Monday, December 21, 2009

Questions to Ponder: What is your Favorite Christmas Movie?

Hello; this is the second post in a series entitled Questions to Ponder. The first dealt with atheist Richard Dawkins and his claim that Darwin allowed one to be an "intellectual fulfilled atheist." If you missed that one you can check it out here.

This question is much less serious, but very time appropriate. I thought it would be fun to ask-

What is your favorite holiday movie? What is it you like about the film?

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

Sunday, December 20, 2009

Article: The Christmas Story: Does it It Still Matter? by Rusty Wright


Rusty Wright offers his thoughts on the question, "Does the Christmas Story still matter?" In this article, Wright challenges the reader with the fact that the story has endured, gives hope, was foretold, is substanially supported, and more.

You can read it here.

I would encourage you to visit Probe for great apologetic resources!

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Saturday, December 19, 2009

Friday, December 18, 2009

Featured Videos: The Case for Christmas featuring Lee Strobel

In this brief video, author and speaker Lee Strobel gives his case for Christmas. In this talk, Strobel presents a fraction of the information presented in his small book The Case for Christmas: A Journalist Investigates the Identity of the Child in the Manger.

You can watch it here (6:51).


Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Wednesday, December 16, 2009

Featured Audio: An Interview with John MacArthur- The Jesus You Can't Ignore


In this interview, pastor and teacher Dr. John MacArthur discusses his latest book entitled The Jesus You Can't Ignore: What You Must Learn from the Bold Confrontations of Christ.

In this short, 26 minute interview, MacArthur challenges the evangelical world to fight for truth and gives tips on how to do it.

You can listen to this audio here or download the MP3 here.

This audio was originally found here.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Tuesday, December 15, 2009

2012-The Mayan Calendar: The Sky is Falling, the Sky is Falling!


Well, if you believe some in the news, 2012 is when the world is ending. Of course, I personally don't believe that, but many are speculating and asking questions.

Charlie Campbell, of Always be Ready Ministries, has created a resource page for the 2012 phenomenon and I thought it may be helpful to some.

You can check it out here. I also encourage our readers to checkout the wealth of other resources offered at ABR.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad A. Gross

Monday, December 14, 2009

Resources about the Twilight Saga


Unless you live in a cave and rarely venture out of it, you have most likely heard of the new book and film series, Twilight, based upon the books by Stephanie Meyer, a Mormon. The book centers around the romance between teenager Bella and Edward, a human-vampire.

Here at Truthbomb, we desire to not only inform followers of Christ, but to also provide them with useful, practical, and relevant information. It occurred to me that many Christian parents may have questions about this new book series such as: 1. What is this all about? 2. Should I let my teen read these books? Watch the movies? 3. Are there any Christian themes in the stories? 4. Is it violent? 5. Is it demonic?

There are many more I could list and while I haven't read the books, it is my desire in this post to provide parents and teens with some Christ-centered resources that discuss the various themes and issues in the Twilight saga:

Articles

Audio
The views represented in this post vary. More resources will be made available if/when they are found. If you know of any, or have any thoughts to share about the books or movies, please send them our way or share!

Thanks!

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Thursday, December 10, 2009

Wednesday, December 09, 2009

A Recent Intelligent Design vs. Darwinian Evolution Debate

Apologetics 315, your one-stop internet source for all the best current apologetics audio, has recently posted a debate that will be of interest to those who follow the debate between Intelligent Design and Darwinian Evolution.

Here it is:

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Thursday, December 03, 2009

The Goliath of Neo-Darwinism vs. The David of Intelligent Design


Evolution News and Views has been posting some very interesting articles as of late regarding the debate between Neo-Darwinism and Intelligent Design.

Are you aware that:

1. Dr. Stephen Meyer and Dr. Richard Sternberg recently debated Dr. Michael Shermer and Dr. Donald Prothero on the topic of "Has Evolutionary Theory Adequately Explained the Origins of Life?"
See how it went here.

2. Dr. Stephen Meyer's latest book, The Signature in the Cell, was recently voted "book of the year" by the book reviewers at the Times Literary Supplement (TLS) in London? Furthermore, the book reviewers left out some of the year's most pro-Darwin books such as Richard Dawkins' The Greatest Show on Earth and Jerry Coyne's Why Evolution is True. Read more here.

Here is an endorsement for Dr. Meyer's book that comes from atheist philosopher Thomas Nagel:

"Stephen C. Meyer’s Signature in the Cell: DNA and the evidence for Intelligent Design (HarperCollins) is a detailed account of the problem of how life came into existence from lifeless matter – something that had to happen before the process of biological evolution could begin. The controversy over Intelligent Design has so far focused mainly on whether the evolution of life since its beginnings can be explained entirely by natural selection and other non-purposive causes. Meyer takes up the prior question of how the immensely complex and exquisitely functional chemical structure of DNA, which cannot be explained by natural selection because it makes natural selection possible, could have originated without an intentional cause. He examines the history and present state of research on non-purposive chemical explanations of the origin of life, and argues that the available evidence offers no prospect of a credible naturalistic alternative to the hypothesis of an intentional cause. Meyer is a Christian, but atheists, and theists who believe God never intervenes in the natural world, will be instructed by his careful presentation of this fiendishly difficult problem."

See Jerry Coyne's reaction to Nagel's decision to choose Meyer's book, go here.

Signature in the Cell was previously named one of the top ten best-selling science books of the year by Amazon.com.

In other noteworthy news at Apologetics 315...

Dr. William Lane Craig recently debated evolutionary biologist Francisco J. Ayala on the topic "Is Intelligent Design Viable?" You can listen to this debate here.

One blogger's comments were telling:

"Let me be very honest and say that I'm actually coming around to a position of thinking ID might be viable (in a Christian universe, which I believe to be our universe) partially because I'm sick and tired of the hand-waving and lack of good response from scientists who claim to be experts."

For an atheist's perspective on the debate, see here.

The "goliath" is still standing, but he is starting to look a little smaller...

