IF315's Book Recommendations:

IF315's Book Recommendations

Thursday, January 31, 2013

How do You Choose a Religion?


By J.P. Moreland

Hey, I gotta question!" yelled a student from the back of the room. I was sharing the claims of Christ at a University of Massachusetts fraternity house when he interrupted me. "Yes, what is it?" I queried. "I think Jesus is great for you, but I know Buddhists and Muslims, and they're just as sincere as you are. And they think their views are true just like you do. There's no way a person can know his religion is the 'right' one, so the best thing to do is to just believe everyone's religion is true for them and not judge anyone."
Ever heard something like this? It's hard to believe you haven't. What should we make of these ideas? How should we respond? I think there is a good response to this viewpoint and I hope to provide it in what follows. But before I do, we should carefully note what seems to underlie such a claim. The student was assuming that there are no objective principles that, if applied to one's religious quest, would help one make the best, most rational choice of religious options. In the absence of such principles, any choice is either purely arbitrary or totally based on emotion or upbringing. In either case, such a choice would in no way put a person in a position to judge someone else's choice as being wrong.
Are there objective principles to guide one in choosing a religion? Indeed there are. I believe the following four principles should be used to guide one in choosing which religion he or she will follow and, if properly applied, I believe they will point to Christianity as the most rational choice.

Facts About Creation

Continue reading --->


Wednesday, January 30, 2013

Why Is Richard Dawkins So Popular?

"Richard Dawkins: A Simplistic and Silly Skeptic"
- Part 3 - 

(pt.3 of 3) Contrary to the common opinions of his devotees, Richard Dawkins is very unsophisticated and uninformed in his thinking.  Most notable in his lack of understanding of good rigorous philosophical reasoning.

Here, numerous philosophers offers some powerful and simple refutations to the silly claims that are made by the famouse British Biologist, in his recent book "The God Delusion".  What Dawkins claims is "his best knockdown argument" is actually a philosophical error and very incoherent.

Don't take my word for it.  Listen to Dr. William Lane Craig, one of the greatest Phd philosophers in the world today and his critiques the simplistic thinking of Dawkins and his intellectual devotees. 

It you are an atheist/agnostic because of what you have "learned" from men like Dawkins, I strongly encourage you to do some more rigorous research and investigation into the issues, and the fundamental questions of humanity.  

A great place to start this intellectual quest is www.reasonablefaith.org



Monday, January 28, 2013

Why We Raised Our Kids to Believe in God


Dear Dr. Craig,
Thank you for all the work you do in the name of Christ. I was disturbed by a very "front and center" article I found on CNN.com news website from a mother in Texas entitled: "Why I raise my kids without God." The article has already been viewed by over 500,000 people on the website. I posted her reasons below and wondered if you might comment on it (I know this is not typical, but the response she's received has been eye-opening):
  When my son was around 3 years old, he used to ask me a lot of questions about heaven. Where is it? How do people walk without a body? How will I find you? You know the questions that kids ask.
  For over a year, I lied to him and made up stories that I didn't believe about heaven. Like most parents, I love my child so much that I didn't want him to be scared. I wanted him to feel safe and loved and full of hope. But the trade-off was that I would have to make stuff up, and I would have to brainwash him into believing stories that didn't make sense, stories that I didn't believe either.
  One day he would know this, and he would not trust my judgment. He would know that I built an elaborate tale--not unlike the one we tell children about Santa--to explain the inconsistent and illogical legend of God.
  And so I thought it was only right to be honest with my children. I am a non-believer, and for years I've been on the fringe in my community. As a blogger, though, I've found that there are many other parents out there like me. We are creating the next generation of kids, and there is a wave of young agnostics, atheists, free thinkers and humanists rising up through the ranks who will, hopefully, lower our nation's religious fever.
  Here are a few of the reasons why I am raising my children without God.
God is a bad parent and role model.
  If God is our father, then he is not a good parent. Good parents don't allow their children to inflict harm on others. Good people don't stand by and watch horrible acts committed against innocent men, women and children. They don't condone violence and abuse. "He has given us free will," you say? Our children have free will, but we still step in and guide them.
God is not logical.
  How many times have you heard, "Why did God allow this to happen?" And this: "It's not for us to understand." Translate: We don't understand, so we will not think about it or deal with the issue. Take for example the senseless tragedy in Newtown. Rather than address the problem of guns in America, we defer responsibility to God. He had a reason. He wanted more angels. Only he knows why. We write poems saying that we told God to leave our schools. Now he's making us pay the price. If there is a good, all-knowing, all-powerful God who loves his children, does it make sense that he would allow murders, child abuse, wars, brutal beatings, torture and millions of heinous acts to be committed throughout the history of mankind? Doesn't this go against everything Christ taught us in the New Testament?

