tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.comments2023-10-18T00:59:40.216-07:00Christian Skepticism - a reasonable faith...oddXianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15427095709766850092noreply@blogger.comBlogger1938125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-81906790416533001422013-09-25T09:30:31.400-07:002013-09-25T09:30:31.400-07:00Amen brothersAmen brothersReformed Apologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17398596496540697639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-76426542181469456442012-01-04T18:44:48.722-08:002012-01-04T18:44:48.722-08:00Just another sort of "bait and switch" s...Just another sort of "bait and switch" seeker-sensitive technique. Robert Reymond points out what lies behind this sort of approach.<br /><br />1.) We've lost confidence in the power of the gospel itself to change lives.<br /><br />2.) We've lost confidence in preaching as the method by which this gospel is spread.<br /><br />May Mark Driscoll and others like him begin to conduct their services in a manner consistent with the theology they claim to hold.Puritan Ladhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02240560332777968090noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-55733280440239588502011-08-25T12:49:39.204-07:002011-08-25T12:49:39.204-07:00And at the same time over the last fews days in th...And at the same time over the last fews days in the news are articles expressing the shock and outrage where pedophilia has occurred. Which is it? Without a standard, anything can be justified or opposed. Thanks be to God we are not left in confusion.All Things Reformedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07921579806367678328noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-81832794779534546002011-05-05T17:19:16.426-07:002011-05-05T17:19:16.426-07:00prepare for circular reasoning...prepare for circular reasoning...JDLhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13765474751389309071noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-9341269867280798692011-05-05T15:46:22.687-07:002011-05-05T15:46:22.687-07:00There will be lots of arguments, but they will boi...There will be lots of arguments, but they will boil down to this... what is the basis for empathy and why should we show it.<br /><br />(Thanks for posting)All Things Reformedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07921579806367678328noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-37491275050070970782010-12-25T05:44:39.417-08:002010-12-25T05:44:39.417-08:00you are invited to follow my blogyou are invited to follow my blogSteve Finnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15041851737677873347noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-84768877726947176362010-12-23T10:45:46.339-08:002010-12-23T10:45:46.339-08:00I've read them all and recommend them to our r...I've read them all and recommend them to our readers. <br /><br />I greatly appreciate the stand you are taking in Denver.All Things Reformedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07921579806367678328noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-68041404985356354262010-12-23T10:11:41.220-08:002010-12-23T10:11:41.220-08:00Hello again,
I have a number of Christmas article...Hello again,<br /><br />I have a number of Christmas articles covering the atheist invasion of Denver if you are interested,<br /><br />Shawn<br />Denver Christian Apologist at Examiner.com<br /><br />http://www.examiner.com/christian-apologetics-in-denver/shawn-mathispolymathishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13122383984552473728noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-8266062833800536452010-12-23T08:05:33.239-08:002010-12-23T08:05:33.239-08:00I knew I ate too much broccoli last year. I'l...I knew I ate too much broccoli last year. I'll add some sauerkraut this year and see if I can reach Jupiter.Puritan Ladhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02240560332777968090noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-64471926594505672812010-10-04T06:14:21.136-07:002010-10-04T06:14:21.136-07:00Before they ask for the funding, maybe they should...Before they ask for the funding, maybe they should go and check it out in person.Puritan Ladhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02240560332777968090noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-59887683605268021062010-04-15T08:17:49.582-07:002010-04-15T08:17:49.582-07:00This is Hannah Bevills, Editor for Christian.com w...This is Hannah Bevills, Editor for Christian.com which is a social network made specifically for Christians, by Christians, to directly fulfill Christian's needs. We embarked on this endeavor to offer the ENTIRE christian community an outlet to join together as one (no matter denomination) and better spread the good word of Christianity. Christian.com has many great features aside from the obvious like christian TV, prayer request or even find a church/receive advice. We have emailed you because we have interest in collaborating with you and your blog to help us spread the good word. I look forward to an email regarding the matter, Thanks!