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

Saturday, November 28, 2009

C.S. Lewis on Christianity


C.S. Lewis on the importance believing something because it's true:

"Christianity is not a patent medicine. Christianity claims to give an account of facts- to tell you what the real universe is like. Its account of the universe may be true, or it may not, and once the question is really before you, then your natural inquisitiveness must make you want to know the answer. If Christianity is untrue, then no honest man will want to believe it, however, helpful it might be: if it is true, every honest man will want to believe it, even if it gives him no help at all." [1]

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

1. C.S. Lewis as quoted by Ken Boa in Passionate Living: A Devotional- Wisdom and Truth.

Thursday, November 26, 2009

Free Video: Icons of Evolution


This video, titled after Jonathan Wells' ground-breaking book Icons of Evolution, addresses many of the problems with Darwin's theory and demonstrates how much of the teaching on the topic in our public schools is censored.

Using RealPlayer, you can watch it online for free here.

Other free videos such as The Privileged Planet, Unlocking the Mystery of Life, and The Incorrigible David Berlinski can also be found at the same link.



Courage and Godspeed,


Chad

Wednesday, November 25, 2009

Special Article: The Darkside of Darwin's Legacy- Q & A with Dennis Sewell

I found this Q & A with British political journalist Dennis Sewell, author of The Political Gene: How Darwin's Ideas Changed Politics to be very thought-provoking. Although I take issue with some of Sewell's points, I believe the brief interview is worth your time.

You can check it out on Time Magazine's website here.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Monday, November 23, 2009

Thanksgiving Articles from Greg Koukl at Stand to Reason


We here at Truthbomb Apologetics want to wish all of you a happy and very blessed Thanksgiving!

Here are some great Thanksgiving articles by Stand to Reason's Greg Koukl to enjoy:

1. America's Unchristian Beginnings?

2. The Faith of our Fathers

3. What was the Faith of our Founding Fathers?

4. Thanksgiving

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad


Saturday, November 21, 2009

Essay: On Atheism by Francis Bacon


Essay excerpt:

"I HAD rather believe all the fables in the Legend, and the Talmud, and the Alcoran, than that this universal frame is without a mind. And therefore, God never wrought miracle, to convince atheism, because his ordinary works convince it. It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth men’s minds about to religion."

You can read the entire essay here.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Friday, November 20, 2009

One Solitary Life

The following is an excerpt from a sermon entitled One Solitary Life. It's purpose is to underscore the tremendous impact of Jesus Christ's life:

"He was born in an obscure village, the child of a peasant. He grew up in another village, where he worked in a carpenter shop until he was 30. Then, for three years, he was an itinerant preacher.

He never wrote a book. He never held an office. He never had a family or owned a home. He didn't go to college. He never lived in a big city. He never traveled 200 miles from the place where he was born. He did none of the things that usually accompany greatness. He had no credentials but himself.

He was only 33 when the tide of public opinion turned against him. His friends ran away. One of them denied him. He was turned over to his enemies and went through the mockery of a trial. He was nailed to a cross between two thieves. While he was dying, his executioners gambled for his garments, the only property he had on earth. When he was dead, he was laid in a borrowed grave, through the pity of a friend.

[Twenty] centuries have come and gone, and today he is the central figure of the human race. I am well within the mark when I say that all the armies that ever marched, all the navies that ever sailed, all the parliaments that ever sat, all the kings that ever reigned- put together- have not affected the life of a man on this earth as much as that one, solitary life." [1]

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Resource:

1. Adapted from "Arise, Sir Knight," a sermon by James Allen Francis, in the Real Jesus and Other Sermons (Philadelphia: Judson, 1926), 123-124; as quoted by Norman Geisler and Frank Turek in I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist, p. 324.

Saturday, November 14, 2009

Special Feature: Dr. Gary Habermas's Dissertation Project


Dr. Gary Habermas, philosopher and resurrection expert, has released his 376 page Dissertation Project from 1976 entitled The Resurrection of Jesus: A Rational Inquiry. I love to read about the resurrection, so for me, this is exciting stuff!

You can get it here.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Wednesday, November 11, 2009

Thank you to America's Veterans


On this November 11th, 2009, Truthbomb Apologetics would like to take a moment to thank and remember all those who have lived and died to afford us the freedoms that we enjoy everyday.

I also encourage our readers to fervently pray for our men and women in uniform currently serving in the military.

May God Bless our Veterans!

"I think there is one higher office than president and I would call that patriot."

-Gary Hart

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Research Materials for the Old and New Testament

This post is a continuation of a series offering research materials...

New Testament Resources


Articles

Archaeology and the Bible featured at christiananswers.net; various questions

How Do We Know Who Wrote the Gospels by Timothy Paul Jones

The Historical Reliability of the Gospels by Craig Blomberg

Why I Believe the New Testament is Historically Reliable by Dr. Gary Habermas

The Historicity of the New Testament by Dr. J.P. Moreland

The New Testament Canon by Craig Blomberg

Audio

External Evidence for the Gospels by Tim McGrew

Internal Evidence for the Gospels by Tim McGrew

Interview with Dan Wallace on the Reliability of the New Testament Text

Interview with Craig S. Keener on the Reliability of the Book of Acts

Trusting the New Testament by Dr. Bill Cook

What do the Gospels really say about Jesus
by Darrell Bock

Veracity of the New Testament by Dr. Gary Habermas

Video

Early Testimony for the New Testament (9:10) by Dr. Frank Turek

Eyewitness Testimony for the New Testament (8:01) by Dr. Turek

Is the New Testament True?
Part I (10:06) Part II (10:07) by Dr. Turek

What type of literature are the gospels?
(4:50) by Dr. William Lane Craig

Who decided what books became part of the New Testament?
(8:20) featuring various scholars

Flash Videos


Is the New Testament Reliable?

Where did it come from?

Free E-book

The Historical Reliability of the New Testament by Darren Hewer


The New Testament Documents: Are they reliable?
by F.F. Bruce

For other free e-books, please check out our free online Apologetics Library here.

