Watching RZIM’s The Apologist a few nights ago, where they had two Christians and two atheists debating on why they believed what they believed.
Both of the RZIM apologist where former nonbelievers meaning they did not grow up in a home that taught Christianity and it made me think that former atheist or none believers seem to make really good tactical apologist meaning they defend Christianity sometimes better than Christians that grow up in a Christian home.
I’m a part of this group that grew up Christian and I’ve had to check myself and my belief and understanding of God and the nature of God and I can say growing up I was a miserable failure in defending Christianity and the fact growing up in a small down in Northern California made it that much worse
As I got older I needed to ask myself the hard questions and show evidence of why I believed what I did and this is where people that believe in God but are not grounded or have a good foundation lose the conversation when asked to show the evidence or tell why they believe and then give a coherent answer that can be understood.
Going to the Scriptures we can get a small view of this when reading 1 Peter 3:15: but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect. This requires us to do more than just say I believe in God it ask us to have an answer and how we go about answering the question.
Parents that believe in God beyond just believing in a deity need to know the how and why of God because it becomes their responsibility to teach this to their Children.
If you cannot communicate or answer why you believe then how can you yourself understand what you hold to be truth?
If I ask you why are you a Christian can you give me a good answer, if I ask you do you think you are going to heaven can you give me a good answer, if I ask you if I don’t believe in what you believe why is that wrong and will I go to heaven; can you give me a good and true Biblical answer?
These are question that we should be asking ourselves and our children. Don’t think your six year old child cannot give you a good answer if you have taught them well.
To think I’ll just drop them off at Sunday school or youth group and hope for the best is like throwing them in water and hoping they learn to swim, some will some wont maybe if you give them lessons they will learn for sure.
I feel the reason why non believers tend to give better answers is because they are new to the game and if they are serious about their conversion they tend to dive into the word deeper than people that grow up in a Christian home.
I am for one guilty of growing up in a Christian home and taking for granted that God gave me grace, I had the faith but I lacked the understanding of his nature and my nature making me ineffective as a believer to a nonbeliever.
I only bring this up because I hate to see people struggle with understanding the scriptures and being so ineffective in their belief. The most concerning is that these same people now have Children and they too become ineffective witnesses of Jesus and some even get completely lost.
I urge you if you are a believer in God, if you are a believer that Jesus is the son of God that the scriptures are the breathed word of God to then build a knowledge of understanding God. Build a defense of your faith in Jesus for others to know. The cost is time, effort and sometimes friends but the payoff is knowing who God is and how much he really loves you that he would extend his grace to you no matter who you are.
The reason why I write this blog is based on that I believe the idea of God creating the universe based in millions and billions of years only compromises with the secular world view and it has implications that are far more reaching than just difference of opinion.
If you have the time here is a nice little debate or conversation between the idea of young earth and old earth via Ken Ham and Hugh Ross. Ken Ham is young earth and backs his theology by scripture while Ross is old earth that is trying to interpret scripture and the Bible with the idea of fitting millions of years into the Biblical historical picture.
Most secularists will say both proponents Ham and Ross are wrong because the universe is billions of years old.
What I find as the problem with the old earth belief is there is not good evidence and you have to add to scripture to make the point while the young earth is better equipped to follow scripture.
Interesting out of a panel of six on this show, five of the guest believed in a young earth and one (Ross) believes in an old earth that included the big bang.
Out of that 5 only three so it was split evenly (with Ross being the 6th), but only three Ken Ham, Ray Comfort and Eric Hovid believed the scripture was more clear on the idea of each day as it was created by God (day being 24 hours) and that this statement of scripture was very important, not only understanding Biblical creation but it aided in the understanding of Biblical knowledge for everyone.
The interpretation of each creation day being one day (24 hour day) is important to teach people based on if we demand that people believe in the parting of the red seas, a virgin woman getting pregnant by the Holy Spirit and a man dying and coming back to life. How then can we tell people that in Genesis God was not talking about 24 hour day but he meant millions of years and that the passages of Genesis aids itself more to how modern science interprets the age of the earth via millions and billions of years.
On one end we demand people believe in supernatural events but in Genesis we compromise and say there is nothing supernatural how God created the universe. That statement maybe a bit over the top due to that Christians believing in a creation of a million years still view it as supernatural but the idea of God creating the world in 6 days has to be agreed as a bit more of a supernatural event than using a naturalistic way to explain creation.