<br /> <br />God Bless<br /><br />|Hannah Bevills|Christian.com|<br />hannah.bevills@gmail.comUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08235103091406533840noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-17138752219684847472010-04-07T12:41:39.135-07:002010-04-07T12:41:39.135-07:00I also can't get over how the meat of the stor...I also can't get over how the meat of the story disagrees with the shameless headline. The story says, "Scientists believe the almost-complete fossilised skeleton belonged to a previously-unknown type of early human ancestor that <b><i>MAY</i></b> have been a intermediate stage as ape-men evolved into the first species of advanced humans, Homo habilis." The headline, however, assures us that the "Missing link between man and apes found", and "A "missing link" between humans and their apelike ancestors has been discovered".<br /><br />This is typical of such stories, which try to create news as opposed to report it.Puritan Ladhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02240560332777968090noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-45845041270118565252010-04-04T04:20:12.593-07:002010-04-04T04:20:12.593-07:00All roads lead to our presuppositions...All roads lead to our presuppositions...JDLhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13765474751389309071noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-73018918724664209272010-04-04T04:16:33.808-07:002010-04-04T04:16:33.808-07:00The headline for this discovery under a God-center...The headline for this discovery under a God-centered worldview:<br /><br />Yet Another Ape-Like Fossil Discovered: Additional proof for incredible variety within kinds and the continued reduction due to the effects of the Fall.JDLhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13765474751389309071noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-39698676896631309262010-04-04T04:10:25.460-07:002010-04-04T04:10:25.460-07:00...thus insuring continued funding of the fairy-ta......thus insuring continued funding of the fairy-tale of evolution...JDLhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13765474751389309071noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-27126992150509460132009-12-21T18:49:04.650-08:002009-12-21T18:49:04.650-08:00"Skeptimal, you haven't answered my quest..."Skeptimal, you haven't answered my questions."<br /><br />It's not like you answer all the comments or questions I put out there. Even so, in this case, okay.<br /><br />What is the "religion-neutral" position on abortion?<br /><br />The question is not valid. There are pro-lifers and pro-choicers in most religion. If you're asking what is the question between you "real" Christians and everyone else, there isn't one. There isn't a neutral position between Scientologists and everyone else either.<br /><br />If you quit issuing orders to the rest of the universe, you might find that there is a political will to limit some abortions. <br /><br />What is the "religion-neutral" position on gay marriage?<br /><br />Marriage is a legal contract that does not require religion. Most, if not all, of the attempts to legalize gay marriage have included provisions to allow you to express your fear and hatred of gays with impunity. NO gay marriage law has attempted to require churches to perform gay marriages.<br /><br /><br />"The idea that "we negotiate our laws" doesn't answer the question."<br /><br />Yeah, it pretty much does. Only in the past twenty years has there been this concept that that the majority gets to tell the minority to **** off. <br /><br /><br />"And yes, I do have an absolute standard. You should know that..."<br /><br />I know otherwise. You wear mixed-fiber clothing, you probably eat shellfish, and you haven't stoned any wayward children recently (unless you're writing from jail). Do you require "your" woman" to stay silent in church? Do you support the right to own slaves? Do you cast out demons? If you answer "no" to any of these, then you have no absolute standard.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12292816223593513911noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-41596000249121512842009-12-21T14:48:46.328-08:002009-12-21T14:48:46.328-08:00"You say you do, but if that were the case, C...<em>"You say you do, but if that were the case, Christians would agree on all issues"</em><br /><br />That i ssimply not true. When it comes to the proper roloes of civil government, all TRUE Christians, properly discipled are pretty much in agreement (Abortion, gay marriage, etc.)<br /><br />The word "Christian" has unfortunately become without meaning. We have 2 Billion people that call themselves by that name. How do we know whether they are or not? By the same standard, God's Word.Puritan Ladhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02240560332777968090noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-756780091924536842009-12-21T14:41:48.772-08:002009-12-21T14:41:48.772-08:00Skeptimal, you haven't answered my questions....Skeptimal, you haven't answered my questions. Let's try this again.<br /><br />What is the "religion-neutral" position on abortion?<br /><br />What is the "religion-neutral" position on gay marriage?<br /><br />The idea that "we negotiate our laws" doesn't answer the question. I addressed that problem previously (see majority rule above). Besides, if we merely negotiate our laws, then I ask again, one what basis will say that "Government can and should be silent on the subject."<br /><br />And yes, I do have an absolute standard. You should know that...Puritan Ladhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02240560332777968090noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-46807325707977074362009-12-19T09:50:32.520-08:002009-12-19T09:50:32.520-08:00Puritan,