Old Testament Resources

Articles

Archaeology and the Bible by John McRay

Archaeology and the Old Testament by Patrick Zukervan

How did Jesus view the Old Testament?
by Josh McDowell

Old Testament Reliability by Phil Fernandes

Was the Old Testament transmitted faithfully? by Wayne Jackson

What are the Dead Sea Scrolls? by Josh McDowell

Audio

Dead Sea Scrolls by Probe Ministries

Reliability of the Old Testament Documents by Peter Gentry

Flash Video

Are the Old Testament Documents Reliable and Where did they come from?
More materials will be added as they are found.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Wednesday, November 04, 2009

Research Material on Miracles

Hello; I have been facilitating a book study at my church and my goal is to begin offering different posts with articles, audio, and video for the group members to research the topics covered more in-depth. My hope is that our readers will also benefit.

Articles

Are Miracles Logically Impossible? by Lenny Esposito

Did Jesus Really Perform Miracles?
by Daniel Morais and Michael Gleghorn

Did the New Testament Authors invent the miracle stories?
by Glenn Miller

If God would just perform a miracle for me, then I would believe! answer by Greg Koukl

Miracles Cannot Happen by Matthew Slick

Miracles or Myths?
by Greg Koukl

Miracles by Rick Wade

The Miracles of Jesus: A Historical Inquiry by Christopher Price

Problem of Miracles: A Historical and Philosophical Perspective by Dr. William Lane Craig

The Reality of Miracles; a refutation of Anthony Flew's views by Malachi

Audio- many thanks to Apologetics 315 for the excellent audio!

A Lecture on Miracles by Dr. Walter Martin

Is God Active in the World Today? by Dr. Gary Habermas

Miracles
by Ken Boa [4 parts]

Miracles (Part 1 and Part 2) by Doug Groothuis

Video


Flash Video: Do Miracles Happen?

How Do We Explain Miracles?
by Dr. Frank Turek

Why Does God Do Miracles? by Dr. Frank Turek

Why Don't People Believe in Miracles? by Dr. Frank Turek

Other resources could possibly be added as they are found.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Tuesday, November 03, 2009

Featured Podcast: Author David Berlinski reviews Dawkins' The Greatest Show on Earth


In the most recent ID the Future Podcast, author and skeptic David Berlinski shares his thoughts on Richard Dawkins' latest book The Greatest Show on Earth.

Berlinski has also recently released The Deniable Darwin and Other Essays.

Check out the podcast here.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Saturday, October 31, 2009

Thursday, October 29, 2009

Featured Podcast: Reasonable Faith- The Hitchens Debate


In this new podcast from Reasonable Faith, Dr. William Lane Craig reflects back on his April 4th, 2009 debate with atheist Christopher Hitchens on the topic of "Does God Exist?"

You can listen in here.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Featured Resource: The Chuck Colson Center for Christian Worldview


Recently on his radio show Breakpoint, Chuck Colson announced the release of a brand new online resource The Chuck Colson Center for Christian Worldview. This resource offers various tools to encourage and equip those who hold to a Christian Worldview.

The Colson Center explains in more detail:

"The Colson Center presents a research, study, and networking center for growing in a Christian worldview. The Center provides opportunities for searching a wide range of documents and other materials, joining a learning community, acquiring materials for training others, networking with likeminded Christians, and staying abreast of the latest in Christian worldview thinking."

Some of the available materials include:
There is a wealth of information that can be found at The Chuck Colson Center for Christian Worldview.

You can explore this valuable resource here.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Richard Dawkins wins- "the worst atheistic argument in the history of Western thought."


Christian Philosopher Dr. William Lane Craig has recently co-edited a new book entitled Contending with Christianity's Critics. In the book, various apologists, theologians, and philosophers set out to answer the New Atheists and other common objections raised against the Christian Worldview.

Chapter 1 has been made available online and includes Craig's critique of Richard Dawkins' "central argument" in The God Delusion. Craig's final assessment of the argument?

"Several years ago my atheist colleague Quentin Smith unceremoniously crowned Stephen Hawking’s argument against God in A Brief History of Time as “the worst atheistic argument in the history of Western thought.” With the advent of The God Delusion the time has come to relieve Hawking of this weighty crown and to recognize Richard Dawkins’s accession to the throne."


You can check out the entire chapter here.

To learn more about the book, see here.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad A. Gross

***Bonus:
Creationist Dr. Jonathan Sarfati, of Creation International Ministries, has offered his early thoughts on Dawkins' new book The Greatest Show on Earth here.

Saturday, October 24, 2009

Richard Dawkins- The Greatest Show on Earth


Celebrity atheist Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion, has released his newest book this month entitled The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution.

Here is a very detailed review by Apologetics 315.

You can check it out here.

Enjoy!

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Monday, October 19, 2009

Ida got canned, so party with 'Ardi'


As most of you will have heard, a few months back evolutionists announced that they had found the latest 'missing link,' Ida. However, Ida quickly disappeared from the scientific landscape.

Now, we are told that the 'missing link' has been found again. It's name is Ardi. After receiving a question and an email about the supposed "missing link in human evolution," I decided to checkout the available evidence for myself.

Already featured on notable media outlets such as National Geographic and The Discovery Channel, Ardi (formerly called Ardipithecus ramidus) is being heralded as a find that "underwent a previously unknown stage of evolution more than a million year."

(http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/10/091001-oldest-human-skeleton-ardi-missing-link-chimps-ardipithecus-ramidus.html)

Interestingly, it has taken over 15 years for the reports of this fossil find to be published. As Casey Luskin reports, perhaps the reason for the 15 year prolonging was due to the fact that in 2002 Ardi was described in Science as "squished," "chalky," and "eroded."

Luskin provides the following from the 2002 Science article:

[I]n 1992, the Middle Awash Research Team, co-led by [Tim] White, made a discovery that ended Lucy’s reign. About 75 kilometers south of Lucy’s resting place, at Aramis in the Afar depression of Ethiopia, the team found fossils of a chimp-sized ape dated to about 4.4 million years ago. … The team named this species Ardipithecus ramidus, drawing on two words from the Afar language suggesting that it was humanity’s root species. But skeptics argue that the published fossils are so chimplike that they may represent the long-lost ancestor of the chimp, not human, lineage. The next field season, team member Yohannes Haile-Selassie found the first of more than 100 fragments that make up about half of a single skeleton of this species, including a pelvis, leg, ankle and foot bones, wrist and hand bones, a lower jaw with teeth—and a skull. But in the past 8 years no details have been published on this skeleton. Why the delay? In part because the bones are so soft and crushed that preparing them requires a Herculean effort, says White. The skull is “squished,” he says, “and the bone is so chalky that when I clean an edge it erodes, so I have to mold every one of the broken pieces to reconstruct it.” The team hopes to publish in a year or so, and White claims that the skeleton is worth the wait, calling it a “phenomenal individual” that will be the “Rosetta stone for understanding bipedalism.”