  The question we should be asking is this: "Why did we allow this to happen?" How can we fix this? No imaginary person is going to give us the answers or tell us why. Only we have the ability to be logical and to problem solve, and we should not abdicate these responsibilities to "God" just because a topic is tough or uncomfortable to address.
God is not fair.
  If God is fair, then why does he answer the silly prayers of some while allowing other, serious requests, to go unanswered? I have known people who pray that they can find money to buy new furniture. (Answered.) I have known people who pray to God to help them win a soccer match. (Answered.) Why are the prayers of parents with dying children not answered?

  If God is fair, then why are some babies born with heart defects, autism, missing limbs or conjoined to another baby? Clearly, all men are not created equally. Why is a good man beaten senseless on the street while an evil man finds great wealth taking advantage of others? This is not fair. A game maker who allows luck to rule mankind's existence has not created a fair game.
God does not protect the innocent.
  He does not keep our children safe. As a society, we stand up and speak for those who cannot. We protect our little ones as much as possible. When a child is kidnapped, we work together to find the child. We do not tolerate abuse and neglect. Why can't God, with all His powers of omnipotence, protect the innocent?
God is not present.
  He is not here. Telling our children to love a person they cannot see, smell, touch or hear does not make sense. It means that we teach children to love an image, an image that lives only in their imaginations. What we teach them, in effect, is to love an idea that we have created, one that is based in our fears and our hopes.
God Does Not Teach Children to Be Good
  A child should make moral choices for the right reasons. Telling him that he must behave because God is watching means that his morality will be externally focused rather than internally structured. It's like telling a child to behave or Santa won't bring presents. When we take God out of the picture, we place responsibility of doing the right thing onto the shoulders of our children. No, they won't go to heaven or rule their own planets when they die, but they can sleep better at night. They will make their family proud. They will feel better about who they are. They will be decent people.
God Teaches Narcissism
  "God has a plan for you." Telling kids there is a big guy in the sky who has a special path for them makes children narcissistic; it makes them think the world is at their disposal and that, no matter what happens, it doesn't really matter because God is in control. That gives kids a sense of false security and creates selfishness. "No matter what I do, God loves me and forgives me. He knows my purpose. I am special." The irony is that, while we tell this story to our kids, other children are abused and murdered, starved and neglected. All part of God's plan, right?
  When we raise kids without God, we tell them the truth--we are no more special than the next creature. We are just a very, very small part of a big, big machinewhether that machine is nature or societythe influence we have is minuscule. The realization of our insignificance gives us a true sense of humbleness.

  I understand why people need God. I understand why people need heaven. It is terrifying to think that we are all alone in this universe, that one day we--along with the children we love so much--will cease to exist. The idea of God and an afterlife gives many of us structure, community and hope.

  I do not want religion to go away. I only want religion to be kept at home or in church where it belongs. It's a personal effect, like a toothbrush or a pair of shoes. It's not something to be used or worn by strangers. I want my children to be free not to believe and to know that our schools and our government will make decisions based on what is logical, just and fair--not on what they believe an imaginary God wants.
Thanks again, for all your hard work.
Sincerely,
Eric

Click HERE to read Dr. Craig's answer

Saturday, January 26, 2013

Christopher Hitchens's Christian Friend?!?

What was it like for Larry Taunton to be friends with the late Christopher Hitchens?

Larry Taunton, the Executive Director of "Fixed Point Foundation" talks to the One Minute Apologist about how he befriended Christopher Hitchens, and some of the great conversations that they had over the years concerning the Christian Worldview.

There is much that we can learn from his perspective on friendships with people of other worldviews.


