A Review of Heretic: One Scientist’s Journey from Darwin to Design, by Matti Leisola & Jonathan Witt
As a student beginning his scientific studies in 1966, Finnish biochemist Matti Leisola used to laugh at Christians who “placed God in the gaps of scientific knowledge,” as the criticism often went. As he saw it, those people lacked the patience and level-headedness that he possessed. After hearing Francis Schaeffer speak in 1972, though, he realized his concept of truth was naïve. He bought several of Schaeffer’s books and began to study philosophy, a subject he had previously considered of little value. At some point, he realized the god-of-the-gaps criticism cut both ways since a functional atheist could also insert a pat explanation into any knowledge gap.
Read more at : Where the Evidence Led Me by Terrell Clemmons – Salvo Magazine
“What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life…” 1 John 1:1
Empirical Evidence – Test with the Senses Notice in this verse how John testifies to the truth by what he heard, saw and touched. All of this was empirical evidence of the risen Lord. Empirical evidence is what scientists base their discoveries on; it’s what you can test with the five senses. This kind of evidence is easy to believe because it’s tangible. Faith is Not Blind – Our Assurance is Based on Empirical Evidence
Read more at: Empirical Evidence – Verifiable Faith – Homeschool 101
Life demands that we please certain people at least some of the time; our boss, our spouse, police officers… But trying to please everyone all the time is like drinking from a colander, you might get a few sips, but mostly you get all wet! Jesus, however, notices every effort we make. Even if you don’t succeed in your efforts, if you are trying to please him, he will recognize that effort.
No, it isn’t selfish to say that you only want to please Jesus because if you are pleasing Jesus you will love your family, love the sick, the downtrodden, and even your enemies. Some of those people will not appreciate your efforts, but if you are doing those things because you love Jesus there will always be one that is pleased by you.
The book below is sold by Amazon and a small percentage of the proceeds will help support this website.
Our society is facing a terrible crisis. Many people feel as if there is no meaning in life, and we have lost our moral code. JP Moreland explores how we can recover the Christian mind, renovate Christian spirituality, and cultivate the power of the Holy Spirit in ourselves and in the world today.
One of the strangest things I have heard from atheists is the assertion that Christianity is somehow connected to the fascism, such as the fascism that existed under Adolf Hitler. Two posts by Jewish author Jonah Goldberg from National Review supply us with the facts to set the record straight. Let’s start with the first post. Here are some of the points:1) Hitler wanted Christianity removed from the public squareLike the engineers of that proverbial railway bridge, the Nazis worked relentlessly to replace the nuts and bolts of traditional Christianity with a new political religion. The shrewdest way to accomplish this was to co-opt Christianity via the Gleichschaltung while at the same time shrinking traditional religion’s role in civil society.
Read More at: Was Hitler a Christian? Is Nazism similar to Christianity? | WINTERY KNIGHT
The link below is an affiliate link and will help support Smart Christian.net
I was just watching a debate that was so silly that I could not finish watching it. The atheist that was debating the Christian was an absolute hot head! If that guy wasn’t a villain in WWE wrestling he missed his calling!
Even though he personally admitted that experts had been giving him an alternative definition for the word faith, from his definition every week for the last twenty years, he still insisted on his definition being right and everyone else’s being wrong.
This has the effect of crippling any honest investigation of the beliefs of Christianity. Even IF all those scholars and all those believers, and all those pieces of ancient literature with the word that means faith were wrong, we still believe in our definition, for the sake of an honest discussion and investigation of our beliefs you must believe that we believe it.
It is the same with other belief systems. Their beliefs may be mistaken and may be objectively wrong, but we must believe that they believe it before we can any kind of productive discussion with them about which of our beliefs are objectively right, and which are not.
Are you looking for a Christian book that will help you grow stronger in the faith? Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis is a modern classic that is helpful learning about basic Christianity I highly recommend it.
America has a TERRIBLE problem with discussing important issues! One side starts name-calling, the other side gets nasty, which makes the first group get even nastier. Saying something even slightly offensive, true or not, can incite violence and ruin lives! Even I try to be nice, but I have a sarcastic streak a mile wide. It should not be this way. Not only does it blind the other side to any truths that you are speaking, But That also is not the way Jesus wanted it. Yes, sometimes he was rough Matthew 23:33 (HCSB)33 “Snakes! Brood of vipers! How can you escape being condemned to hell? He, however, was like this to people who should have known better like the Pharisees and could be interpreted as a warning. To people who were not immersed in Judaism, he was often gentle. For example, the woman at the well was a Samaritan, while they may have been close geographically they did not communicate with each other, so there is a lot that they did not know about each other. John 4:9 “How is it that You, a Jew, ask for a drink from me, a Samaritan woman?” she asked Him. For Jews do not associate with Samaritans.
Source: Bless those who curse you – Smart Christian.net
Previously I looked briefly at Dawkins’ refusal to debate Christian/religious apologist William Lane Craig. Craig is arguably America’s leading intellectual apologist and defender of religion, and I concluded that Dawkins’ reasons for not debating him struck me as excusatory rather than as legitimate concerns.I briefly wish to revisit the reasons Dawkins provides for not debating Craig in an article Dawkins released on The Guardian in 2011. As the date shows, this is not a recent controversy but it is yet one I wish to comment on. I shall do so over the course of several posts. I should make known my own position. I simply favor formal debates and find it a necessary conduit for imparting knowledge to public consciousness, particularly on those who attend in the audience. I don’t believe religion and atheism should be merely private affairs beyond critical scrutiny. A major way to ensure that this is not always the case is the formal debate. As such, I found it unfortunate that Dawkins, perhaps the world’s most well-known atheist, refused to debate Craig, arguably the world’s most well-known apologist. A debate between Dawkins and Craig would have been a spectacle and therefore one of great public interest. This is why I wish to put a critical eye on Dawkins, for it is he he decided to avoid one. From the beginning of the article Dawkins makes it a clear goal to undermine Craig by way of belittling him,
Read more at: Richard Dawkins’ Delivers Nasty Low Blows Against William Lane Craig (Revisiting the Controversy) | Bishop’s Encyclopedia of Religion, Society and Philosophy