(http://www.ideacenter.org/contentmgr/showdetails.php/id/1484)

To further complicate matters, Time Magazine reports the following:

"Tim [White] showed me pictures of the pelvis in the ground, and it looked like an Irish stew," says Walker. Indeed, looking at the evidence, different paleoanthropologists may have different interpretations of how Ardi moved or what she reveals about the last common ancestor of humans and chimps.

(http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1927200-2,00.html)

I agree that scientists should arrive at their conclusions by looking at the evidence; however, it seems that Ardi has already earned the title of a "New piece in the Human Evolution Puzzle," so how many other conclusions could one come to?

Admittedly, I am not at a place where I feel I can draw any concrete conclusions at this time. I would like to learn more about Ardi; however, I do want to offer some resources from those who have an alternative viewpoint because I highly doubt that National Geographic or The Discovery Channel will share anything that isn't consistent with the evolutionary party line.

1. Did Humans Evolve from Ardi? by Brian Thomas

2. The Overselling of Ardipithecus ramidus by Casey Luskin

3. Ardipithecus Again: A Recycled Ape-man by Carl Wieland

4. Ardi, Our Uncommon Ancestor? by Mariano

5. Ardi Joins a Long, Infamous List of Losers by Kyle Butt, M.A.

6. Ardi Revels More Than They Think by Melinda Penner

7. Ardi: Hardly Evidence for Human Evolution by Fazale 'Fuz' Rana, Ph.D.

I will continue to evaluate the evidence for Ardi; however, for those who are throwing a party for Ardi...'Ida' be a bit more skeptical...

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Thursday, October 15, 2009

Bart Ehrman Got You Down? These Resources May Help...



Dr. Bart Ehrman's now infamous book, Misquoting Jesus, has caused many followers of Christ to doubt the accuracy of the New Testament documents.

It is my hope that these two resources will serve to confirm that the Christian's confidence in the Bible's accuracy rests on solid ground:

Courage and Godspeed
Chad

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

Common Objection #8- "Intelligent Design is Magic"

"Intelligent Design is magic!"

Dr. William Dembski would argue that it's the Darwinist who might be "pulling rabbits out of the hat."

Check out his reply to this objection here. Although dated, I believe the fair-minded inquirer will find it informative.

For those who may have more questions about Intelligent Design(ID), see here.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

FYI- Stephen Meyer to appear on The Dennis Miller Show

Scientist and author of Signature in the Cell, Dr. Stephen Meyer will appear on The Dennis Miller Show to discuss the new film, Darwin's Dilemma, his book, and more.

For more details, see here. Further, for those interested in learning more about Dr. Meyer's book, you can read an in-depth review here.

This information was originally found at the Evolution News and Views blog.


Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Sunday, October 11, 2009

Richard Dawkins turns down Dr. Stephen Meyer's debate Challenge


Richard Dawkins has added Dr. Stephen Meyer, author of Signature in the Cell to his list of people he refuses to debate. Prior to denying Dr. Meyers, Dawkins had also declined challenges issued by Dinesh D'Souza, who has debated notables such as Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett, and Michael Shermer. Dawkins also has passed up opportunities to debate Christian Philosopher Dr. William Lane Craig, a formidable debater who in the past has debated the best atheism, Islam, and skepticism has to offer.

Dawkins, apparently continuing to hide behind his Stephen Jay Gould inspired article Why I Won't Debate Creationists, continues to dodge his critics and avoid putting his beliefs under the microscope of his numerous detractors. In this article, Dawkins sloppily throws creationists and Intelligent Design advocates (ID) into the same the camp, while they themselves would separate themselves from each other. They clearly have vastly different approaches and both IDers and Creationists know it; and so does Dawkins.

Consider his recent appearance on the Michael Medved show:

"Bruce Chapman: … Dr. Dawkins, this is Bruce Chapman from Discovery Institute calling. [Dawkins, muttering under his breath: “Right.”] I was frustrated with this conversation because most of the time I hear straw man arguments about intelligent design. Your new book apparently doesn’t really deal with intelligent design. But it seems to me, that in your previous book, you said that it’s a question of science, that it is a scientific argument – I congratulate you for that -- But if it is, how about having a debate with Stephen Meyer, who is the author of another new book, Signature in the Cell, which deals with this question, and have this in a respectful, civilized, scholarly fashion where you look at the scientific arguments, pro and con?

Richard Dawkins: Now, when you say that I don’t deal with intelligent design, I do, because I deal with creationism and, of course, intelligent design is simply another name for creationism invented for political reasons.

Chapman: Well, if it’s another name for creationism, why did you distinguish between intelligent design and creationism very early in this program?

Dawkins: I don’t.

Medved: You did, earlier on, when we were talking about the Holocaust denier analogy, you said you applied that analogy to old earth creationists. Intelligent design advocates are not old earth creationists.

Dawkins: Sorry, um, I applied the history-deniers to young earth creationists.
Medved: I’m sorry, young earth creationists, yes, but you know intelligent design advocates are not young earth creationists.

Dawkins: I do, and that was precisely the distinction I was making. That’s why I said that I was not accusing intelligent design people of being history deniers, in that sense.

Medved: But you just said intelligent design is another name for creationism.

Dawkins: It is another name for creationism, but not young earth creationism.

Medved: Bruce Chapman?

Chapman: In that case, you’ve got an argument with your previous caller also, because that would be a theistic evolutionist proposition, which is also, by your definition, if it’s not Darwinian evolution, it’s creationism in some fashion. There isn’t any other kind of evolution, as far as you’re concerned.

Dawkins: Where do you guys think – do you think that God did it?

Chapman: I don’t know, I don’t think that the intelligent design people—

Dawkins: That’s what you say, you always pretend, you always pretend that an alien in outer space or something, but you know very well that what you mean is God.

