Stream

Join this community to post or comment

Kenny Strawn

Apologetics Content  - 
 
+Sean McDowell​ has some amazing advice for those who make hasty generalizations regarding religion and violence…
Is religion behind all the violence in the world? Is the cause of all fighting somehow rooted in religious beliefs? Some say it is.
3
1
Armoured Christian's profile photoray salmon's profile photoRobert  John's profile photo
10 comments
 
Sin is the cause of violence and everybody has sin. 
Add a comment...

Doug Potter

Apologetics Content  - 
 
check out my world religions workbook for middle schoolers, its free: https://www.academia.edu/15254286/World_Religions_Workbook_A_Christian_Approach
2
Mark McGee's profile photoRick LeMarr's profile photo
2 comments
 
Much appreciated, +Doug Potter I can't wait to get my kids started on it!
Add a comment...

Stephen Mac

Apologetics Content  - 
 
In another community, an atheist wrote the following:

I firmly believe that my chair will stop me falling on my arse because it has consistently performed this function for several years. In fact it was designed for the purpose of preventing people from falling on their arses. I'm not seeing a fallacy here.

Why don't I believe in gods?
1) "God" is poorly defined.
2) There is a lack of evidence supporting the assertion that there is any such thing as a god.
3) Gods are not necessary.
4) I am unconvinced by the arguments that theists use to support their assertion that their god exists.
5) Science provides better explanations about reality than a god does.
6) The problem of evil exists for any god described as all loving, all powerful, and all knowing.
7) Any god described as all loving, all powerful, and all knowing is logically contradictory.
8) Sociology explains the need for groups of people to accept the claims of religionists. God is explained as a function of society.
9) Psychology explains why some humans have a desire to maintain religious beliefs. God is explained as a function of the imagination.
10) Gods are not apparent.

Feel free to point out the fallacies.

This atheist believes there are no fallacies in any of his statements. But I'm seeing several. For example, assertion fallacy in 3), science of the gaps in 4), and so on. Or am I seeing things?


1
MS An Thrope's profile photo
20 comments
 
+Kenny Strawn +Monique Zorzella  Same kind of comments apply. I'll just cover the first couple.

Argument from ignorance, how do you know what his argument is based on? You haven't asked him to provide his argument and are therefore guessing which is a great example of an argument from ignorance.

The comment starting "If they mean" is precisely my point, stop guessing what he means and ask him.

And the tu quoque is now acceptable? 

imagined semantics about the difference between explanation and description, why are you guessing what he means?

etc etc I hope you get the point by now.
Add a comment...

Kenny Strawn

Blogging Ideas  - 
 
Can't get enough amusement from all the #ArgumentumExSilentio put forth by the mythicists here. It's this fallacy that takes atheism to a new low.
 
Mythers' Arguments from Silence, and other problems
Following in the theme of "Jesus mythers," I've discovered a pretty devastating critique from atheist Tim O’Neill. O-Neill rejects some "fundamentalist" claims about Jesus, but equally rejects the modern "myther" movement that claims Jesus did not exist at all. This is the most persuasive defense of the historicity of Jesus I have read to date. The article is long, but information-dense. I don't normally take the time to read just one thing (rather than skim) among the many other things competing for my attention, but I must admit: I did slow down to take in this perfectly articulated critique of the most serious arguments from mythers.

One interesting point that O'Neill raises is that multiple surveys show a consensus among scholars that Josephus' reference to Jesus was authentic in part, despite later interpolations that attempt to strengthen a certain Christology. My question is this: If atheists are so enthusiastic about consensus-thinking, will they apply this evenly to the consensus of experts on the historicity of Jesus? Or will they rather apply skepticism evenly to the consensus of experts on, say, evolution?

Enjoy the read. I know I did!

Article: http://goo.gl/gMYyez

+Brandon Petaccio 
2
Christian Apologetics's profile photoLance G's profile photo
2 comments
Lance G
 
Great resource 
Add a comment...

Samuel Kazee

Apologetics Content  - 
 
This is a free hour long video about the inerrancy of scripture by Ken Ham's AiG ministry. Their life size (huge) Noah's ark is being built in KY.  
Mac Brunson of FBC, Jacksonville FL recently said something like "A nation in moral spiritual decline can blame coward pastors."
1
Add a comment...

Andy Thomas

Apologetics Content  - 
 
Nuclear Physicist Rejects Evolutionary Theory & Urges Christians To Keep Believing In The Genesis Account! 
https://plus.google.com/+NewlifefellowshipUsJI/posts/5v2b8HvDfGY
Nuclear Physicist Rejects Evolutionary Theory & Urges Christians To Keep Believing In The Genesis Account! http://creation.com/brandon-vd-interview  - New LIFE Fellowship, Johns Island, SC - Google+
4
3
Bennett Piater's profile photoDaniela Hal's profile photo
Add a comment...