I didn't say you'd accused me of...Puritan,<br /><br />I didn't say you'd accused me of attacking; I said that you treat any comment that does not endorse Christianity as an attack on Christianity. You've said there is no neutrality, and any government that doesn't specifically endorse Christianity is anti-Christian. That doesn't appear to leave Christians anything to discuss with non-Christians, in your view, other than that we should all become Christians.<br /><br />"Once the Supreme Authority of God is removed from the public square, then these are the only two choices left."<br /><br />You keep saying things like this, but it's a false dilemma. In practice, democracy means that we negotiate our laws. We argue those laws based on experience, history, and our hopes for the future. <br /><br />You keep implying that unless I have an absolute standard that tells me what to do in every situation, that I have no ground on which to argue. Why? You don't have one either.<br /><br />You say you do, but if that were the case, Christians would agree on all issues. How many branches and denominations of Christianity do we have? Further, I'm fairly confident that you would not support slavery, genocide, mass-murder, polygamy, etc., all of which are Biblical.<br /><br />So let's quit pretending that you have this absolute standard that you follow. You don't.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12292816223593513911noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-45217914678410431242009-12-16T05:47:12.882-08:002009-12-16T05:47:12.882-08:00Dawkings wants his religion promoted under the cov...Dawkings wants his religion promoted under the cover of not being a religion. However, his belief system is based on faith at its very foundation and core.jazzycathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16720471765591930568noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-25720504256570422032009-12-15T18:40:39.749-08:002009-12-15T18:40:39.749-08:00There is only one triune God, therefore Muslims wo...There is only one triune God, therefore Muslims worship a false God.jazzycathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16720471765591930568noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-26352341311890115122009-12-15T11:19:10.295-08:002009-12-15T11:19:10.295-08:00Skeptimal,
I haven't accusd you of "atta...Skeptimal,<br /><br />I haven't accusd you of "attacking" anything. You are trying to avoid the issue, which is that there is no such thing as a neutral position in any area of life. Like most unbelievers, you are insisting that your worldview is the "neutral" or default position. As a result, you tell us what you think government should or shouldn't do, but you cannot justify why you think so. In telling us this, you prove Owen's point to a tee. You think government should do such and such, and religious folks should not interfere. Why? Because you said so?<br /><br />On what basis does government enact legislation? What gives them the right to tell any individual what to do? In discussing this, we will eventually come to a place where we are faced with the issue of ultimate authority. That is a religious issue. It is inescapable. Either government has ultimate authority (Statism), or individuals do (pure democracy). If the former, then you have no right to say that "Government can and should be silent on the subject" of religion (if that were even possible). If the the latter, then you are left with majority rule, and if that majority happens to be religious, then so be it. Once the Supreme Authority of God is removed from the public square, then these are the only two choices left.<br /><br />As we clearly have two differing worldviews, it is only natural that anything we say can be construed as an "attack". My religion expresses a clear role and duty for civil governments, and as such, when the governments acts outside of that role (either by abusing it's power or by exercising it unjustly), then it becomes anti-Christian.<br /><br />So I need for you to clarify your ultimate authority. You failed to answer these questions, so I'll ask them again, since they clearly express the problem that I have presented to you.<br /><br />What is the "religion-neutral" position on abortion?<br /><br />What is the "religion-neutral" position on gay marriage?<br /><br />The same problems exist in any civil issue, but these two are the most glaringly obvious. The very right for any person to legislate (or not legislate) is itself a religious issue.