Chapman: No, I think that was your line in Expelled. But I think that the thing that you really ought to consider, in all seriousness, is that by your own definition there is a scientific argument. Put that scientific argument to the test, not with somebody who’s a straw man that you bring up, but have somebody like Meyer, who has written a very scholarly book, to actually debate this topic with you…

Medved: All right, the proposal’s on the table, response from Professor Dawkins, thank you, Bruce.

Dawkins: I will have a discussion with somebody who has a genuinely different scientific point of view. I have never come across any kind of creationism, whether you call it intelligent design or not, which has a serious scientific case to put.

The objection to having debates with people like that is that it gives them a kind of respectability. If a real scientist goes onto a debating platform with a creationist, it gives them a respectability, which I do not think your people have earned."

See the entire article here. You can also read more of Chapman's thoughts on Dawkins latest book, and this exchange, here.

I believe Dr. Stephen Meyer does an excellent job defining exactly what Intelligent Design is:

Of course, many scientists have argued that to infer design gives up on science. They say that inferring design constitutes an argument from scientific ignorance- a "God of the gaps" fallacy. Since science doesn't yet know how biological information could have arisen, design theorists invoke a mysterious notion-intelligent design-to fill a gap in scientific knowledge.

Yet design theorists do not infer design just because natural processes cannot explain the origin of biological systems, but because these systems manifest the distinctive hallmarks of intelligently designed systems-that is, they posses features that in any other realm of experience would trigger the recognition of an intelligent cause. [1]

Dawkins is a master at telling "just-so" stories about evolution and explaining science in a literary, non-technical manner. However, when he begins to talk about Intelligent Design, you get the sense that he is making things up as he goes. I would recommend that Professor Dawkins familiarize himself with more works by IDers. Perhaps it would keep him from using old, disproved evidence such as this in the future.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Resources

1. Stephen Meyer, Signs of Intelligence: Understanding Intelligent Design, Essay: Word Games: DNA, Design, and Intelligence, p. 116, Emphasis mine.

Wednesday, October 07, 2009

Featured Article: The Plight of the New Atheism- A Critique by Dr. Gary Habermas


Dr. Gary Habermas offers a unique perspective on the media named "New Atheism" in his new article The Plight of the New Atheism: A Critique.

Habermas especially focuses on authors Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris; but does make some mention of Professor Dawkins.


Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Tuesday, October 06, 2009

Featured Resource: Arguments Creationists Should Not Use


Creation International Ministries offers this helpeful resource entitled Arguments we think creationists should not use.

Regardless if you are a young-earther, old-earther, ID advocate, or Darwinist, this is an interesting read. You may be surprised to see some of the arguments they recommend not using.

Check it out here.

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

Monday, September 28, 2009

Common Objection #7

"Intelligent Design advocates do not publish their work in the appropriate scientific literature."

Actually they do. Check out this list and/or this list.

Furthermore, author and Darwin skeptic David Berlinski offers some insight into the peer-review process here in a short podcast.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Saturday, September 26, 2009

Movie Preview: Darwin's Dilemma


About [taken from the Darwin's Dilemma home site]

Shot on location in southern China, the Canadian Rockies, and Great Britain, Illustra Media’s powerful new documentary Darwin’s Dilemma explores one of the great mysteries in the history of life: The geologically-sudden appearance of dozens of major complex animal types in the fossil record without any trace of the gradual transitional steps Charles Darwin had envisioned 150 years ago.

Frequently described as “the Cambrian Explosion,” the development of these new animal types required a massive increase in genetic information. “The big question that the Cambrian Explosion poses is where does all that new information come from?” says Dr. Stephen Meyer, a featured expert in the documentary and author of the book Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design. Growing evidence suggests that the creation of novel genetic information requires intelligence, and thus the burst of genetic information during the Cambrian Explosion provides convincing evidence that animal life is the product of intelligent design rather than a blind undirected process like natural selection.

Darwin’s Dilemma recreates the prehistoric world of the Cambrian era with state-of-the-art computer animation, and the film features interviews with numerous scientists, including leading evolutionary paleontologists Simon Conway Morris of Cambridge University and James Valentine of the University of California at Berkeley, marine biologist Paul Chien of the University of San Francisco, and evolutionary biologist Richard Sternberg, a Research Collaborator at the National Museum of Natural History. The new film forms the conclusion of a trilogy of science documentaries by Illustra Media that includes the previous acclaimed films Unlocking the Mystery of Life and The Privileged Planet.

I suggest checking this video out! Visit the website here where you'll find:

Spread the word!

For those interested, Brian over at Apologetics 315 has posted a review of the video that can be read here.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Saturday, September 19, 2009

Questions to Ponder: Dawkins, Darwin, and being Intellectually Fulfilled

Hello everyone! This post is the first in what I hope will become a series entitled Questions to Ponder. My hope is to get some dialogue going (via the comments) between like minded persons on apologetic topics, beliefs, and arguments that are widely used or well-known. Believers and non-believers are welcomed to comment!

Celebrity atheist Richard Dawkins is well-known for the following infamous quote (and many others!):

"An atheist before Darwin could have said, following Hume: "I have no explanation for complex biological design. All I know is that God isn't a good explanation, so we must wait and hope that somebody comes up with a better one." I can't help feeling that such a position, though logically sound, would have left one feeling pretty unsatisfied, and that although atheism might have been logically tenable before Darwin, Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist." [1]

So, my question is, "Was Richard Dawkins right when he said that 'Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist?' Or, in other words, if Darwinism was true beyond reasonable doubt, does atheism logically follow?

I look forward to your thoughts and comments!

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Resources:

1. Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker, p. 6.

Saturday, September 12, 2009

Featured Debate: What Does It Mean When the Bible calls Jesus G/god?


It was Socrates who once said, "The unexamined life is not worth living." Christian apologist, Dr. Norman Geisler, later adapting Socrates statement and said, "The unexamined faith is not worth believing." I believe that both Socrates and Geisler are correct.

As painstaking as it can be, we must be willing to examine truth claims, regardless of the consequences. This is just as true for the atheist, Christian, humanist, or Jehovah's Witnesses. After all, who wants to knowing believe a lie?