Preet Wilson

Apologetics Content  - 
4
Gary Ellis's profile photo
81 comments
 
Troll:  A person who seeks out internet chat sights that differ with his or her opinion with the purpose of starting arguments.
Add a comment...

Echo Guzman

Apologetics Content  - 
 
Thought this would be good for content. 
6
Tyler Wall's profile photoPaul Milleson's profile photo
6 comments
 
If no NT book claims it to be fulfilled , it must be the second coming, but what Jesus got in trouble for, is claiming to be the son of the living God and able to forgive sins...
Add a comment...

Heidi Carico

Apologetics Content  - 
 
The difference between knowing about Jesus and knowing Jesus can be illustrated in the following analogy:

If a friend comes to you and tells you about a man named John Doe whom you've never met, you have no reason to believe that you're friend is lying. The more he keeps talking about John Doe and the more you like what he says, the more you want to hear about John Doe but you're still taking your friend's word that John Doe even exists. So your faith is in your friend, not in John Doe.

It's only when you MEET John Doe for  yourself that you KNOW he exists and you no longer have to go through your friend to communicate with John Doe. You can go directly to John Doe yourself.  

The latter is what it means to be born again. You know Jesus personally through the Holy Spirit who lives in your heart and can communicate directly to him through prayer and hear His answers through his words in the bible. 

The former group is FAR more common and includes professed Christians who've heard about Jesus through their families, their pastors, theologians, and their University professors in college. They simply trust that these people know about Jesus and can tell them what he said and what he means.  Their faith is in these people that Jesus even exists. So they quote their pastors, the words of theologians and the words of University professors.

But human teachers can't make anyone know Jesus personally, or understand the bible; understanding comes only from knowing Jesus  the Counselor, yourself when he lives in you. But those who only know about Jesus are described in MT. 7:21-23 and that will comprise most of the professing church since true believers are few:

 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.  Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’  Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’
1
tommi atkins's profile photo
4 comments
 
+Heidi Carico Anything to add? I'm missing your "wit".
Add a comment...

Andy Thomas

Apologetics Content  - 
 
The author of this article is an atheist.
"The more I considered the arguments of the New Atheists, however, the more I found their understanding of religion intellectually shallow, and their faith in science and reason naive and dangerous.
The New Atheists offer a binary world view, neatly divided into good and evil. Science and reason on the one hand, religion and faith on the other. The implication being: if we get rid of religion we get rid of evil."

http://goo.gl/3O1tbp
Scientific and moral progress do not walk hand in hand
2
Jim Wyss's profile photo
 
I really liked this line, "As journalist Chris Hedges puts it, they externalise evil. Fundamentalist religious groups do the same, only for them evil resides in liberal secularism."
Add a comment...

Holly Fraser

Apologetics Content  - 
 
This is a great article written by a young talented Millennial . Please read, share and comment. Thanks!
Can God escape the Law of Causality?
3
Add a comment...

About this community

Welcome to the Christian Apologetics Alliance! ***PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING GUIDELINES. This group is actively moderated to protect and support unique, high-quality conversations.*** This community focuses on the topic of apologetics. “Apologetics” is giving a thoughtful, reasonable explanation for the truth of Christianity. Our goal is to help one another learn more about apologetics so we can have proper confidence in our beliefs and become more effective in evangelism. Posts on theology, politics, sermons, and devotionals—while valuable—are off-topic for this community. If you spam, post memes, religious or political propaganda, or other off-topic items, promote non-apologetic websites, insult other members, or engage in other negative behaviors, you will be removed. Please note that you can be removed from this group for both content and tone: both truth and love are required. Please click "read more" to see the rest of the guidelines. There are many different definitions of what it means to be a "Christian." For this particular group, participation is limited to those in agreement with the CAA Statement of Faith, as well as the denial of universalism. This group is intended to have an "evangelical" spirit to it, whether participants are Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant. When posting, please carefully select the proper tab for your post: JUST JOINED? Tell us who you are in the "Introductions/Hello" section. FIND A GREAT APOLOGETICS RESOURCE? Share it in the "Apologetics Content" section. The APOLOGETICS CONTENT section is for apologists to share about the ministry of apologetics. Posts and comments questioning Christian apologists about the Christian worldview should be shared in the CAA-SEEKER discussion section. APOLOGETICS VIDEOs or AUDIOs shared with the CAA community must be less than 15-minutes in length UNLESS it's from very well-known Christian apologists (e.g. Craig, Zacharias, etc). The "BLOGGING IDEAS" tab is for discussing how to run blogs well. The "MODERATOR UPDATES" tab will have occasional posts from the community’s leaders. "APOLOGETICS EVENTS" is for sharing upcoming conferences, debates, special courses, and online presentations. The "CAA-SEEKER DISCUSSION" group is for respectful, open discussion about the Christian worldview. This is also the one section where non-Christians who are sincere in their desire to learn about Christianity are invited to post and comment. We encourage you to INVITE YOUR FRIENDS to join the group (Use the "Invite People" button at the top right of the community page). Thank you for making this a valuable group for sharing great apologetics content, exchanging ideas, and having friendly conversation about these very important questions. This group is a project of the Christian Apologetics Alliance. Find us online at http://www.christianapologeticsalliance.com Thank you for joining! We look forward to many great discussions on apologetics!

