Comments in this recent discussion of apologetic methodologies by Liberty University professor Gary Habermas led me to find a paper he wrote on the topic, making the same claims back in 2002. Habermas is a well-known evidentialist and he defends his views in a faculty research paper entitled “Greg Bahnsen, John Warwick Montgomery, and Evidential […]
You know your society is in bad shape when even its conservatism is based on Darwinism. Unfortunately, this is exactly the state of jurisprudence that has manifested in the oral argumentation for the Obergefell “gay marriage” case. This revelation appeared in an exchange between Justice Breyer and the lawyer for the conservative side. Breyer moved […]
In a recent pair of attacks on the use of Presuppositional Apologetics (PA) in the abortion debate, Pyromanics (brought to you by MacArthur’s own Phil Johnson) blogger Frank Turk taunts all would-be critics, “Pack a Lunch.” Let me say, I am glad I saved my lunch until afterward. Turk blasts: [L]et me say this to […]
Many Christians balk at the mention of critical thinking. They associate the phrase with skepticism and “criticism” of the Bible and of religion in general; thus, they want nothing to do with it. “Critical thinking” gets taught at colleges and places where they use reason and logic to lure children away from the faith their parents taught them. While university professors have often stolen away children in the name of “critical thinking,” the unbelieving skepticism promoted by these types does not deserve the label: it is not “critical” in the least bit, at least not in the biblical sense of the term.
When thinking of the famous Greek scientist and great man of physics, Archimedes, (287 B.C.â€”212 B.C.) you might recall the historical account that has him running naked through the streets of Syracuse in Sicily crying Eureka,
The fairy tale of evolution tries to explain how species-improvement works. Whatever species is in question, we’re told that the wholly self-oriented yet purpose-free critter is always striving, though unknowingly, to make the species better and better by means of natural selection/survival of the fittest. The supposed process – which is not open to scientific testing – depends on “favorable” chance mutations and random chemical-electrical events within the “accidental sack of molecules.” But mutations, as millions of lab-sacrificed fruit flies will attest, only cause reduced, not improved, function.