Keeping this in mind, Jehovah's Witnesses believe that Jesus was not God Almighty. Consider the following, taken from an article entitled Is Jesus God Almighty?, found on the Jehovah's Witnesses official website:

"Obviously, the Father and the Son were not equal before Jesus came to the earth or during his earthly life. What about after Jesus’ resurrection to heaven? First Corinthians 11:3 states: “The head of the Christ is God.” In fact, the Son will always be in subjection to God. (1 Corinthians 15:28) The Scriptures therefore show that Jesus is not God Almighty. Instead, he is God’s Son."
[1]

However, Christians believe that there exists One True God (John 17:3), but that He exists in 3 separate persons in one divine essence. This is known as the Trinity- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Trinity is like a triangle: a triangle has three corners but it is still one triangle. Admittedly, it is impossible for us as finite humans to fully comprehend the Trinity, and while the Trinity may transcend our reason, it does not contradict our reason.

Obviously, both of these views cannot be correct. In other words, to say that Jesus was not fully God and that Jesus was fully God at the same time is obsurd. Either Jesus is God or He is not!

Such was the subject of a recent interaction I had with a Jehovah's Witness on the blog. I presented the following argument in an effort to sustain Jesus' deity:

"According to John 17:3, how many true Gods are there? The answer is one, Jehovah. Now, I believe that we both can agree that whatever is not true is false, correct? Then, if there is only one God, all other gods must be false gods, right? According to the NWT translation of the Bible (in which I reject), Jesus is a god. I believe you would agree with this, yes? So, is Jesus a true god or a false god? He can't be a false god, since that would mean the apostle John was guilty of falsely honoring Jesus as a god. Therefore, he must be a true God. But, you say, "Jehovah is the only true God!" I agree; therefore, Jesus must be Jehovah."

The Jehovah's Witness replied as follows:

That's a false dichotomy. I could ask you, is Moses a true God or a false god?"Consequently Jehovah said to Moses: 'See, I have made you God to Pharaoh, and Aaron your own brother will become your prophet.'" (Exodus 7:1)"


[PLEASE see the link to the comments section for the entire interaction]

So, his basic claim was that in other places in the scriptures, creatures are called "gods" without any reason to believe that they are 'false gods.'

Common texts often quoted to 'prove' this are:

"So the Lord said to Moses: "See, I have made you as God to Pharaoh, and Aaron your brother shall be your prophet" (Exodus 7:1).

"Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your law, 'I said, "You are gods"? (John 10:34).

"For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many gods and many lords)," (1 Cor. 8:5).

"I said, "You are gods, and all of you are children of the Most High" (Psalm 82:6).

"For you have made him a little lower than the angels, and You have crowned him with glory and honor" (Psalm 8:6).

Further, things begin to get interesting when one also considers that the Bible clearly states that there is only "One True God" (John 17:3).

So, the argument presented by the JW's goes like this:

1. Elsewhere in Scripture creatures as called "gods"
2. They are not considered "false gods."
3. Therefore, Jesus is not to be considered a "false god."

However, when all the data is considered, does this argument hold up? I submit that it does not.

One True God

The verses that I listed above use the plural "gods" are clearly not speaking of Jehovah because John 17:3 tells us that Jehovah is the "Only True God." With that in mind, these verses could not be understood to be referring to creatures as "God" in the usual sense. Regardless of what "sense" that is, clearly it is not the same "sense" in which Jehovah is God.

Thank...Moses?!

Now, the JW's is quick to quote Exodus 7:1 as saying that Moses was a god; however, is that what it says?

Consider the verse, quoted from the New World Translation:

"Consequently Jehovah said to Moses: "See, I have made you God to Phar'aoh and Aaron your prophet."

So, the verse actually says that Jehovah made Moses "God to Pharaoh." In other words, Moses was going to be enabled to exercise godlike powers over Pharaoh.

But then the question must be asked- "Why doesn't the NWT translate this verse "make you a god to Pharaoh?" Clearly, this verse is saying that Moses was standing in God's place. So, Moses wasn't "a god," but he was simply representing the Only True God (Jn. 17:3). Jehovah's Witnesses believe that Jesus is called "God" in this representative sense also. For example, in John 20:28, when Thomas calls Jesus "my God."

However, in John 1:1, where the NWT calls Jesus "a god," that can't be a "representative" sense. Jesus is called "a god" because he has godlike powers and qualities(this agrees with the Greek). But, Moses wasn't "a god" in the sense that Jesus was; meaning, Jesus alone, the JW's claim, "has godlike powers and qualities." Is there anyone else in the Bible besides Jesus Christ who is called "a god"-in the sense of having godlike powers and qualities-who wasn't a false god? The answer is no.

But someone might still wonder, "Why can't Jesus be called a god in that sense? He alone was with God at the beginning of the world, assisting Him in the process of creation."

Put simply, the Bible says there is only One True God (Isaiah 43:10; 44:6-8; 1 Cor. 8:4; 1 Tim 2:5; James 2:19) and that there is no one who is "godlike" (Isa. 40:18, 25; Jer 10:6-7). The Bible even denies that powerful rulers (Exe. 28:2, 9; 2 Thess. 2:4) and spirits (1 Cor. 10:20; Gal. 4:8) are gods. [1]

However, after drafting the above response, I sent it to a few friends for input and Mike Felker, of The Apologetic Front, pointed out the following to me:

"As for your primary question in implementing John 17:3, I would be careful in limiting the range to two possibilities: true or false. The reason being, there certainly are "gods" who are such only in a representational or figurative sense. Exodus 7:1 is a good example of this. Obviously, there is nothing about Moses' nature that somehow makes him more human than you or I. Therefore, he is not "god" in any sort of ontological sense. Instead, he represents God, and therefore can be "God" in that most limited sense.

However, as you pointed out, Jesus is not merely "god" in a figurative or representational sense. He is actually "God" by nature. In this case, he is either true or false, since the "figurative" category is easily ruled out."

Moreover, Mike directed me to a debate that he had with a Jehovah's Witness entitled, "What Does It Mean when the Bible calls Jesus G/god?" After reading Mike's opening statement I realized that I admittedly could not provide the same in-depth answers that Mike can. Mike studied with Jehovah's Witnesses for two years and attended the meetings. Our desire here at Truthbomb Apologetics is to provide the best answers to important questions.

