April 28, 2015

What I’ve Been Reading: What Every Christian Needs to Know About the Qur’an

Posted by Jason Dulle under Book Reviews, Islam, Religions
[21] Comments 

Need to Know about Qur'anIslam is the second largest religion in the world, and growing rapidly.  As such, it’s important for Christians to have a basic understanding of this formidable religion, and in particular, it’s sacred text, the Qur’an.  Christian apologist, James White, has written an excellent book – What Every Christian Needs to Know About the Qur’an – that provides Christians with a basic understanding of the Qur’an, focusing on the topics that divide Muslims and Christians.

White begins the book by making a case for why Christians should concern themselves with the teachings of the Qur’an.  From there, he provides a broad overview of both Muhammad and the Qur’an:

  • A brief sketch of Muhammad’s life and the origin of Islam
  • According to Muslims, the Qur’an was written by God from eternity past and merely dictated to Muhammad by an angel over a period of 22 years. As such, it is inerrant.
  • The central tenet of faith for Muslims is the absolute numerical oneness of God (tawhid), and a confession that Muhammad is His greatest and last prophet.
  • The worst of all sins is to associate anything with God (shirk), so the Christian claim that Jesus is God is shirk.

While White’s book is not written as a refutation of the Qur’an’s claims to be divine revelation, there are a number of points raised in the book that expose the Qur’an’s claims as false:

(more…)

 

April 12, 2015

If you know God exists, you are an atheist?

Posted by Jason Dulle under Apologetics, Atheism, Atheistic objections, Epistemology, Logic, Tactics
[74] Comments 

Christian apologist, Tyler Vela, has observed that atheists like to define “atheism” and “belief” in very nontraditional ways, and these definitions lead to an absurdity. Consider the following: “Atheist” is redefined as someone who merely lacks the belief that God exists (rather than someone who believes God does not exist), and “belief” is redefined as holding something to be true without evidence (rather than a mental disposition concerning the truth of some proposition). Given these definitions, if God did something by which all people had direct and incontrovertible evidence that He existed, then no one could believe in God (since His existence is no longer an opinion without evidence). If no one believes in God because they know God exists, then they are atheists (because atheists lack a belief in God’s existence). Ironically, then, everyone would be an atheist precisely because they know God exists.

(more…)

 

April 7, 2015

Muslim bakeries refusing same-sex wedding cakes

Posted by Jason Dulle under Apologetics, Ethics, Fun, Political Incorrectness, Same-sex Marriage
[4] Comments 

In light of my recent post regarding religious freedom, Lowder with Chowder has a great video talking about this issue.  He illustrates it by showing what happens when a supposedly homosexual man asks a number of Muslim bakeries to bake him a same-sex wedding cake.  The end is great too.  He addresses the idea that people should not go into business unless they have no conscience or are willing to violate their conscience are willing to provide their services for any purpose.

 

April 6, 2015

The sociology of cohabitation: “Shacking up” isn’t such a good idea after all

Posted by Jason Dulle under Holiness, Sin, Social
[14] Comments 

CohabitationCohabitation – the politically correct term for what used to be called “shacking up” – has become very common in our day.  Nearly 8 million opposite-sex couples live together today, compared to less than 1 million 30 years ago.  Nearly 10% of all opposite-sex couples are cohabiting, and over half of all first marriages are preceded by a period of cohabitation.

How did we get here?

How did cohabitation go from being illegal in all states prior to 1970 and held in moral contempt by society at large to being so ubiquitous and accepted today?  There are several reasons:

  • The sexual revolution removed the moral stigma of premarital sex.
  • Our culture has moved from a culture of traditions and social conformity to a culture of individualism and personal gratification.
  • We shifted from a deontological view of morality to a pragmatic and relativistic view of morality in which any activity that does not cause harm to others is morally permissible.
  • The recognition of the fragility of marriage, and a corresponding fear of divorce.
  • The rise of feminism which rejected the traditional roles played by married women. Cohabitation promised personal autonomy and more relationship equity.
  • The increasing economic independence of women made marriage less necessary for them. And men, who are generally more fearful of commitment, supported the arrangement since it still provided for their needs of sexual gratification and domestic support.[1]

Cohabitation is not what it seems

(more…)

 

April 3, 2015

Why Moral Platonism Is Not a Good Explanation for Objective Morality

Posted by Jason Dulle under Apologetics, Moral Argument, Theistic Arguments
[23] Comments 

PlatoVirtually all moral theories end up with a subjective version of morality (including evolutionary explanations of morality), in which moral values have their genesis in the human will in one way or another. In our moral experience, however, we have a basic moral intuition that moral values are objective.