Ted Paul

Apologetics Content  - 
 
Dr. Bowman shared his response to Kyle Robert's article criticizing the idea on inerrancy. There's some talk on Facebook that the main graphic on this blog is not nuanced enough.
Those who affirm the basic elements of Christianity are inconsistent if they don't also accept the inerrancy of Scripture. Let's look at seven argument why.
1
Add a comment...
 
Most Christians I know have never given this issue much of a thought, and it is not because they don't understand the Bible. You can be a Bible Scholar and still not understand why  vaccination...
1
Rob Trindade's profile photo
 
I don't think it's a moral issue as much as an issue of scientific understanding concerning health. However if someone is convicted that it's an issue they should always have the right to refuse. From my study, I would never recommend them for problems of neurotoxins, heavy metal toxins, and the unnatural, dangerous way of putting substances directly into the blood stream. Diseases from conditions of inflammation (from the toxins) are at the core of the threats to the body that vaccines pose. Not to mention the forced infection of the virus itself is questionable to begin with.
Add a comment...

Johan P

CAA-Seeker Discussion  - 
 
whether babies of unbeliever who die go to hell?

give reasons and Bible verses

Nb:I think they do not go to hell.
1
Rick LeMarr's profile photolesliedale Hicks (mr)'s profile photo
9 comments
 
+Rick LeMarr king david believed that he would join his dead child when david died. I suspect david knew. 
Add a comment...

Kenny Strawn

Apologetics Content  - 
 
Unconstitutional? The very NAME of the organization suing to have this portrait removed has "unconstitutional" written all over it. It's a corruption of the Constitution's actual wording: freedom of religion IS NOT freedom from religion. #hypocrites
Public school officials in the small Kansas town of Chanute are trying to find a new home for a portrait of Jesus Christ after a civil liberties group demanded its removal from the town's middle school.
3
Nelson de Leon's profile photoKenny Strawn's profile photo
9 comments
 
+Nelson de Leon​ Agreed. It's selective hypocrisy 101 how the demons at FFRF treat stuff like this, and at the same time they corrupt the Constitution's own wording to fit their persecutional agenda, as if their name wasn't obvious enough of a hint at that.
Add a comment...

Sean McDowell

Apologetics Content  - 
 
Book review of Russell Moore's new book ONWARD. Enjoy!
Christians find themselves in a unique cultural moment. It is more important than ever that we are thoughtful and biblical in our cultural engagement.
4
Add a comment...

Bob Trube

Apologetics Content  - 
 
This book can be a helpful source for responding to critiques of Christianity as paternalistic, Western, imperialistic, and more by showing the growth and indigenous character of evangelical movements in every part of the world.
2
Add a comment...

Bobby Valenzuela

Apologetics Content  - 
 
(Problem of divine hiddenness/ non-belief) The Case against God The argument from divine hiddenness (modestly stated) would state that on theism it is unlikely that non-resistant unbelievers would...
1
Elizabeth Hollenhorst's profile photoBobby Valenzuela's profile photo
11 comments
 
+Elizabeth Hollenhorst Very true, this is the primary way in which one knows that God exists and has decisivelyrevealed Himself through the person of Jesus of Nazareth 
Add a comment...

Solamon Grundy

CAA-Seeker Discussion  - 
 
If you were born into a random family in India, do you think you would be Christian as an adult? Feel free to answer why or why not.
44 votes  -  votes visible to Public
I'd probably still be Christian
66%
i'd probably not be Christian
34%
1
Monique Zorzella's profile phototommi atkins's profile photo
91 comments
 
+Lance G Oh.. It was payday yesterday. No issues.
Add a comment...

Liv Walker

Introductions / Hello!  - 
 
I saw this on TV a few minutes ago and thought I'd share it.
I know I'm going to call
8
2
Liv Walker's profile photoClay Hurst's profile photoArmoured Christian's profile photo
23 comments
 
+Liv Walker
I don't personally believe in bridling or trying to  constrain discussion about the Lord or His word with an unbeliever, that is good enough reason. I am sorry you are offended, I hope Mr. Kalles is satisfied. 
Add a comment...