So I have decided, with Mike's permission, to post his debate here at Truthbomb for those who honestly desire to investigate what the Bible actual means when it calls Jesus G/god.

The debate can be found here.

For Jehovah's Witnesses that may accuse me of using other peoples arguments, please keep in mind that when Witnesses come to my door, they are usually armed with some of the following:
  • Awake! Magazine- Watchtower Publication
  • The Watchtower Magazine
  • Reasoning from the Scriptures
  • The New World Translation of the Bible, created by the Watchtower Society
So, let us not waste our time discussing the who of the argument, rather, let us spend our time discussion the truth of the arguments.

Finally, Mike has graciously agreed to interact with reader's who have questions via the comments! Thank you Mike!

I pray you'll take advantage of this learning opportunity!

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Resources:

1. Is Jesus God Almighty?, appeared in The Watchtower, appeared in The Watchtower, Sept. 15, 2005, Emphasis mine. This article can also be found online here.

2. [This argument was adapted from an article that appeared in the Christian Research Journal entitled, "Is Jesus a True or a False God?" by Robert M. Bowman, Jr.]

Wednesday, September 09, 2009

Book Study: I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist

Hello to everyone and I hope you are having a great week! The following is the information we covered in our first class. Remember; if you have any questions, don't hesitate to contact me!

Course Syllabus
I Don't Have Enough Faith to be Atheist
by Norman Geisler and Frank Turek

Week 1 9-4-09
Introduction- Discuss Syllabus
Explanation of Ground Rules for Discussion
The Purpose of Apologetics
Types of Apologetics

Week 2 9-11-09
Introduction
Chapter 1 Can We Handle the Truth?
Chapter 2 Why Should Anyone Believe Anything At All?

Week 3 9-18-09
Chapter 3 In the Beginning There Was a Great SURGE (Cosmological Argument or the Argument from the Beginning of the Universe)

Week 4 9-25-09
Chapter 4 Divine Design (Teleological Argument or the Argument from Design)

Week 5 10-2-09 [no class next week, 10-9-09]
Chapter 5 The First Life: Natural Law or Divine Awe?
Chapter 6 New Life Forms: From the Goo to You via the Zoo?

Week 6 10-16-09
Chapter 7 Mother Teresa vs. Hitler (Moral Argument)

Week 7 10-23-09
Chapter 8 Miracles: Signs of God or Gullibility?

Week 8 10-30-09
Chapter 9 Do We Have Early Testimony About Jesus?
Chapter 10 Do We Have Eyewitness Testimony about Jesus?

Week 9 11-6-09
Chapter 11 The Top Ten Reasons We Know the New Testament Writers Told the Truth

Week 10 11-13-09
Chapter 12 Did Jesus Really Rise from the Dead?

Week 11 11-20-09
Chapter 13 Who Is Jesus: God? Or Just a Great Moral Teacher?
Chapter 14 What Did Jesus Teach about the Bible?

Week 12 11-27-09
Chapter 15 Conclusion: The Judge, the Servant King, and the Box Top
Appendix 1 If God, why Evil?
Appendix 2 Isn't that Just Your Interpretation?

Class notes, discussion questions, and supplementary materials will be posted on the blog weekly at http://www.truthbomb.blogspot.com/

Week 1 Class Notes

I Don't Have Enough Faith to be Atheist
by Norman Geisler and Frank Turek

Week 1 9-4-09
Introduction- Discuss Syllabus

1. Ground Rules for Discussion
2. Stay on topic- Stay Off the Rabbit trails!
3. Try not to interrupt others
4. If you plan to challenge an idea, do so respectfully
5. Keep in mind that we are here to come along side each other to help us become better thinkers

The Purpose of Apologetics- the Bible Commands it

We are commanded to defend the Christian faith
- “But in your hearts set apart Christ the Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do with with gentleness and respect” (1 Peter 3:15).

We are commanded to refute false ideas about God- “We demolish arguments and ever pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ" (2 Cor. 10:5).

Jesus corrected error- “Jesus replied, “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God” (Matthew 22:29).

Jesus refuted false teachings- “Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of tradition. You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you: 'These people will honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.' (Matthew 15:6-9).

Paul reasoned with people- “While Paul was waiting for them in Athens, he was greatly distressed to see that the city was full of idols. So he reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and the God-fearing Greeks, as well as in the marketplace day by day with those who happened to be there” (Acts 17:16-17).

Paul refuted those who opposed the truth- “He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it” (Titus 1:9).

Paul defended the gospel- “It is right for me to feel this way about all of you, since I have you in my heart; for whether I am in chains or defending and confirming the gospel, all of you share in God's grace with me” (Philippians 1:7).

Jude urged that we contend for the faith- “Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints” (Jude 3). [1]

Jesus and the greatest commandment
- “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind” (Matthew 22:37).

Types of Apologetics


Don Moyer gives an excellent overview of the different apologetic approaches in his article Apologetics Method Overview:

The Classical Method starts with natural theology in order to establish theism as the proper world view. Only after theism is established through natural theology do they move to historical evidences to show the truth of Jesus. In other words, they first want to show that theism is true, then demonstrate that the biblical view is the best view of theism (a two-step approach). Examples of arguments from natural theology include the Kalam Cosmological Argument (i.e., first cause).

Sometimes it is argued that this two-step approach is necessary as a foundation for arguing historical evidences. The idea is that, without a theistic base, one could not show historically that miracles occurred. [2]

Noted Classical Apologists:
William Lane Craig, J.P. Moreland, Augustine, Peter Kreeft, C.S. Lewis, R.C. Sproul, and Norman Geisler.

The Evidentialist Method. If the classical method is seen as a two-step approach, this method is a one-step approach. Those who hold to this would disagree with the classical approach in the area of historical evidences. They do not think that one must begin with natural theology. They see miracles as historical, which, in turn are demonstrative of God and His activity in the world. In other words, miracles can be used as one sort of evidence for the existence of God.