Sean McDowell and John Bloom from Biola University were more on the fence of Biblical interpretation, McDowell even so far as to going there and saying so much as can we really know the true interpretation from Greek, Hebrew to English. I chalk McDowell statement to his youth; this statement is what secularist use to kill the conversation on Christians that don’t know there Biblical history or believe in actual words of our Biblical authors and we cannot accept such a statement.
Bloom and McDowell were willing to question interpretation while Comfort, Ham and Hovid felt that the Bible was God’s breathed word that all can know, people could know then (thousands of years ago) we can know now. 1 Timothy 3:16 Ephesians 4:11-16 and Hebrews 11: 1-40
McDowell and Bloom walk a slippery slope that will have you back peddling trying to explain Biblical truth in a sea of secular lies and it does not have to be that way if we take scripture at its word.
I believe Ross is trading certainty for truth and McDowell and Bloom are entertaining that idea as well Bloom more so than McDowell.
The truth is we can know scripture and what it says, understanding that not everyone will completely get what is being stated in every book or letter but the main theme of the Bible is God and following God. His grace to us and for us and how and why he did what he did for his creation.
You will see at the end of the video Ross offers a truce and I have no doubt Ross was very sincere just as I have no doubt Ross is a Bible believing man of God. The problem I have with Ross’s truce is it is not as the same way we can view the main purpose of truth from such men as George Whitfield and John Wesley.
Whitfield was a strong preacher of election with his main theme on salvation, while Wesley was a strong preacher on the will to know God with the main theme on salvation so we see two men that preached different styles had the same theme and that was salvation. This is what made these men great in the eyes of Biblical history the final authority was God and his salvation for you.
Ross’s truce is genuine but misguided based on the issue we live in different times than Wesley and Whitfield did; the average person had a standard of who was God and the respect of who God was not to mention being a pastor or evangelist during the 1700’s was a very respectable position.
Today’s western world does not respect God as it once did nor has a standard of who God is. Today’s western world does not respect men like Ross or Ham they view them as the enemy. People like Bill Nye who puts out hate messages that parents that teach creation are abusing their children.
We can easily see why main stream media and science who is desperate to be the grand daddy of all authority of life will mock and tear down our children and young people in the public arena.
How can we as Christians tell our children God did all these great supernatural things but that stuff in Genesis may not be literal, can you see why liberal Churches are not teaching that Jesus died or was born of a virgin, compromise to secularism to be relevant in today’s world is the in thing for people and Churches that think this is the only way to get people to God.
The difference between Ross and Ham is that Ham uses the Bible to interpret scripture for both knowing God and understanding God in a Biblical context with the final goal preaching the word of God for the purpose of following Jesus to salvation. Ross uses the Bible to prove science is correct and prove there is a God while returning a standard of the belief in God to science and while this is important without the notion of one following Jesus and putting God first before all things there is no real hope for people to know God.
Final thoughts I know those six men, Ham, Comfort, Hovid, Ross, McDowell and Bloom are good men of God and I know they want the best for bringing the Gospel to all people but the western world we live in is now requiring we either go with the world or against the world.
Trying to compromise or make a hybrid world view with a mix of some world and some Christianity will not work. It is not Biblical to mix Holiness with evil 1 Corinthians 15:33, like my old youth pastor use to say, two rivers running into each other, one is flowing clear blue water the other is dirty brown water and when the two come together and mix the clear blue water turns to dirty brown. The two cannot mix.
Abortion has to end now, pro life and right to life groups are for slow incrementalism.
The goal is to slowly change the laws state by state all the while change the hearts and minds of humans that abortion is wrong.
I completely understand this but logically this form of action makes no sense.
For one point of logic the right to kill an unborn child with the idea that the baby is not a real human these days is antiquated and out dated at best.
In an age of 3D sonograms and medical sonograms that show at 5 weeks (one month) this is a baby and we are still saying “yes you can kill that child”.
Interesting note do a web search on sonograms and just about every medical site uses the term baby not globs of cells.
It took one day in 1973 for unelected judges to legalize killing our offspring yet we are expected to be patient and allow smart guys using the political process to slowly change the law through court cases one at a time. In the meantime millions of babies are being killed each year, in this country alone over a billion world wide since 1973.
The logical option is to end abortion now, every state needs to end abortion now today not tomorrow.
