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"Intelligent Design advocates do not publish their work in the appropriate scientific literature."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

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,

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,


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."

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.


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,


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
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

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.


1. Norman Geisler and Frank Turek, Twelve Points that Show Christianity is True, p. 2.
2. Don Moyer, Apologetic Methods Overview,, May 15, 2000.

Discussion Questions

Week 2

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,

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.


  • 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,

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

Tuesday, September 08, 2009

The Watchtower: God's Organization or Agent of Deception?

It is my intent in this post to provide a brief history of the Jehovah's Witnesses and provide answers to common questions asked about the Watchtower Society and it's followers.

Apologist Josh McDowell gives a brief history of the Watchtower Society:

"Officially known as the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, the Jehovah’s Witnesses are a product of the life work of Charles Taze Russell, born February 16, 1852, near Pittsburgh, PA. In 1870, while still in his teens and without a formal theological education, Russell organized a Bible class whose members eventually made him “pastor.”

In 1879 he founded the magazine Zion’s Watchtower in which he published his own unique interpretation of the Bible, and in 1886, the first volume of seven books (six written by Russell) entitled The Millennial Dawn was published. (These later were retitled Studies in the Scriptures.)

By the time of his death in 1916, Russell, according to the Watchtower, traveled more than a million miles, gave more than thirty thousand sermons, and wrote books totaling over fifty thousand pages.

A few months after the death of Charles Taze Russell, the society’s legal counselor, Joseph Franklin Rutherford, became the second President of the Watchtower Society. It was under his leadership that the name “Jehovah’s Witnesses” was adopted.

Ruthorford died in 1942 and was succeeded by Nathan H. Knorr. It was during Knorr’s presidency that the society increased from 115,000 to more than 2 million members. In 1961, under Knorr’s leadership, the society produced its own English translation of the Bible entitled The New World Translation of Holy Scriptures." [1]

For more on the history that the Watchtower doesn't want you to read, see here.

What do JW’s believe?

Is the Jehovah's Witness religion Christian?

Is The New World Translation of Holy Scriptures an accurate translation of the Bible?

Do Greek Scholars recommend the NWT?

Does the Watchtower honestly quote scholars regarding the NWT?

What Do Greek Scholars think about the NWT treatment of John 1:1?

Who is the God of the Watchtower?

Does the Watchtower portray the Trinity honestly?


Is the Watchtower claims to be the "Faithful and Discreet Slave;" is it?

Is "Jehovah" the authentic name of God inserted in the NWT?


Is Jesus the Archangel Michael, as JW's believe?


Is Jesus simply a "mighty god" compared to Jehovah?

Is Jesus 'The God?'

According to the Watchtower, who's sin did Jesus pay for?

What do JW's believe about the Holy Spirit?

Are Jehovah's Witnesses encouraged to think for themselves?


The JW's teach that only 144,000 people are going to make it to heaven; is that true?

The Watchtower claims to be God's prophet here on earth; do they pass the test God Himself puts forth in Deuteronomy 18:22? The Watchtower invites you to check it out!

How does a JW's receive salvation?

What is the JW’s final authority on doctrinal matters?


I'm a JW's who is considering leaving the Watchtower Society? Where can I get help?

Two more JWs posts to go and then it's on to Mormonism!

Courage and Godspeed,


1. Josh McDowell, A Ready Defense, p. 332-333.

For Further research, I would recommend:

1. The Apologetic Front- maintained by Mike Felker

2. Witness Inc.- Reaching JW's since 1975

3. Tower to Truth Ministries

4. Free Minds- Discover the truth about Jehovah's Witnesses and the Watchtower Society

5. Watchman Fellowship- Various articles

6. Jehovah's Witnesses...For Jehovah God!

7. Jesus is Jehovah!

8. David Reed's (former JWs) Biblie Answers for Jehovah's Witnesses

Saturday, September 05, 2009

Featured Video: Jehovah's Witnesses and Deuteronomy 18:21-22 by Mike Felker

Mike Felker has posted another great video regarding the Jehovah's Witnesses and Deuteronomy 18:21-22:

"And if you say in your heart, 'How shall we know the word which the Lord has not spoken?'- "when a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does not happen or come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him" (Deu. 18:21-22).

Does the Watchtower pass the Bible's test?

In this video, Mike is speaking to "the few Jehovah's Witnesses who are willing to defend their organization and it's claims, rather than dismiss them out of hand."

You can check it out here.

Courage and Godspeed,

Friday, September 04, 2009

Featured Video: A Great Testimony of a Jehovah's Witness who Left the Organization because of 1914

Mike Felker, of The Apologetic Front, has posted an outstanding video (6:42) entitled, "A Great Testimony of a Jehovah's Witness who left the Organization because of 1914."

I would encourage you to check out this video and Mike's excellent blog. He offers numerous resources including debates, book reviews, and videos.

Courage and Godspeed,

Wednesday, September 02, 2009

Knowing the Truth in the Shadow of Doubt Conference

Hello Everyone,

Would you like to sit under the teaching of apologists J.P. Moreland, Craig Hazen, Greg Koukl, and John Bloom in the same weekend?

Truthbomb is excited to announce the forthcoming Knowing the Truth in the Shadow of Doubt Conference that will take place at Mt. Airy Bible Church located in Mt. Airy, Maryland.

The information is as follows:

When you boil it down, isn't Christianity really about blind faith and mystery? That's certainly what we hear the world saying through every vehicle of the media. But it turns out to be the furthest thing from the truth.

In this fast-paced and stimulating conference, some of the leaders in Christian thinking and philosophy will demonstrate that Christianity is really all about KNOWLEDGE! As the Apostle John said, we can "KNOW the truth and the truth will set you free" (John 8:32). The very best scholarship and thinking in history, philosophy, science, and cultural studies point to the truth of the Christian worldview. This conference will help equip you to make your case for Christ in a hostile world.

Free Kick-Off Session

Our Skeptical Culture and the God Question
Thursday, October 8
7:00 - 9:30 pm
with J.P. Moreland and Craig Hazen

October 9-10 Conference

Join us for three cutting-edge sessions on basic apologetics and communicating your ideas with impact.

The Resurrection of Jesus: A Bizarre Focal Point for Our Time
with Craig Hazen

Friday, October 9
7:00 - 9:30 pm
Scientific Knowledge as One of Our Greatest Allies: The Issue of Intelligent Design
with John Bloom

Saturday, October 10
9:00 am - 12:00 pm
The Toughest Questions We Face as Christians
with Greg Koukl

Saturday, October 10
1:00 - 4:00 pm

Register Online Here

Conference Location:

Mount Airy
Bible Church
16700 Old Frederick Rd
Mount Airy, MD 21771

View Map!

I would also encourage you to spread the word to all those you believe may be interested. You may also want to make an announcement at your church!

If you have any questions, please contact me at

I hope to see you there!

Courage and Godspeed,