Guest Post: Just the Facts!

This was a post that I wrote for Domain for Truth as a guest. It was an honor to be permitted to share my thoughts on his great blog.

The Domain for Truth

Note: This is a guest post since by ApoloJedi.  He’s a friend of our blog over at Twitter and his blog be found here.

Recently, social media was astir with news that the well-known fact-checking website, Snopes.com had been checking the truthfulness of the well-known satire website, TheBabylonBee.com. Even the NY Times recognized the controversy between the Bee and Snopes. They noted the bias by which Snopes appears to judge the stories subjected to fact-checking.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/03/us/snopes-babylon-bee.html

This also generated some humorous satirical “headlines” at the Bee (and I heartily endorse you check out the Bee for your daily comedic intake):

View original post 627 more words

Is the ‘Big Bang’ in the Bible?

Hugh Ross continues to redefine scripture in order to accommodate old earthism. This article by In His Image shows the shortcomings of Ross’s assumptions

In His Image

I recently stumbled across an article in the Christian Post by Dr. Hugh Ross, the founder of the old earth Christian ministry Reasons to Believe. The article was entitled “Does the Bible teach Big Bang Cosmology?” and, predictably for an old earth group, Ross concludes it does. However, his logic is flawed on multiple levels as is his interpretation of Scripture.  Since the Christian Post is not exactly friendly to Biblical creationists, it is unlikely a rebuttal article will appear there so I have elected to respond to Dr. Ross and attempt to educate him on his errors.

Ross’s first section is devoted to expounding on why he believes the Bible teaches the Big Bang.  However, it is here he pulls a clever sleight of hand.  He admits that the Bible does not specifically teach a Big Bang cosmology, but immediately claims that it is compatible with the text of…

View original post 774 more words

The Curse Reversed: The Parallels of Genesis and Revelation

Enjoy reading this exegesis from Theologetics

Theologetics.org

“Satan Enters Eden” and “The New Jerusalem” by Gustave Dore

“The Bible says light appeared on the 1st day of creation. However, the sun and stars weren’t created until the 4th day. How can there be light and days with no sun and stars?”

Apologists have different ways of answering this question. I once even considered what’s called the cosmic microwave background. However, through further scripture reading, I believe the Bible has answered this question thousands of years ago.

I believe the “light” in Genesis 1:3 is the Glory of God.

The reason I believe this is because of the parallels in the books Genesis and Revelation. In Genesis we have the creation of the world and the Garden of Eden, God’s temple on earth. We also have the fall of mankind and the curse on man and the rest of creation where God dwelt and communed with man…

View original post 361 more words

A Review of ‘Darwin Devolves’ by Michael Behe

This is a concise review of an important book for a culture that is strongly influenced by the materialist religion of evolution.

Behe makes a strong case that evolution is indeed a real concept, but it is not understood by its proponents because the “direction” of the evolution is degenerative…not constructive.

“More cases of loss of religious faith are to be traced to the theory of evolution. . .than to anything else.” –Martin Lings

DR. RELUCTANT

Review of Michael Behe, Darwin Devolves: The New Science About DNA That Challenges Evolution (New York: HarperOne, 2019), 342 pages, hdbk. 

The author of this new book is well known for his earlier works Darwin’s Black Box and The Edge of Evolution.  In the former book Michael Behe argued that biological systems, more especially the molecular makeup of incredibly complex structures in the cell, could not have arisen via evolutionary pathways.  Natural selection and mutation were simply not capable of building the city-like features that had only recently been discovered.  Nor could evolution explain how these structures (like the bacterial flagellum) be constructed as functioning wholes by the processes available to it.  The “irreducible complexity” of the structures meant that everything had to be put together at once in just the right way so that the molecular machine would work.  Not only this, but in The Edge of Evolution

View original post 1,044 more words

DEBATE: Apologetics Methodology Presuppositionalism vs Evidentialism

Christians are called to share the gospel. Many evangelists try to throw evidence at people to convince them of the truth of Christianity.

While evidence does point to the truth of Christianity and the revelation of God, people will always interpret evidence according to their worldview. So, the non-believer will take evidence presented and claim it is evidence for THEIR worldview. The non-believer will also incorrectly assume they can justify laws of logic, truth, morality, and induction without the One True God, who revealed Himself in creation, in scripture, and in Jesus.

I really enjoyed reading the article below where I got the following quote:

“Even when/if the classical or evidentialist apologist begins with a Christian worldview, both approaches, even combined end up falling victim to the deserved title of “god of the gaps” arguments. Let’s suppose that a Christian provides a convincing argument for the existence of God, such that the debate opponent surrenders. The question that follows is “which God?” From here we cannot really get to Jesus Christ, because this involves proving the Scriptures according to Christianity are from God, before we could ever get to arguments for the resurrection of Christ.”

https://presupp101.wordpress.com/2019/04/30/debate-apologetics-methodology-presuppositionalism-vs-evidentialism/

Presuppositionalism 101

Hello faithful readers and guests, here recently I decided to participate in somewhat of a formal debate with another Calvinist on the subject of Apologetics methodology. I confess to being reluctant (for a number of reasons), I turned him down several times, but he persisted to hint and nudge over a period of months, and so I finally gave in.

Here below is my (rather short) opening statement, with a link to more of the (more detailed) debate on christianforums.com below. So far I have completed the first round, and thinking about the direction I might take for the second. Comments, thoughts, etc. are welcome and appreciated.


Brother Mark Kennedy and I have agreed upon a friendly debate on the subject of apologetics, more specifically apologetic methodology. Mark will be making the case for Evidential Apologetics, while I make the case for Presuppositional Apologetics.

The format will be as follows:

View original post 1,150 more words

Replacing Darwin

Good video on the reason Darwin’s theory is no longer valid:

New information!

Creation Bunch

The New Origin of Species

by Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson

Science has come a long way since Darwin made his claims in the 1800s. Several remarkable scientific discoveries have been made that shed new light on the earth’s origins. In addition, much of the evidence Darwin presented for his argument no longer seems like clear evidence for evolution. What if Darwin was looking at the same evidence today using modern science; would his conclusions be the same? Could modern scientific discoveries overthrow Darwin’s reign? Watch this talk to find out how recent findings are rewriting a century and a half of “settled science.” Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson (Ph.D Cell and Developmental Biology from Harvard University, Research Biologist) presents “Replacing Darwin: The New Origin of Species”.

image credit: Original artwork based on “Replacing Darwin: The New Origin of Species” book cover

View original post