only reason why I (or anyone) is a Christian is because of a tradition and upbringing

I was raised in a Christian househould, but not everyone who is a born-again Christian was raised in a Christian household or even in the Western world. Add to the fact that some are raised in just as a pious household as I and they turn their backs on God and you can see how this is really a fallacious and silly argument. Let me be clear I love God  because He has personally changed my mind and heart and saved me from my sins because of his grace and mercy and not because of anything good in me.

2, We never consider if Christianity is a lie.

Of course I've considered it and looked at other religions and thoughts people have but I can find nothing wrong or contradictory in the Bible and I have looked and searched. The reason why I know Jesus truly saved me from my sins is that He changed my life and sustains me. On top of that there really are evidences that support the Bible and anything that attempts to stand against it can easily be knocked down.

3. We accept the existence of God because of we have been taught fear and respect.

Again: I believe in God because he deserves my respect and loved me first. I thank my parents for modeling this life but if it wasn't for my own  relationship with my Creator it would mean precious little for me. When I stand before my Savior, I won't be judged by what parents did, didn't do, or taught me. I, like you, will only be judged by what we say and do.

4. If there is a god it's not the God of the Bible.

The Bible says that God is all-powerful and knows everything - who else fits the bill?

5. Too many contradictions.

Many folks make the claim that the Bible is full of contradictions but when they start to name them you can see that they really are misunderstandings or lies. 

6.  A loving God, for instance, would never have created hell. Period.

When people use this they define "love" as meaning that you can do whatever you want without retribution or punishment or discipline.One has to look no farther than my own generation to see that  raising children this way is not a good idea. This is not what love is. Good thing that God does not run the universe this way. I always wonder when people raise this objection do they know what God should do with those people who don't want to obey Him but instead do things their own way including hurting other people?  God has chosen to separate himself from them and quarantining them from those who will love Him.  What do you think should happen? I think that God is being just. If you reject God now, you wouldn't change your mind if you were in hell.

7.  Nor would he have bet with the devil and tortured Job,

Misunderstanding of what the Bible says. A "bet" means you don't know what the outcome is and God knew and was always in control. Job's life shows us that bad things can and do happen to good people.All this does is to try to argue from emotion without seriously considering what is being said. Look at Job's attitude. He thanked God for showing him more of  God himself. His relationship was deepened even thought he was not told why God allowed all He did to happen to Job. Suffering does indeed teach such lessons - like it or not.  Job's life demonstrates Romans 8:28-29


 28 And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who 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.- Romans 8:28-29

8,  Nor would he have done a thousand other things that the bible says that HE DID.

Notice the catch all statement here with no explanation or proof. or example. I would ask, what has God done that you have a problem with? Good thing God inspired Paul to answer this nearly 2000 years ago. 

 19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” 20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’” 21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?  - Romans 9:19-21

9. The mere existence of the book of Leviticus, totally INVALIDATES your whole faith.

Here is the question "how?".. Leviticus tells us a whole lot about the ancient sacrificial system.This system was symbolic and pointed to Jesus Christ. Leviticus totally does not invalidate my faith - Putting your faith in Christ fulfills and validate that system. Read Hebrews and here is another example:.


23 Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. 24 So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. 25 Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian. 

 I think it is plainly obvious that if God is truly who the Bible says God is and has done what God said  God has done, we should not just believe with our minds but love and trust God with our minds, bodies and souls.


Enhanced by Zemanta

The Bible illustration blog: Guest Bible Artist Interview #8 - Sergio Cariello

I am very familiar with Sergio Cariello's work. The man is an artistic genius and I own several comic books he drew. I'm glad to find out he is a Christian and has lent his considerable talents to the Action Bible. I sure plan to get a copy. This is great interview and you learn a lot about him, art, and how God can use art to bring glory to Himself. I found some videos regarding the Action Bible to show what I am excited about.








The Bible illustration blog: Guest Bible Artist Interview #8
Enhanced by Zemanta

I'm Not Sure I Believe in Limited Atonement!

And Here is why Dr. James White thinks we should:



I'm planning a fuller post working through this material but this is a good place to start.

I Believe in Limited Atonement!
Enhanced by Zemanta