To say a moral value is objective is to say its truth value does not depend on any human knower. So, for example, to say that killing Jews simply because of their ethnicity is immoral in an objective sense is to say that killing Jews is wrong whether anyone believes it to be wrong or not. If Hitler had won the war and eliminated everyone that thought the Holocaust was immoral, such that everyone believed it was moral, it would still, in fact, be immoral.

(more…)

 

April 1, 2015

Navy Chaplain May Be Terminated for Speaking Against Homosexuality

Posted by Jason Dulle under Apologetics, Homosexuality
[9] Comments 

Read about the story here.  Just remember, homosexual advocacy and same-sex marriage will not affect anyone.

Update: Wes Modder has been cleared of all wrong-doing and will be allowed to retire from the Navy. It’s not clear whether this is a forced retirement or not.

 

March 31, 2015

The First Amendment be damned: Homosexual rights even trump Constitutional and basic human rights

Posted by Jason Dulle under Apologetics, Homosexuality, Political Incorrectness, Same-sex Marriage
[7] Comments 

For those who are reacting so negatively to the Indiana religious freedom law, do you not realize what you are saying (even if not explicitly)? You are saying that people should not have the right to live out their own religious convictions and follow their own conscience. Read that sentence again. Say it out loud. You are saying we should deny these American citizens a Constitutional right that is 200+ years old so that we can uphold these new same-sex marriage rights that are less than 10 years old and nowhere to be found in the Constitution. You would deny American citizens a basic human right (the free exercise of religion and conscience) in favor of a right we just made up a few years ago.

(more…)

 

March 27, 2015

Christian ethics are, but Christianity is not…true

Posted by Jason Dulle under Apologetics, Ethics, Theology
[41] Comments 

Some people value Christian ethics, but deny that Christianity itself is true. This makes no sense. The truth of Christian ethics is directly dependent on the truth of Christian metaphysics. If Christian metaphysics are mistaken, then the ethics that flow from those metaphysics have no basis in reality (on the Christian worldview).

Granted, it could still be the case that Christian ethics are still true in toto or in part, even if Christian metaphysics is false. But in that case, they are true in virtue of the truth of some other metaphysical worldview or meta-ethical system. So why continue to embrace these ethics as CHRISTIAN ethics if their truth is grounded in something other than Christianity? It’s one thing to affirm that Christian ethics are true even if Christianity isn’t, but it’s another thing to subscribe to Christian ethics as CHRISTIAN ethics while denying that Christianity is true.

 

March 27, 2015

Indiana governor signs free exercise of religion bill

Posted by Jason Dulle under Apologetics, Homosexuality, Political Incorrectness, Politics, Same-sex Marriage
[4] Comments 

Indiana Governor, Mike Pence, has signed legislation that prevents anyone (individuals, business owners, organizations) from being forced to violate their conscience and religious convictions (what the bill calls “exercise of religion”). One would think the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution would be enough to secure these rights, but not these days. While the historical context of the bill is surely recent examples in which business owners have been forced by state governments to offer their services to homosexuals in ways that violate their conscience and religious convictions, the bill does not make any reference to homosexuality in particular. It is a general protection religious freedom.

This bill will prevent Jewish publishers from being forced by law to print anti-Jewish propaganda, gay sign-makers from being forced to make signs that condemn homosex, and Christian business owners from being forced by law to provide services that violate their religious convictions.  Like it or not, agree with it or not – that is true freedom of conscience and freedom of religion.

You can read the text of the law here.  An excellent legal analysis can be found here.

 

March 25, 2015

Morality cannot exist if God exists?

Posted by Jason Dulle under Apologetics, Atheistic objections, Moral Argument, Theistic Arguments
[38] Comments 

Garret Merriam

Professor Garret Merriam argues that if God exists, then we can’t be moral.   In other words, we can only be moral if morality is not grounded in God’s existence.  This is a reversal of the moral argument for God’s existence.  It’s a moral argument against God’s existence.

Like many new atheists, Merriam argues that the Christian God commands and commits evil, so if morality is rooted in God and our moral duties are based on God’s commands, morality is impossible.  I don’t accept the premise that God commands or commits evil, but let’s grant it for the sake of argument.  Does his conclusion follow?  No.

(more…)

 

March 16, 2015

What I’ve Been Reading: The Bible and Homosexual Practice – Texts and Hermeneutics

Posted by Jason Dulle under Apologetics, Homosexuality
[46] Comments 

Bible Homosexual PracticeFor more than three thousand years Jews and Christians have understood the Bible to condemn homosex in no uncertain terms.  Today, however, we are witnessing the rise of a gay hermeneutic that reinterprets the Bible’s teachings on homosex in a way that allows for at least some forms of homosex.  While small in number, this movement has a handful of reputable scholars making their case.  So what does the Bible really say?  Have we misunderstood the Bible on this issue for millennia, or are the Scriptures being twisted by those who want the Scriptures to affirm homosex for various personal or social reasons?

