Archive for March, 2012

Speaking out when God’s Word is Attacked

March 28, 2012 2 comments

A dog barks when his master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God’s truth is attacked and yet would remain silent….

John Calvin (1509-1564)


William Lane Craig vs. Peter Atkins Round 1

March 27, 2012 8 comments

My second debate I listened to today was between William Lane Craig and Peter Atkins. Atkins was your typical scientist, whom upon denying the existence of God, has nothing left to try and answer the reason for the universe and all that lies therein except for evolution. Atkins argued that the arguments for theism do not work, yet just arguing they don’t work does not make the conclusions invalid to the theist arguments. In order for Atkins to really dismantle the theist arguments he must not only show that they don’t work, but must erect in their place, arguments that will be valid once the premises are reasoned to their logical conclusions.  This he did not do.

Atkins had as much faith in science as a theist has in his belief in God. Atkins argued that science can give an answer for all there is in this closed system or universe. Atkins believed that science can explain all things. Nevertheless Craig took him to task and showed that science cannot prove or explain mathematical equations, science cannot show the foundation for logic and reason, science cannot explain aesthetics, nor can science prove that science is true because the scientific method cannot be done on science itself.

Of course, Atkins used the famous argument against cause and effect that most atheist use. He stated that we know that cause and effect works within this closed system called the universe, but we do not know whether or not cause and effect works on the universe itself to bring it into existence.. Of course, before he was finished he actually admitted that nothing exist, in this universe or outside of it. As Atkins closed he lamented that he had been misrepresented.

Of course Craig took Atkins to task and dismantled his arguments. But Atkins could not receive truth because he trusted in science as if it were a god.

You can listen to this debate here.

This debate took place in 1998. There is a more recent debate between these two.


William Lane Craig vs. Paul Draper

March 27, 2012 2 comments

Today I listened to a debate between William Lane Craig and Paul Draper on the existence of God. In this debate Draper admitted that he was an agnostic and that even though the belief in theism was probable, nevertheless there just wasn’t enough evidence to support the view that God exist. Draper instead built a cumulative case defense for humanism and naturalism and concluded by stating that there was more evidence to deny God, than there was to affirm his existence.

Craig done a fine job in dismantling Draper’s views. In doing so, Craig presented evidence for God’s existence that could not be torn down by Draper.

 You can listen to the debate by downloading it here.

This debate took place in 1997.

The Dangers of Losing our Gospel-Centeredness

March 27, 2012 1 comment

I ran across this good little article by Julian Freeman on the dangers of slipping from our gospel-centered preaching of the gospel. I retitled it on my blog because I felt like the title would fit the article better because of the fact that it has been written to warn us of the dangers of falling from our gospel-centered view of the gospel and Christ.

I agree with both of Julian’s points that we must make the gospel applicable to today’s generation, while at the same time living a gospel-centered life. Anyhow here is Julian’s article.

 The Dangers of Being Gospel-Centered by Julian Freeman

 I love being gospel-centered. The ‘new Calvinists’ did not invent the emphasis on being gospel-centered, but it is a renaissance I’ve been thankful to experience.

Like anything that becomes a movement, we must be wary of the potential drawbacks. As I see it, there are at least two dangers in being gospel-centered, and they are both rooted in this one reality: In the past, whatever the fad, it typically became popular because of the promise it offered. Being Purpose-Driven or Seeker-Sensitive or Emerging or whatever held people’s attention only so long as it could promise power (power to draw numbers, power to help people change, etc.). But when those movements were unable to deliver the promised goods, people flocked away from them as quickly as they had flocked to them.

Read more here.

Concerning Walking Before the World

My brethren, let me say, be like Christ at all times. Imitate him in “public.” Most of us live in some sort of public capacity—many of us are called to work before our fellow-men every day. We are watched; our words are caught; our lives are examined—taken to pieces. The eagle-eyed, argus-eyed world observes everything we do, and sharp critics are upon us. Let us live the life of Christ in public. Let us take care that we exhibit our Master, and not ourselves—so that we can say, “It is no longer I that live, but Christ that lives in me.”

Charles Spurgeon


William Lane Craig vs. Frank Zindler

I listened to a debate today between Craig and Zindler on “Atheism vs. Christianity or “Does God Exist”?

William Lane Craig won this debate by a long shot. Frank Zindler offered no evidence whatsoever to prove that God does not exist. It seemed to me that he had problems or questions on whether the Bible was historically reliable, whether it actually means what it says, and with the ethics of the scriptures.

Craig on the other hand took Zindler to task and not only did he offer proofs for God’s existence, but he also countered all the fallacies of his opponent and all the twisting of the scriptures of his opponent.

I recommend that if you have time that you should listen to this debate. You can find the debate  by clicking right here.


Answer the Objection: The Bible has Errors

March 26, 2012 2 comments

I ran across a good post, by a man named Jonathan Dodson, on how to counter the objection of skeptics when they claim the Bible has errors. Of course one way to disarm the skeptic is to ask them to show you an error. Most who spout out such nonsense are only repeating what they have heard. Most are not fluent in how the English Bible came to exist and therefore know nothing of manuscript evidence or the science of textual criticism.

Jonathan Dodson takes the opposite approach when encountered by the skeptics arguments of why we can’t trust the Bible. He suggest that we tell the skeptic that the Bible does contain errors and then proceed to show them the few errors of which it contains. Here is several paragraphs from his article.


What to Say When Someone Says “The Bible Has Errors” by Jonathan Dodson

 Most people question the reliability of the Bible. You’ve probably been in a conversation with a friend or met someone in a coffeeshop who said: “How can you be a Christian when the Bible has so many errors?” How should we respond? What do you say?

Instead of asking them to name one, I suggest you name one or two of the errors. Does your Bible contain errors? Yes. The Bible that most people possess is a translation of the Greek and Hebrew copies of copies of the original documents of Scripture. As you can imagine, errors have crept in over the centuries of copying. Scribes fall asleep, misspell, take their eyes off the manuscript, and so on. I recommend telling people what kind of errors have crept into the Bible. Starting with the New Testament, Dan Wallace, New Testament scholar and founder the Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts, lists four types of errors in Understanding Scripture: An Overview of the Bible’s Origin, Reliability, and Meaning.


Read more of Jonathan Dodson’s article here.