Friday, January 25, 2013

The Historicity of the Empty Tomb of Jesus


William Lane Craig
An examination of both Pauline and gospel material leads to eight lines of evidence in support of the conclusion that Jesus's tomb was discovered empty: (1) Paul's testimony implies the historicity of the empty tomb, (2) the presence of the empty tomb pericope in the pre-Markan passion story supports its historicity, (3) the use of 'on the first day of the week' instead of 'on the third day' points to the primitiveness of the tradition, (4) the narrative is theologically unadorned and non-apologetic, (5) the discovery of the tomb by women is highly probable, (6) the investigation of the empty tomb by the disciples is historically probable, (7) it would have been impossible for the disciples to proclaim the resurrection in Jerusalem had the tomb not been empty, (8) the Jewish polemic presupposes the empty tomb.
Source: "The Historicity of the Empty Tomb of Jesus." New Testament Studies 31 (1985): 39-67.
Until recently the empty tomb has been widely regarded as both an offense to modern intelligence and an embarrassment for Christian faith; an offense because it implies a nature miracle akin to the resuscitation of a corpse and an embarrassment because it is nevertheless almost inextricably bound up with Jesus' resurrection, which lies at the very heart of the Christian faith. But in the last several years, a remarkable change seems to have taken place, and the scepticism that so characterized earlier treatments of this problem appears to be fast receding.2 Though some theologians still insist with Bultmann that the resurrection is not a historical event,3 this incident is certainly presented in the gospels as a historical event, one of the manifestations of which was that the tomb of Jesus was reputedly found empty on the first day of the week by several of his women followers; this fact, at least, is therefore in principle historically verifiable. But how credible is the evidence for the historicity of Jesus' empty tomb?
In order to answer this question, we need to look first at one of the oldest traditions contained in the New Testament concerning the resurrection. In Paul's first letter to the Corinthians (AD 56-57) he cites what is apparently an old Christian formula (1 Cor 15. 3b-5), as is evident from the non-Pauline and Semitic characteristics it contains.4 The fact that the formula recounts, according to Paul, the content of the earliest apostolic preaching (I Cor 15. 11), a fact confirmed by its concordance with the sermons reproduced by Luke in Acts,5 strongly suggests that the formula originated in the Jerusalem church. We know from Paul's own hand that three years after his conversion (AD 33-35) at Damascus, he visited Jerusalem, where he met personally Peter and James (Gal 1. 18-19). He probably received the formula in Damascus, perhaps in Christian catechesis; it is doubtful that he received it later than his Jerusalem visit, for it is improbable that he should have replaced with a formula personal information from the lips of Peter and James themselves.6 The formula is therefore probably quite old, reaching back to within the first five years after Jesus' crucifixion. It reads:
. . . hoti Christos apethanen huper ton hamartion hemon kata tas graphas,
kai hoti etaphe,
kai hoti egegertai te hemera te trite kata tas graphas,
kai hoti ophthe Kepha, eita tois dodeka.


New and Improved Android App!!

Hey guys,

great news, Intelligent Faith has a brand new re-designed app!! Unfortunately we could not give it as an update via Android's Play Store so please download the NEW and IMPROVED app!! For the IOS users (iPhone/iPod touch) you will receive an update to the existing app. If you have any questions please email us.

You can find the new app HERE or search for IF315 on the Play Store.

And remember to always have an Intelligent .....app!!


Thursday, January 24, 2013

Coming To A Church Near You! - "Intelligent Faith 315" ?!?

Want "Intelligent Faith 315" to come and speak at your church or school?

If you've ever wanted to have a weekend conference or afternoon seminar at your church or school, here's your chance!  You can have the teachers of "Intelligent Faith 315" come and speak on a great variety of topics demonstrating the evidence and rationality of the Christian worldview and faith.  These topics include:
  • "Science: Has It Eliminated the Need for God?"
  • "The Absurdity of Atheism"
  • "5 Unique features of Christianity"
  • "The Bible: Can We Really Trust It?"
  • "GOD: Can We Prove That He Exists?"
  • "Jesus: Did He Really Live and Rise From the Dead?"
  • And many, many more.....
If these or other topics are of interest to you, you can contact us via the email option on our website or through intelligentfaith315@gmail.com.  We aren't interested in making money through this.  We simply would be privileged to join you in educating Christians and unbelievers alike in the amazing evidence and powerful proof that exists for the truth of the Christian worldview.