Robert Gagnon’s The Bible and Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics is a must-read for everyone who want to know what the Bible has to say on this topic.  Gagnon examines the relevant OT (creation, cursing of Ham, concubine, Sodom and Gomorrah, Leviticus, cult prostitutes, David and Jonathan) and NT texts in depth, the cultural background of the Ancient Near East (ANE), and classic arguments offered against homosex (focusing on the argument from anatomical complementarity and natural function).  He finishes the book by interacting with arguments against the Bible’s enduring authority on this issue, showing how none of them are successful.

(more…)

 

March 13, 2015

What I’ve Been Reading: The Soul – How We Know It’s Real and Why It Matters

Posted by Jason Dulle under Apologetics, Book Reviews, Dualism, Naturalism, Science, Theism, Theistic Arguments
[17] Comments 

SoulUntil relatively recently, most people believed that human beings are constituted of both body and soul.  With the rise of materialism, Darwinism, and neuroscience, however, this notion is under scrutiny and dismissed by most secular thinkers as ridiculous.  The notion that humans have souls is tantamount to a “ghost in the machine,” as British philosopher Gilbert Ryle put it.

The existence of the soul is important to Christianity for a variety of reasons.  First, the Scriptures teach that humans have souls.  If we don’t, then Scripture is wrong.  Second, if humans lack souls, then there is no life beyond the grave (at least prior to the resurrection).  But apart from the Bible or human tradition, why should we think the soul exists?  That is the subject of J.P. Moreland’s newest book, The Soul: How We Know It’s Real and Why It Matters.

This is not the first book Moreland has written on the subject, but it is the first book that is easily accessible to a lay audience. In less than 200 pages, Moreland lays out the case for the existence of the soul, the nature of the soul/consciousness, and the afterlife. He manages to examine the Biblical teaching on the topic as well.

While the modern tendency is to reduce the mind to the brain (appealing to neuroscience for empirical evidence), Moreland argues that this is manifestly false because mental properties are not identical to brain properties.  If mental properties cannot be reduced to physical properties, then the mind is not a physical thing, but an immaterial substance.

(more…)

 

March 9, 2015

Can evolution explain objective morality?

Posted by Jason Dulle under Apologetics, Atheistic objections, Moral Argument, Theistic Arguments
[36] Comments 

MoralityThere are two senses in which something can be considered good.  Something can be good in a pragmatic sense: that which is the most effective means for obtaining some desired outcome.  For example, if we desire to eat an ice cream cone without getting ice cream on our clothes, it is “good” to start eating from the top of the cone rather than the bottom.  This kind of goodness is judged by something’s utility.  It is considered good because it works well, and the human subject values the fact that it works well.  We might call this kind of goodness “pragmatic goodness.”

Something can also be good in the sense that it has intrinsic moral virtue/character.  For example, it is “good” to try to save someone who is drowning.  This kind of goodness is judged by the intrinsic moral character of the act itself, rather than its utility.  Indeed, risking one’s life to save a stranger has little utility for the rescuer, but great moral virtue nonetheless.  This sort of goodness is not determined by what we desire or the value we attach to the outcome, but is rooted in the moral character of the act itself, wholly independent of what any human may think about it.[1]  We might call this kind of goodness “moral goodness.”  This is the kind of goodness moral philosophers have in mind when they talk about objective morality. (more…)

 

March 3, 2015

Will God Forgive Intentional Sin?

Posted by Jason Dulle under Forgiveness, Hamartiology, Holiness, Theology | Tags: , |
[82] Comments 

SinMany Christians wonder whether God will forgive them for intentional sin – particularly premeditated and habitual sins.  It’s easy to believe God will forgive us for accidental sins, but not for sins that we plan out in advance or choose to do over and over again.

So, will God forgive such sins?  Before we answer that question we should be clear about what God thinks of these sins.  He hates them because He hates all sin.  Sin is contrary to His holy nature.  Sin ruptures God’s relationship with us, and this grieves Him.  He has given us the power to choose righteousness (Romans 6; 8:1-4) and yet we choose unrighteousness instead. (more…)

 

February 27, 2015

No NT Promise that Jesus Would Come “Soon”

Posted by Jason Dulle under Eschatology, Theology
[9] Comments 

jesus-coming-soonBen Witherington III has argued that references to Jesus returning “soon” are based on a mistranslation of en taxei. Rather than referring to when Jesus will come (soon), it refers to how Jesus will come when He does (quickly).  This is important to claims that the NT teaches that Jesus was expected to return in the first century, or the expectation of a pre-tribulation return of Christ.

___________________

[1]Ben Witherington III, “’En Taxei’ – Quickly or Soon?”; available from http://www.patheos.com/blogs/bibleandculture/2015/01/25/en-taxei-quickly-or-soon/; Internet; accessed 17 February 2015.