So what if the federal government says its legal, each state can still end abortion now.
Plenty of states have laws that are contrary to federal law yet they choose not to follow or the Feds choose not to prosecute so the precedent has been set many years ago, we don’t need judges to tell our states what kind of killing is right and wrong we need to end abortion now.
The logic is today all states make abortion illegal and criminal.
Now that it is illegal then pro life, right to life and all the good men and women everywhere can start explaining why killing your child is wrong. Why life is important, we educate people we educate our children why life is better alive than dead.
It is easier to explain to somebody why somethings is wrong to do when it’s wrong to do it.
When something is against the law you have a precedence on your side, you have the the legal right to explain why it’s wrong, the morality of the issue makes more sense because the law states this is wrong.
The ethics and philosophy of the law makes more sense and scientifically it confirms that yes there is a baby in that belly yes there is life living here.
Pro life and pro choice cannot be a preference, it cannot be an opinion abortion has to end now we owe this to our children and to the human race.
Logic demands we end abortion now
Time to go to war with Islam or with those evil sects that Islam breads”, this is the easy way for people, heads of states and leaders of countries to say yet most never attempt.
It’s a complete symptom of when people and countries that deny God in order to maintain that it is fair and just for everyone all the while allowing sects of religions and beliefs that has no real regard to humanity just its own to grow and live unassimilated and in contempt of lives and countries that all the while have taken them in, fed them and protected them.
The easy way out is “let’s go to war” but how many times has mankind done this. How may people have shed blood over and over to beat back evil but never confront and deal with evil.
Because if they confront one form of evil they will have to eventually confront another from, a form that is much closer to home. A form of evil they themselves have taken in, fed and protected all the while that evil has had no regard for them and their families and is in contempt of their lives, their states and their countries
The hard way that few, if any want to try will requires people to admit secularism, humanism and naturalism and all the idols of their personal lives have failed. The hard way is for people to say “it’s time we repent” and start converting them to follow Jesus.
Iowa Caucus done and in the books, big winners big losers this week.
Big winners on the GOP have to be Cruz who won but barely, Trump and Rubio. Both Trump and Rubio were not pummeled but stayed real close and that is a win.
To me this is a real win for Americans in general, both Cruz and Rubio have good plans for America both are pro life and both have good tax plans as well. I view both Cruz and Rubio as pretty good statesmen with Cruz getting the node based on his smaller government ideology over Rubio.
What about Trump well I just don’t have the faith in the Donald like others. A red herring is my first thought, a man who use to support the Clintons, was a self toting liberal from New York just does not have my trust Ross Perot comes to mind. Could Trump have changed and gone middle of the road GOP well of course anything is possible I just don’t trust him at this point he won’t get my primary vote.
Big losers in the GOP Paul, Bush and the rest. I like Paul and hope he can climb back up but I have to admit I’m glad to see Bush fair so poorly. What I would like to see is Paul, Cruz and Rubio fight it out instead of Trump. I know these are political guys in the establishment but these three men have in my opinion the best ideas for America at this point in our time.
Big winner in the DNC are both Clinton and Sanders, Sanders holding on tight and probably will win New Hampshire but after that I think Clinton will blow his doors off.
The losers in the DNC are O’Malley and the American people. Right now the big winner for Sanders is Karl Marx. The fact Americans have split the vote between a lier and a socialist that cannot understand economics is sad very sad indeed. Both Clinton and Sanders want government growth and the only way to do this is for you to give the government your money.
You cannot have free collage, free internet without somebody paying for it. Teacher do not teach for free and AT&T does not give out free data plans. Socially the DNC is morally bankrupt, theft from personal property to pay for free stuff is morally wrong. Killing innocent unborn humans is morally wrong, dismantling the traditional family is morally wrong and those are just the basics.
This is the year people, the year you decide what kind of America do you want, choose wisely because we cannot take back what we choose. In a good world view one should be able to do so but in a real world view it won’t be given back, you are stuck with what you took.
Reading a blog just the other day from a liberal Christian blogger who felt that today’s church needs to bow down to the world and apologize to the LGBTQ society for I’m guessing not occluding them.
This poses a few questions from me, what church is there certain denomination? Is it any evangelical church, Roman or charismatic Catholics, Eastern Orthodox churches could you put Orthodox Jewish Synagogue’s as well. Is it the pastor that needs to apologize, the elders, the congregation because that is the church you and I are the church.