<br /><br />There is no neutral position Skeptimal. Maybe we cannot resolve our issues, but if we are to do so, you'll need to justify your position on government, law, ethics, etc. On what authority will you do so?Puritan Ladhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02240560332777968090noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-57247649519131881742009-12-15T10:56:46.183-08:002009-12-15T10:56:46.183-08:00"a government that doesn't actively and s..."a government that doesn't actively and specifically endorse Christianity is actually embracing another religion by failing to do so. Is that what you believe?"<br /><br />Response: Exactly."<br /><br />Well, I guess I always suspected that was the case, but I thought only Muslims or Scientologists would consciously think that way. That explains why you take even my gentler comments as direct frontal attacks on all that you believe is holy. <br /><br />It doesn't really leave us much to talk about, though, does it? In your mind, the only reason to talk to me would be to convert me to Christianity, and everything I say that doesn't specifically refer to Jesus as Lord and Savior is going to be taken as a direct attack on your faith. Even when we agreed on an issue, in your mind, I'd be agreeing with you for the wrong reason, which would also be a direct attack on your faith.<br /><br />Is that accurate?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12292816223593513911noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-38895481440938366212009-12-15T10:09:22.045-08:002009-12-15T10:09:22.045-08:00"What you have failed to address is not just ..."What you have failed to address is not just whether you have no more problem with what Obama has done than with what Bush did, but whether you have a problem with what Obama is doing (or what Bush did) in affirming Islam as a "GREAT" religion."<br /><br />I can appreciate your confusion, but I've tried to say as clearly as possible that I *do* have a problem with it, but I don't think it's illegal. Your original post complained that the sep of church and state crowd weren't jumping all over Obama, which they would generally only do if there was a legal issue.<br /><br />"If you do not have a problem with it, then let's not hear objections when Christians in government (or government funded institutions) espouse Christianity."<br /><br />My sample comments from Christian politicians were to make the point that while I might complain about some of the things the lesser Bush and others have done, I don't believe all of them are against the law.<br /><br />"It shocks me that you would be so hesitant to agree with this post."<br /><br />I have to assume your "shock" is because you think I'm going soft on Obama because I agree with him more often than I did with the lesser Bush. (I refer to him as the lesser Bush becuase I actually voted for and liked Bush's father as president.) If Obama were a Muslim and said that, I would have a much more serious problem with it, but I still don't think it would be illegal. <br /><br />If you're shocked that I don't think this is a sep of church and state issue, I think it's because you've misunderstood many of my previous comments. You may be tempted to say "back at you," but it's seemed to me that you've jumped to alot of unwarranted conclusions about me in the past. <br /><br />In my previous comment, I gave samples of religious attacks by Christian politicans that I did not like but did not consider illegal.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12292816223593513911noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-68957072628204339292009-12-15T05:04:11.269-08:002009-12-15T05:04:11.269-08:00Skeptimal: "Are you saying that its impossibl...<b>Skeptimal:</b> <i>"Are you saying that its impossible to have a religion-neutral government"</i><br /><br /><b>Response:</b> Yes. Nothing is "religion-neutral". (I believe that we have had this discussion many times before.) Ones the government legislates anything, it has taken a religious position.<br /><br /><b>Skeptimal:</b> <i>"Government can and should be silent on the subject."</i><br /><br /><b>Response:</b> That is a religious position. It is based on a particular view of God, man, life, law, ethics, etc. For example, on what basis wuld you suggest that the government can or should do anything? Who says? Without being subject to God, government becomes autonomous. It is no coincidence that the more "secular" our government becomes, the more totalitarian it becomes. Who would have ever dreamed that the US Federal government would consider putting it's citizens in jail for refusing to buy health insurance? It may very well become a reality soon.<br /><br /><b>Skeptimal:</b> <i>"The only way that I can see your position making any sense is if you believe that a government that doesn't actively and specifically endorse Christianity is actually embracing another religion by failing to do so. Is that what you believe?"</i><br /><br /><b>Response:</b> Exactly. For example, what is the "religion-neutral" postion on abortion? Gay Marriage? When a government legislates, how do we decide if a law is just or not?<br /><br /><i>“Without absolutes revealed from without by God Himself, we are left rudderless in a sea of conflicting ideas about manners, justice and right and wrong, issuing from a multitude of self-opinionated thinkers.”</i> - John OwenPuritan Ladhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02240560332777968090noreply@blogger.com