We look forward to hearing from you!  Until then, have an Intelligent Faith!

Pastor J. 



Christianity beats Atheism?!?

Is Christianity rationally and evidentially superior to all other Worldviews?

(pt.3 of 3) This is Lesson #2 in our video class on foundational Christian Apologetics, entitled "The War of the Worldviews".  Here I begin to cover what a worldview is, what the seven major worldviews are, and how each of them compares to Christian Theism in terms of their logical consistency and evidential strength.  

In today's culture of Pluralism (many roads to God), Syncretism (the combining of many different religions/philosophies into one), and Relativism (all truths are subjective and not absolute), having a solid understanding of worldviews in general, and of the Christian worldview in particular, is absolutely vital.

As one man said, Christians need to start thinking "Worldview-ishly" as we share our faith and live out our beliefs in public.  I hope this teaching is of benefit to you, and that you can grow of your understanding in this very important area of our thinking.  

Here is a wonderful book by Dr. Norman Geisler if you want to study deeper in this area of your thinking and faith: "Worlds Apart: A Handbook On Worldviews".  It can be found HERE on Amazon. 

Have an Intelligent Faith!

- Pastor J.


Tuesday, January 22, 2013

Do You Know The 4 Foundational Reasons for Apologetics?

Pt.3 - "What Is Apologetics and Why Do It?"
- Pastor J. 

(pt.3 of 3) This is our new "Reason To Believe" Video Apologetics Class, taught especially with our web audience in mind.  The lessons will be in short 20 minute segments and will be developing an overall cumulative case for the Christian Worldview.  

Here in Lesson #1, I go over what the essential definition of "apologetics" is biblically, and then I cover four foundational reasons why we as believers need to be engaging in the defense of our faith.  If you are new to Apologetics, I especially encourage you to go over this material.  But even if you are a veteran to christian apologetics, take the time to go through it, as it will serve as a good reminder to the good reasons we have for defending the Christian Worldview.

Have an Intelligent Faith! 

- Pastor J.


Pt.2 - "Richard Dawkins: A Simplistic and Silly Skeptic"

What do Professional Philosophers have to say about Richard Dawkins' objections to God?

Contrary to the common opinions of his devotees, Richard Dawkins is very unsophisticated and uninformed in his thinking.  Most notable in his lack of understanding of good rigorous philosophical reasoning.

Here, numerous philosophers offers some powerful and simple refutations to the silly claims that are made by the famouse British Biologist, in his recent book "The God Delusion".  What Dawkins claims is "his best knockdown argument" is actually a philosophical error and very incoherent.

Don't take my word for it.  Listen to these Phd philosophers and their critiques of Dawkins simplistic and silly thinking. 

It you are an atheist/agnostic because of what you have "learned" from men like Dawkins, I strongly encourage you to do some more rigorous research and investigation into the issues, and the fundamental questions of humanity.  

A great place to start this intellectual quest is www.reasonablefaith.org



Equipping the saints with Apologetics


Here at Intelligent Faith we have partnered up with the Christian Apologetics Alliance (CAA) by posting on their blog on a regular basis with other Apologists and also became a part of their blog team.

The CAA has started a petition for church leaders and churches to equip the people by teaching Apologetics. As many of you may know the number of "Nones" are rising. What are "Nones"? A "None" is basically someone that does not identify with any kind of religion, including atheism and agnosticism. That is a result of many reasons and we as Apologists need to do our part to educate people of the evidences that lead to a creator God through Apologetics.

As follows is a short extract from the petition and a link to it. If the Lord leads, please sign it and leave a comment.

"We of the Christian Apologetics Alliance write to you today to thank you for all you are doing to equip the body of Christ in the midst of a faith crisis that is evident in the rise of the “Nones”–those who claim no religious affiliation.  We know you are aware of the problem, and of the need for those with questions to have answers. If we put all of our voices together, perhaps they will hear that there are answers and seek them? Will you add your voice to this petition and proclaim that you are committed to learning and equipping your church with apologetics?"
Click HERE for the petition.

Thank you and have an Intelligent Faith!!