By this method, they believe that they can demonstrate both the existence of God and the truth of biblical theism all in one step. If, for example, the resurrection of Jesus is historically valid, then it would show that there is a God, and that Jesus is true, all in one step. Those who hold to this would not necessarily deny the value of natural theology; they just don’t see it as the necessary first step that classical apologists do. [3]

Noted Evidentialist Apologists: Gary Habermas, Mike Licona, and John Warwick Montogomery

The Cumulative Case Method argues that the case for Christianity is not a strict formal argument (such as in natural theology or historical evidences), but is, instead, informal, like a lawyer would present a brief. The biblical view is the best explanation of all of the data taken together. In other words, it does not seek to rely upon one or two major arguments, but instead takes all of the evidence as a whole unit, and says that biblical theism best explains it all. The strength of this would be that even if one or two particulars can be explained away by skeptics(e.g., the problem of evil), they must explain all of the evidence taken together. All the elements of the argument stand or fall together, so that one need not rely on one strict argument. This approach will utilize the arguments from natural theology and historical evidences, but is more concerned with everything taken together. [4]

Noted Cumulative Case Apologists: Paul Feinberg

The Presuppositional Method. Presuppositionalism parts with the evidentialist methods above, generally rejecting traditional proofs for God’s existence. In this view, believers and unbelievers do not have enough common ground between each other to allow the evidentialists to accomplish their goals. Due to sin, minds have become so corrupt that believers and unbelievers will not agree on the fundamentals needed for evidentialists to establish their position. Thus, one must presuppose Christianity as the beginning point in apologetics. All meaning and thought presupposes the existence of the God of Scripture. Presuppositionalists
try to demonstrate that unbelievers cannot argue, think, or live properly without first presupposing the biblical God. Only biblical theism can make sense of the world. Proof for this position is not seen as necessary. It is simply presupposed.

My problem with this is two-fold: 1) it inherently begs the question (assumes what needs proof), and 2) it contains some other assumptions which I reject. However, there is truth to the fact that we all have presuppositions from which we argue. I hope to go into this more later. [5]

Noted Pre-suppositional Apologists: Corneluis Van Til, Greg Bahnsen, Douglas Wilson, and James White.

References:

1. Norman Geisler and Frank Turek, Twelve Points that Show Christianity is True, p. 2.
2. Don Moyer, Apologetic Methods Overview, http://www.theapologiaproject.org/Apologetic%20Methods.pdf, May 15, 2000.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid.

Discussion Questions

Week 2
Introduction

Do you understand the “box top?”

Chapter 1

What is a “self-defeating” statement?

What are 2 reasons that all religions cannot be true?

Chapter 2

How is truth known?

How are truths about God known?

Again, if you have any questions, please let me know and I'll see each of you on Friday!

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Note to Readers: This post is to those brothers and sisters who are participating in our FCF Apologetics Book Study. Perhaps you will find it helpful, but if not, just look over it! As always, I appreciate your readership!

Book Excerpt: Reasoning with the Scriptures with the Jehovah's Witnesses by Ron Rhodes


John 14:28- "The Father Is Greater than I"

The Watchtower Teaching. The New World Translation renders John 14:28, "You heard that I said to you, I am going away and I am coming back to you. If you loved me, you would rejoice that I am going my way to the Father, because the Father is greater than I am" (emphasis added). The book "Let God Be True" tells us that Jehovah is greater than Jesus not only in regard to office but also in regard to His person. Jehovah is intrinsically greater than Jesus.

The Watchtower Society concludes from this that because Jehovah is the "greater" of the two, Jesus cannot be God Almighty. The fact that Jesus is lesser than Jehovah proves that He cannot be God in the same sense that Jehovah is. Indeed, "on numerous occasions Jesus expressed his inferiority and subordination to his Father...Even after Jesus' ascension into heaven his apostles continued to present the same picture.

The Biblical Teaching. It is critical to recognize that in John 14:28, Jesus is not speaking about His nature or His essential being (Christ had earlier said, "I am the Father are one" in this regard [John 10:30]), but rather about His lowly position in the incarnation. The Athanasian Creed affirms that Christ is "equal to the Father as touching his Godhood and inferior to the Father as touching his manhood."

In his commentary Exposition of the Gospel of John, Arther W. Pink relates Christ's statement that the Father was "greater" than Him to the great humiliation Christ suffered in becoming a man:

"In becoming incarnate and tabernacling among men, [Christ] had greatly humiliated Himself, by choosing to descent into shame and suffering in their acutest forms...In view of this, Christ was now contrasting His situation with that of the Father in the heavenly Sanctuary. The Father was seated upon the throne of highest majesty; the brightness of His glory was uneclipsed; He was surrounded by hosts of holy beings, who worshiped Him with uninterrupted praise. Far different was it with His incarnate Son-despised and rejected of men, surrounded by implacable enemies, soon to be nailed to a criminal's cross."

Now, it is important that you emphasize the distinction between Greek words for greater (meizon) and better (kreitton). Jesus specifically said, "The Father is greater than I" not, "The Father is better than I." The word "greater" is used to point to the Father's greater position (in heaven), not a greater nature. Had the word "better" been used, however, this would indicate that the Father has a better nature than Jesus.

This distinction is made clear in Hebrews 1:4, where "better" is used in regard to Jesus' superiority over the angels. The word "better" in this verse indicates that Jesus is not just higher than the angels positionally; rather, He is higher than the angels in His very nature. Jesus is different (better) in kind and in nature from the angels.

This distinction between "greater" and "better" can be illustrated in the president of the United States. The president is in a higher position than the rest of us. Therefore, the president is greater (meizon) than the rest of us. However, he is still just a human being-and thus he is not better (kreitton) than the rest of us.

Notice that Jesus never used the word "better" regarding His relationship with the Father, for He is not inferior or lower in nature than the Father. Rather, Jesus used a word ("greater") that points to the Father being higher in position only. During the time of the incarnation, Jesus functioned in the world of humanity, and this necessitated Jesus being lower than the Father positionally.

Ask...

  • Is the president of the United States intrinsically better than us by nature, or is it more correct to say that his position is greater than ours?
  • In view of the distinction between the Greek words for "greater" (meaning higher in position) and "better" (meaning higher in nature), is it not clear that in John 14:28 Jesus is speaking of the Father's higher position and not higher nature?
Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

This book has been re-released, updated, and expanded. Check it out here. (Highly Recommended)