Read the entire article at
I have done a lot of research on the Nazi era and came to an inescapable conclusion, as horrible as those atrocities were, most of the main players thought they were doing what was best for their society. They actually believed they were doing the right thing! During the Nuremberg Trials, many used the excuse that they were following orders, and were only doing what was right in their society.
This fact causes a problem for many in today’s society who believe that there is no higher moral law than what the society creates. You see Hitler, Herrmann Goering (who was to be Hitler’s successor ) as well as many others were the society. If the morals a society chooses are right by definition, then what did they do wrong? In fact, very few people wake up in the morning and say that they are going to do something evil, yet great evil happens all the time. Almost every day the news proves this. Almost everyone has reasons that they use to “justify” what they have done, so to them, it isn’t really wrong. If entire societies can be wrong about what is moral, then they can’t possibly be the source of morality, yet this has happened time and time again on the world stage. Every war had at least one group of participants that were morally wrong, yet they believed that they were right.
What if moral law just is? Why should we follow it? After all, gravity just is, and we create ways to circumvent it all the time. Is it wrong to fly an airplane? If morals are just natural occurrences, then there is no oughtness about them, like gravity we should be able to circumvent the rules, but as the Nurenburg Trials concluded, the moral law is even when individuals or societies disagree with it, or find convoluted ways to get around them like defining away personhood.
I see no escape to the conclusion that if there are things in this world that are wrong, even if society thinks they are right, then there has to be a moral law giver that is above society.
If you liked this article, please consider buying Relativism: Feet Firmly Planted in Mid-Air by Francis J. Beckwith , Gregory Koukl it is available for purchase from Amazon.
I know that sometimes divorce is the only answer but as this and many other studies have concluded, fathers matter! We must as a culture, most especially as Christians start taking marriage and the selection of spouses, more seriously. When we deny children access to their fathers we are hurting them, we may actually be shortening their lives. It has been proven time and time again, that children with both birth parents in the house usually do better than kids who are missing one.
The absence of a father—due to incarceration, death, separation or divorce—has adverse physical and behavioral consequences for a growing child. But little is known about the biological processes that underlie this link between father loss and child well-being.In a study published July 18 in the journal Pediatrics, a team of researchers, including those from Princeton University, report that the loss of a father has a significant adverse effect on telomeres, the protective nucleoprotein end caps of chromosomes. At 9 years of age, children who had lost their father had significantly shorter telomeres—14 percent shorter on average—than children who had not. Death had the largest association, and the effects were greater for boys than girls.
Dallas Willard Perhaps said it best: Like Jesus, we are reaching out in love in a humble spirit with no coercion. The only way to accomplish that is to present our defense gently, as help offered in love in the manner of Jesus.
When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitles them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
The words of The Declaration of Independence have been called America’s birth certificate. The people who signed it risked not only their lives, but the lives of their families, and all their property. You can bet they made sure to agree with every word it said before they signed it. They even agreed with the phrases that I put in bold print, nature’s God, and endowed by their creator. Who could they have been talking about if not the God that inspired people to move here in search of religious liberty?
Some of its signers included; John Hancock, John Adams, Samuel Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas Jefferson.
Yet some would have us believe even though the founders based their rights in their creator, who is nature’s God that they did not want God to have anything to do with this country. While it will take more evidence to prove that the God that they were referring to was the God of the Bible, those who read the Declaration in full with an open mind should be willing to consider the possibility that the founders had no problem with God.
You can read the Declaration of Independence in its entirety at
You are the only Bible some unbelievers will ever read, and your life is under scrutiny every day. What do others learn from you? Do they see an accurate picture of your God?
Introduction Over the years, I have had my share of discussions with atheists and skeptics about the existence of God. Any attempt to point to God as an explanation for observable phenomena such as…