Monday, January 21, 2013

An Evolutionary Argument against (Christian) Theism


Hello Dr. Craig,
You think that evolution is not a threat against christianity or theism in general. However, I think an argument can be made against theism or at least christian theism from evolution.
1. If God created life (biological life), he would have created life in the best possible way someone could create life, because God is a perfect being and therefore only does what´s the best.
2. Evolution is not the best way
therefore: God did not create biological life
Or in formality:
If A then B
not B
therefore: not A
Of course, it does not necessary follow from "God did not create biological life" therefore "God does not exist". God could still exist even if he hadn´t created life (seems unlikely though), but at least the biblical account says that God created humans and animals, in one way or another. So, if God did not create biological life, this would be at least a argument against christian theism, if not theism itself.
1. The first premiss: I think this is obviously true, if we define God as a perfect being, then he would always do what is the best to do. If he had to choose between A,B or C and B is the best, he would choose B.
2. I think you will disagree here, maybe even before or even with the whole structure of the argument. I can´t imagine how evolution could be the best possible way for God to create life. You could think of possible other ways that would be better. For example: God could´ve just created animals or humans withoud the biological mechanisms of evolution or do you think God is dependent on evolution to create life? I don´t think so. So why would God choose A instead of B or C, a way in which his creatures had to go through pain, death and agony, a very brutal way in which only the strong will survive, when B or C seems to be a better way?
You may ask, what do you mean by "better"? Better for whom? God? In this sense you could think evolution is a better way, in terms of easier, less complicated. It may or may not be easier to create the first cell and let it evolve on it´s own like creating everything oneself. Somewhat like a computer scientist who lays the ground and then let the programme do the rest. But I don´t think it makes sense to think in this dimensions like "easy" and "difficult" because for God it would be equal. Think of a mathematician for example. For us it may be easier to count 2+3 than 156+213 but for a good mathematician it really wouldn´t matter. God is a good mathematician, so it really would´t matter in terms of easy and difficult. Then what about better method for animals? I think creating every animal on its own would be way better for the animals than causing unnecesarry pain and random mutations that often result in negative results and even mistakes through evolution. So, all in all, evolution does not seem to be a very noble method in which we would expect God to create.
Thank you and God bless,
Michel
Click HERE to read Dr. Craig's answer

Friday, January 18, 2013

Richard Dawkins - A Silly and Simplistic Skeptic (pt.1)

Are you aware of the mistaken thinking that is employed by Richard Dawkins?

Contrary to the common opinions of his devotees, Richard Dawkins is very unsophisticated and uninformed in his thinking.  Most notable in his lack of understanding of good rigorous philosophical reasoning.

Here, Dr. William Lane Craig offers some powerful and simple refutations to the silly claims that are made by the famouse British Biologist.

It you are an atheist/agnostic because of what you have "learned" from men like Dawkins, I strongly encourage you to do some more rigorous research and investigation into the issues, and the fundamental questions of humanity.  

A great place to start this intellectual quest is www.reasonablefaith.or

- Pastor J.


Thursday, January 17, 2013

Theistic Critiques Of Atheism


William Lane Craig
An account of the resurgence of philosophical theism in our time, including a brief survey of prominent anti-theistic arguments such as the presumption of atheism, the incoherence of theism, and the problem of evil, along with a defense of theistic arguments like the contingency argument, the cosmological argument, the teleological argument, and the moral argument.
Introduction
The last half-century has witnessed a veritable revolution in Anglo-American philosophy. In a recent retrospective, the eminent Princeton philosopher Paul Benacerraf recalls what it was like doing philosophy at Princeton during the 1950s and '60s. The overwhelmingly dominant mode of thinking was scientific naturalism. Metaphysics had been vanquished, expelled from philosophy like an unclean leper. Any problem that could not be addressed by science was simply dismissed as a pseudo-problem. Verificationism reigned triumphantly over the emerging science of philosophy. "This new enlightenment would put the old metaphysical views and attitudes to rest and replace them with the new mode of doing philosophy."1
The collapse of the Verificationism was undoubtedly the most important philosophical event of the twentieth century. Its demise meant a resurgence of metaphysics, along with other traditional problems of philosophy which Verificationism had suppressed. Accompanying this resurgence has come something new and altogether unanticipated: a renaissance in Christian philosophy.
The face of Anglo-American philosophy has been transformed as a result. Theism is on the rise; atheism is on the decline.2 Atheism, though perhaps still the dominant viewpoint at the American university, is a philosophy in retreat. In a recent article in the secularist journal Philo Quentin Smith laments what he calls "the desecularization of academia that evolved in philosophy departments since the late 1960s." He complains,
Naturalists passively watched as realist versions of theism. . . began to sweep through the philosophical community, until today perhaps one-quarter or one-third of philosophy professors are theists, with most being orthodox Christians . . . . in philosophy, it became, almost overnight, 'academically respectable' to argue for theism, making philosophy a favored field of entry for the most intelligent and talented theists entering academia today.3
Smith concludes, "God is not 'dead' in academia; he returned to life in the late 1960s and is now alive and well in his last academic stronghold, philosophy departments."4
As vanguards of a new philosophical paradigm, theistic philosophers have freely issued various critiques of atheism. In so short a space as this entry it is impossible to do little more than sketch some of them and to provide direction for further reading. These critiques could be grouped under two basic heads: (1) There are no cogent arguments on behalf of atheism, and (2) There are cogent arguments on behalf of theism.