Let us just assume our blogger is pointing the finger to any church that refused to bow down to practicing the LGBTQ lifestyle within the confines of the church and Christianity. Christians are not to judge the outside of the church, 1 Corinthians 5: 12-13 (the world). God will and with that Christians do not owe the world an apology for standing with the word of God. The Church does not owe those outside of it an apology for not compromising with an amoral society that does not follow The God of the Bible.
But do we owe the LGBTQ society inside the church an apology for not compromising with their behavior? There really is not much difference sin wise when a person that deals with same sex attraction as does a person that is dealing with sexual addiction of the opposite sex. People have their vices but what separates the believer from the non believer is the continuing hunger to strive for God’s obedience.
People that believe obey and people that obey believe to paraphrase Dietrich Bonhoeffer, repentance is part of obeying God’s word. A question to our blogger is where in the Gospel does God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit condone and promote the LGBTQ lifestyle?
We are not stating when and where do we stop loving somebody for practicing a lifestyle outside of Biblical principles but do we condone, do we promote and do we except it as part of Christian life and in the church? Same sex attraction can be accommodated in the Christian church just as sex addiction, drug addiction, lying and idolatry but it cannot be practiced, condoned or promoted.
The accommodation comes in the form of love understanding and help to overcome the sin, not to hatefully judge but to lovingly support and work with the individuals in their healing.
Maybe it’s the other way around maybe LGBTQ crowed need to apologize to the church for not identifying with Jesus and his teachings and not being sensitive to the church and what the church is commanded to follow. What is the identity of a person or group that does not put God first and follow Jesus and his teaching both old and New Testament?
If the church needs to apologize it should be the church that has compromised with the world to Christians for leading them from the Gospel. A church that conveniently overlooks God and his moral law for fear of alienating people is no church but just a body of people that have religion but no God.
If we accept the notion that America should not be or is not a Christian national we fail to see the consequences that could have been and will be.
The founding framers attempted to design the constitution with the adaptation of natural law. They were of course a few ticks off but still maintained the importance of the need of The God of the Bible essence to be an integral part of the framework.
A strong percentage of our framers belonged to one church denomination or another, whether they were truly saved is not ours to judge but we have to know this affiliation to a Judeo-Christian church had to influence their judgment when creating a country such as America.
If we take Christianity away then we need only to take away some of our founding fathers like George Washington wondering would we have won the revolution without him and his Christian influence. Would a country full of atheist, Islamism, Buddhist and Hindus could have challenged the crown.
Would we still have a two party political system with the democrats and the Wigs parties? One could argue there would be no need for a man like Abraham Lincoln and how long would America continue slavery without the objection of the Christians.
In 1821 Benjamin Lunday, a Quaker from Ohio, started an anti-slavery newspaper “The Genius of Universal Emancipation.” 1830: The Plantation Mission Movement began. Methodist chapels were constructed on many plantations. 1959 John Brown raid on Haper’s ferry are just a few of the many Christian movements that combated slavery in America.
Christian missionaries moved in to helping the Native Americans, Christianizing many tribes over the years one notable being the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma.
As America became more prosperous missionary work flourished, one can easily criticize America’s greed but one cannot take away from prosperous people that gave and continue to give for and to missionaries to help the poor and disadvantaged in this country and abroad with privet contributions.
Much of our colleges we have today started out as Christian based education, Harvard, Yale, Princeton to name a few.
Civil rights movement of the 1960’s was heavily Christian with Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King and seminary students like John Lewis
We can argue and debate on this issue but it’s fairly easy to see the Christian influences in this country are huge. Can we say we are not a Christian nation well I guess one can make the case but we have to say we are a nation of Christian’s and a nation that has been impacted by Christianity. Can you make a case that our government should be secular, yes you can but we must then demand or statesmen and women to be Godly?
Our government functionality should be unbiased to everyone but the people that fill those positions in government should be Godly good statesmen.
If we have bad statesmen then we have bad government, ungodly statesmen ungodly government. In past it was important that anyone serving the public have some ties to a Judeo-Christian believing church of some kind. You can argue this is not fair for a county that embraces all religions all faiths but I’m not sure your argument would be valid.
Go back to the founding framers and their original intentions of natural law, this requires a statesman to know and understand moral law to govern. Can men and women of other faith know and understand good and bad and how morality plays out in a society; to an extent they can but they will fail to grasp why and who set these laws in motion thus the slow migration from a good and moral set of rules to a mixture of moral relativism.
