Showing posts from May, 2011

Founder of NASA Space Program Speaks In Favor of Creation

The following is an excerpt from the book, The Collapse of Evolution by Scott M. Huse; I found it to be quite pertinent to today's Creation vs. Evolution debate. This is a letter written by Wernher von Braun, father of NASA's space program, to the California State Board of Education, on September 14, 1972: Dear Mr. Grose:      In response to your inquiry about my personal views concerning the "Case for DESIGN" as a viable scientific theory for the origin of the universe, life and man, I am pleased to make the following observations.      For me, the idea of a creation is not conceivable without invoking the necessity of design. One cannot be exposed to the law and order of the universe without concluding that there must be design and purpose behind it all. In the world around us, we can behold the obvious manifestations of an ordered, structured plan or design. We can see the will of the species to live and propagate. And we are humbled by the powerful forces a

An Open Letter To Harold Camping From the DCF Blog

Dear Mr. Camping, I am disheartened to hear that you have again predicted the end of the world – this time on October 21, 2011. I have read numerous articles on your predictions that May 21 st was initially the end of the world; and more importantly, I have read the Bible on the topic, Mr. Camping. I would like to bring to your attention several things which it appears that you missed when researching this in your Bible. First and foremost, in an interview that you did just ten days before May 21st , you stated that the Bible is “very factual.” You also stated elsewhere that you had developed some mathematical equations using the Bible – the book of Genesis particularly –from which you arrived at your conclusions. But stating that the Bible is simply “very factual” would seem to downplay that it is inerrant, being “God-breathed” – “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the m

The End of the World?

With only a few minutes until the 6 PM deadline when Christ returns, according to Harold Camping, I wanted to share a few thoughts on this topic. Firstly, I wonder if Camping may be of Jehovah's Witness background. The Watchtower has been predicting the end of the world for years now and each time they are wrong. Camping even made an identical prediction in 1994 . This would seem to indicate that he is a false prophet according to Deuteronomy 18:22 which states: when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing does not happen or come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him. ~ Deuteronomy 18:22 What gets me is how Camping could think he can accurately predict the end of the world to the exact time when Jesus clearly said, "“But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father" (Mark 13:32). I find it sad that so many

Inspiring Story: A Skeptic's Surprise

For today's Inspiring Story on this Friday apologetics finds weekend, I am posting Lee Strobel's testimony. There have been some skeptics who claim that Lee is in it for the money, but when you consider his lifestyle prior to his conversion to Christianity and his background as a journalist, it is pretty easy to tell that this guy is genuine. I highly recommend his "Case" books (and in my opinion, he certainly makes a good "case" for Christianity). Lee has also recently come out with a new book titled "The Ambition: A Novel." You can visit his website here .

Richard Dawkins Debates (Or Lack Thereof)

Recently,  an article came out stating that Richard Dawkins is a coward for refusing to debate Dr. William Lane Craig. According to the article, Dawkins received four requests from Dr. Craig via " The British Humanist Association, The Cambridge Debating Union, the Oxford Christian Union and Premier Radio," but he refused them all stating " that Prof Craig is not a figure worthy of his attention and has reportedly said that such a contest would 'look good' on his opponent’s CV but not on his own." One of Dawkin's colleagues is taking issue with this saying that  “The absence of a debate with the foremost apologist for Christian theism is a glaring omission on your CV and is of course apt to be interpreted as cowardice on your part. “I notice that, by contrast, you are happy to discuss theological matters with television and radio presenters and other intellectual heavyweights like Pastor Ted Haggard of the National Association of Evangelicals and Pasto

The New Tolerance

I haven't posted in a while so while I work on articles and sort out some other apologetics business, I thought I would show you what came in my mailbox this evening: It's the last book from my Easter pack (which I was able to pick out myself), "The New Tolerance," signed by apologists Josh McDowell! Here's a quick synopsis of the book: In The New Tolerance , Josh McDowell and Bob Hostetler unmask the true nature of a cultural movement of "tolerance," as well as its dangerous agenda. This book will not only help you to understand the modern doctrine of tolerance but equip you to counter its insidious effects on your faith and your children... I do plan to write a review of the book and post some articles on this topic in the future, but for now, check out this one by Christopher Copan Scott (son of  professor of Philosophy, author, and speaker   Paul Copan ) entitled "Toward a Substantive Understanding of Tolerance."   “Tolerance

Featured Blog: Faithful Thinkers

Recently, I have been debating an atheist. Like most atheists, he believes in evolution. The trouble with discussing this topic with him is that he makes no distinction between micro-evolution and macro-evolution. Now, micro-evolution is small changes within species; there are variations within species (for example, dogs will always produce dogs -- from Great Dane to Chihuahua -- they will never produce cats or any other species). This is observable in nature. Macro-evolution is major changes, from one species to a completely different species, over long periods of time. An example would be a rat evolving into an ape (seriously, this atheist brought that up and admitted that he has no idea what transitional mammal would be in-between!). I think it's rather obvious that the two are not the same (and of course, macro-evolution has never been observed). But you will recall that this atheist does not see a distinction between the two. His reasoning was that macro-evolution requires m