No Cogent Arguments on behalf of Atheism


Pt.2 - "War of the Worldviews" with Pastor J.

Can you explain the differences between Christianity and the 6 other major Worldviews?

(pt.2 of 3) This is Lesson #2 in our video class on foundational Christian Apologetics, entitled "The War of the Worldviews".  Here I begin to cover what a worldview is, what the seven major worldviews are, and how each of them compares to Christian Theism in terms of their logical consistency and evidential strength.  

In today's culture of Pluralism (many roads to God), Syncretism (the combining of many different religions/philosophies into one), and Relativism (all truths are subjective and not absolute), having a solid understanding of worldviews in general, and of the Christian worldview in particular, is absolutely vital.

As one man said, Christians need to start thinking "Worldview-ishly" as we share our faith and live out our beliefs in public.  I hope this teaching is of benefit to you, and that you can grow of your understanding in this very important area of our thinking.  

Here is a wonderful book by Dr. Norman Geisler if you want to study deeper in this area of your thinking and faith: "Worlds Apart: A Handbook On Worldviews".  It can be found HERE on Amazon. 

Have an Intelligent Faith!

- Pastor J.
 


Tuesday, January 15, 2013

"The War of the Worldviews" (Pt.1) - Pastor J.


What is meant by a "worldview", and how many are there?

How does the Christian Worldview compare to them?

(pt.1 of 3) This is Lesson #2 in our video class on foundational Christian Apologetics, entitled "The War of the Worldviews".  Here I begin to cover what a worldview is, what the seven major worldviews are, and how each of them compares to Christian Theism in terms of their logical consistency and evidential strength.  

In today's culture of Pluralism (many roads to God), Syncretism (the combining of many different religions/philosophies into one), and Relativism (all truths are subjective and not absolute), having a solid understanding of worldviews in general, and of the Christian worldview in particular, is absolutely vital.

As one man said, Christians need to start thinking "Worldview-ishly" as we share our faith and live out our beliefs in public.  I hope this teaching is of benefit to you, and that you can grow of your understanding in this very important area of our thinking.  

Here is a wonderful book by Dr. Norman Geisler if you want to study deeper in this area of your thinking and faith: "Worlds Apart: A Handbook On Worldviews".  It can be found HERE on Amazon. 

Have an Intelligent Faith!

- Pastor J. 