 

February 26, 2015

What is the oldest NT manuscript?

Posted by Jason Dulle under Bible, Textual Criticism
Leave a Comment 

That’s an easy answer: p52 (a fragment of John 18).  Perhaps not.  P52 is typically dated to A.D. 125-175. There is a fragment of Matthew 21, p104, that is dated to A.D. 100-200.  The mean age of both manuscripts is A.D. 150, but if p104 is as early as its terminus a quo, then p104 may be the earliest NT manuscript.

P52

P52

 

P104

P104

Of course, there is still the possibility that we have a fragment of Mark’s gospel dated to before A.D. 90. The court is still out on this one since the research on this fragment has yet to be published. If it turns out to be a valid date, it would be the first NT fragment from the first century to be discovered – an exciting prospect indeed!

 

February 25, 2015

TN Pastor Gets the Revelation that Homosexuality is Morally Fine

Posted by Jason Dulle under Apologetics, Homosexuality
[10] Comments 

Country music star and confessing Christian, Carrie Underwood, has voiced her support for homosexuality and same-sex marriage in the past.  Now, her pastor – Stan Mitchell of GracePoint Church in Franklin, Tennessee – has followed suit.[1]  He announced to his church that

Full privileges are extended now to you [practicing homosexuals] with the same expectations of faithfulness, sobriety, holiness, wholeness, fidelity, godliness, skill and willingness. That is expected of all. Full membership means being able to serve in leadership and give all of your gifts and to receive all the sacraments; not only communion and baptism, but child dedication and marriage.

What?  Expectations of holiness and godliness?  How can they be holy and godly when they are engaging in sexual behavior that the Bible condemns as abominable?  That’s like telling adulterers in the congregation that their behavior is fine so long as they have sex outside of marriage in holiness and godliness.  Their behavior is the opposite of holiness.  (more…)

 

February 24, 2015

Should Christians smoke marijuana?

Posted by Jason Dulle under Hamartiology, Holiness, Theology
[18] Comments 

Cannabis leaf on grunge background, shallow DOF.Now that Colorado, Washington, Oregon, Alaska, and Washington D.C. have legalized the recreational use of marijuana, more Christians are asking whether smoking marijuana is truly immoral. After all, it’s legal.[1] Joe Carter has a thoughtful article on this issue that I found extremely helpful.[2] He argues that smoking marijuana is immoral. Here is Carter’s argument in a nutshell (with some ad-lib on my part at certain points): (more…)

 

February 23, 2015

The meaning of porneia in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9 – What was Jesus’ justification for divorce?

Posted by Jason Dulle under Marriage and Divorce, Theology
[12] Comments 

porneiaDavid Janzen wrote an article in 2001 that was published in the Journal for the Study of the New Testament on the meaning of porneia in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9.[1] In Matthew’s account of Jesus’ teaching on marriage and divorce, Jesus only allows for divorce in cases of porneia.  But what does this refer to?  It’s usually translated as “adultery,” but the Greek word for adultery is moicheia.  Porneia has a wider semantic rate, referring to a range of sexual sins.  It can be used of adultery, incest, pre-marital sex, etc.

Janzen argues that Jesus’ use of porneia is best understood from the cultural context.  In Jesus’ day, some argued that divorce could be obtained for any reason, while others argued that one must have just cause.  All agreed, however, that the husband only had to return the wife’s dowry to her if he had just cause for divorcing her.  Jesus sided with those who taught that the only justification for divorce was a just cause.  He identified that cause as porneia.  What does porneia refer to?  Is he referring to a wide range of sexual sins?  Janzen argues that the cultural context makes it likely that porneia refers specifically to something akin to adultery.  Why didn’t Matthew use moicheia, then?  The most likely explanation is that Jesus was not limiting the exception to sex with another person during the marriage (adultery), but was also including sex with another person during the betrothal period (which, in Jesus’ day, was as legally binding as marriage).

Check out the article: Porneia in Mt 5_32 and 19_9–Janzen

_____________________

[1]David Janzen, “The Meaning of Porneia in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9: An Approach From the Study of Ancient Near Eastern Culture,” in Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 2001; 23; 66; available from http://jnt.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/23/80/66.

 

February 16, 2015

Is the Daniel Fast Biblical?

Posted by Jason Dulle under Theology
[5] Comments 

Lions Daniel FastWhenever an all-church fast is called, pastors commonly give people a range of fasting options to engender wider participation.  On the one extreme, total abstention from food and drink (except water) is called for.  On the other extreme is what is often called “the Daniel Fast.”  This is usually defined as eating only vegetables and drinking liquids.

Two passages of Scripture are called upon to support the Daniel Fast: Daniel 1:8-16 and 10:2-3.  We’ll look at both in turn to see whether either of them teach a fast involving the eating of only vegetables. (more…)

 

« Previous Page — Next Page »