I suspect the last few sentences will enrage some people, we can say America was not intended to be a Christian only nation but we have to admit it is a nation of Christians that have impacted society and helped design country based on a rule and law held on a notion of a creator and one God. A country based on a God with a moral law to protect and govern all that live in this great nation.
Hugh Hefner waves the white flag ending nudity in the long publication of Playboy magazine while Miley Cyrus gets ready to perform an all nude concert.
Playboy magazine recognizes pornography has engulfed our society so much so Playboy magazine and it’s so called classy nudity is no longer enough to keep the boys happy, a few clicks and you see way beyond what Playboy can offer and best of all or not it is free.
Miley Cyrus who is determined to be the Madonna of her generation plans to perform 6 concerts completely nude along with the band and the audience.
It’s not enough to one up the sex drugs and rock and roll culture Miley needs to take it to the next level but how far is too far and will it ever be too far. Galatians 5:19-21 those who fill their hearts and mind with this will not inherit the Kingdom of God
Reminiscent of the days of anything goes punk rock bands maybe but if Cyrus pulls this off it will trump the deviant norm.
So Miley, the band and the audience enjoy a clothing free concert, what will be next? Will this be as far as Miley and her entourage dare or will the fans, the sponsors and the promoters demand more.
More nudity, add live sex, drugs and some rock n roll and we have achieved a full live on stage pornography show way beyond anything Hugh and the boys at Playboy could have ever imagined.
The conclusion to this is simple; sin if not avoided will continue to grow. Proverbs 6:16-19 states there are six things the Lord hates and one being feet that make haste to run to evil why you ask because it grows larger and corrupts.
Hugh Hefner and Miley Cyrus are lying to you and your children another one of those six sins the Lord hates. They are lying to you and your children that casual sex, drugs, and pornography does not exploit nor destroy people.
Pornography is fine, sex drugs don’t matter nothing will happen. Would you let your son hang with Miley and would you let your daughter date Heff; if not why not, are they not role models; do what they stand for you stand for as well? Philippians 4:8 Turn from sin stand with truth.
In the wake of the Oregon shooting one can easily see the division between not only liberals and pro second amendment people but also between liberal Christians and Christians that believe in the constitution and the 2nd amendment freedoms.
I even read one blog where a liberal Christian blatantly refused to morn with Christians that believed in the right of gun ownership. Sad but true, I understand it in the secular world for such division to be held but it saddens me to see Christians divided amongst each other over such issues.
As a conservative Christian myself who believes in the private ownership of guns, knives, bats, gloves, helmets and any other recreational tools or forms of defense and a believer in the constitution that our founding famers wrote and went to war over. I want to offer this to my liberal Christian and non Christian country men as well my fellow conservatives. I want to ask you to forgive me.
What happened in Oregon is a tragedy but it won’t stop, no matter if you believe in conspiracies or just these things happen; this kind of behavior will continue to make news when we continue live in a world, country and state that worships death over Jesus.
Ephesians 4:32 “Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you
I’m not asking you to forgive the shooter although that is a step we can take, I am asking we have patients on how each other feel on this issue.
Is your issue about a shooting by a man (whether he was atheist or had Islamic ties) that walked up and shot people (regardless if they where Christians or not) or is your issue on how can a person believe in gun ownership and still hold to the values of Jesus because those are two different issues based on the fact shootings happen along with knifings and choking the live out of somebody. What is your issue and can you work though it enough to forgive your neighbor and yourself.
Christian in fighting is just what Satan orders to render Christianity and your faith useless. John 10:10 tell us what Satan wants to do he is the thief and he wants to steal from you but Jesus came to counter that attack.
Fall for Satan’s deceit and you are useless in God’s order of preaching the Gospel to the lost.
We can disagree on many things theology, doctrine, pro gun ownership but when we let this cloud our love from each other we lost and Satan has blocked you and your power in reaching the lost.
I’m not asking you to be a drone as some people think Christians are I’m asking will you forgive me. I believe what I believe, in private ownership and my responsibilities to my fellow man if you don’t agree then please just forgive me.
Maybe we just don’t think on the same level or have competing ideas but if you believe Jesus came, died and rose again to save mine and your soul then we do agree on something bigger than a gun or the constitution and that we can agree on.