Rediscovering the Historical Jesus: The Evidence for Jesus


William Lane Craig
Five reasons are presented for thinking that critics who accept the historical credibility of the gospel accounts of Jesus do not bear a special burden of proof relative to more skeptical critics. Then the historicity of a few specific aspects of Jesus' life are addressed, including his radical self-concept as the divine Son of God, his role as a miracle-worker, his trial and crucifixion, and his resurrection from the dead.
"Rediscovering the Historical Jesus: The Evidence for Jesus." Faith and Mission 15 (1998): 16-26.
Last time we saw that the New Testament documents are the most important historical sources for Jesus of Nazareth. The so-called apocryphal gospels are forgeries which came much later and are for the most part elaborations of the four New Testament gospels.
This doesn’t mean that there aren’t sources outside the Bible which refer to Jesus. There are. He’s referred to in pagan, Jewish, and Christian writings outside the New Testament. The Jewish historian Josephus is especially interesting. In the pages of his works you can read about New Testament people like the high priests Annas and Caiaphas, the Roman governor Pontius Pilate, King Herod, John the Baptist, even Jesus himself and his brother James. There have also been interesting archaeological discoveries as well bearing on the gospels. For example, in 1961 the first archaeological evidence concerning Pilate was unearthed in the town of Caesarea; it was an inscription of a dedication bearing Pilate’s name and title. Even more recently, in 1990 the actual tomb of Caiaphas, the high priest who presided over Jesus’s trial, was discovered south of Jerusalem. Indeed, the tomb beneath the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem is in all probability the tomb in which Jesus himself was laid by Joseph of Arimathea following the crucifixion. According to Luke Johnson, a New Testament scholar at Emory University,
Even the most critical historian can confidently assert that a Jew named Jesus worked as a teacher and wonder-worker in Palestine during the reign of Tiberius, was executed by crucifixion under the prefect Pontius Pilate and continued to have followers after his death.1
Still, if we want any details about Jesus’s life and teachings, we must turn to the New Testament. Extra-biblical sources confirm what we read in the gospels, but they don’t really tell us anything new. The question then must be: how historically reliable are the New Testament documents?
Burden of Proof


NY Times: "Darwin Was Wrong" (About Dating)


It's stopped being fun to beat up on evolutionary psychology. Somehow it just feels unsportsmanlike, given that the "discipline" has come to be so widely rejected and mocked even among otherwise dependable Darwin defenders. See this New York Times article ("Darwin Was Wrong About Dating") that sounds the theme. Fewer and fewer in the business of studying evolution are inclined to accept Darwin's own confident view that human mating behavior can be explained in evolutionary terms.
But the fact that some gender differences can be manipulated, if not eliminated, by controlling for cultural norms suggests that the explanatory power of evolution can't sustain itself when applied to mating behavior. This wouldn't be the first time we've pushed these theories too far. How many stereotypical racial and ethnic differences, once declared evolutionarily determined under the banner of science, have been revealed instead as vestiges of power dynamics from earlier societies?
...
Perhaps these phenomena exist. Perhaps men do, over all, pursue more short-term mating. But given new research, continued rigid reliance on evolution as an explanation seems to risk elevating a limited guide to teleological status -- a way of thinking that scientists should abhor.

Continue reading ---> 

Monday, January 14, 2013

Coming to Love God, Question of the week by Dr. Craig


Here is my problem, Dr. Craig: I am as atheist as one can be. Never believed even for 1 minute in my life. However, when I think about it, as a philosopher, I have to admit that I have no good argument to disprove the existence of God. And what's more, watching online debates and reading papers, I find theistic arguments very compelling. The arguments you present, with which I am very acquainted, are sound arguments. Yet, and here is my problem, I am still not convinced. Moreover, I think this: what if I met God today? Surely I will believe in his existence. But why worship? Even if arguments convince me that God exists, why should I care? Either I worship because if I fail to do so God will torture me for ever, or I accept his friendship voluntarily. But what if I don't want to be his friend?
Carl
United States


Click HERE to read Dr. Craig's answer

Friday, January 11, 2013

"Has Science Eliminated GOD?" - Pastor J.

Here are 5 good reasons why Christians can answer "no" to that question. 



In this teaching, I investigate the all important question: "Has Science Eliminated the Need for God?"  In a culture that is growing increasingly more committed to materialistic naturalism, and to a strong devotion to "scientism", this is an extremely important issue to know how to address with your colleagues and friends when discussing the Christian Worldview.

Here are 5 reasons why science HAS NOT eliminated the need for God:

     1. The "Founding Fathers" of science were mostly Theists or Deists.
     2. 95% of science has nothing to do with Christianities truth claims.
     3. 5% of science does intersect with our worldview and is tremendously supportive of
         belief in God.
     4. 'Scientism' is a logically self-defeating/self-contradictory idea
     5. There are many realities that we believe in that are non-physical and outside the 
         realm of scientific verification (morality, mathematics, logic, love, etc...)

Have an Intelligent Faith!

- Pastor J.

About Us - The minds behind "Intelligent Faith 315"