Category: apologetics

On the Necessity of Jesus’ Sacrifice for our Sins

I had an interesting email exchange about a month ago concerning whether or not it was ‘necessary’ for Jesus to atone for humanity’s sins by the shedding of his blood.  In some follow up conversation, we talked about different ways of looking at the question, turning on the word ‘necessary.’  As I recall, ‘free-will’ was […]

Share

Castrate, and then bid them be fruitful- reflections on a cowardly cruise ship captain

The 24 hour news cycle is currently devoted to the ‘Italian Titanic’ and especially the fact that the captain of the ship beat the passengers off of the boat.  Naturally, the captain is everywhere being referred to as a coward, and every indication is that he really was a coward. I couldn’t help but think […]

Share

Reflections on the ‘Jaffe Memo’ and why ‘Religion’ and ‘Politics’ should Mix- Part 1

It is has never been more important to carefully examine what one believes and why they believe it. If you do not carry out this work, you may end up being nothing more than a useful idiot of the worst sort: directly bringing about the goals and ends of those you specifically repudiate as wicked and evil… condemning the communists, nazis, and eugenicists, while carrying out their work.

Share

Support this ministry: give a book, give a buck

ACM is the umbrella organization under which Sntjohnny.com operates.  It is a Christian apologetics ministry that focuses on defending the faith through the arts and literature in addition to ‘standard’ apologetics approaches. On account of this, ACM does a fair bit of publishing, including the recent release of Shirley Tucker’s award winning Diamonds in the […]

Share

The Walk to Walden Hill: A Review

The Walk to Walden Hill begins with tragedy: the orphaning of the protagonist, Josh Billows. His mother dead, his father jailed, Josh ends up in foster care. As just a young child he is forced to grapple with issues that are known to shipwreck adults, even if he doesn’t understand the real issues that are in play.

Share

The Euthyphro Dilemma Revisted with its Simple Solution

Just as Aristotle argued that an actual infinite regress of cause and effect was just plumb impossible, necessitating a causeless cause, so too is a never-ending chain of moral ‘causation.’ In order for the term ‘moral’ to have any meaning at all- and even the amoral atheists behave as though it does- we must come to a point where we must allow that there is an entity which makes moral pronouncements because those pronouncements are good in themselves AND the grounding of the goodness of those pronouncements resides entirely within that entity. That entity, we call ‘God.’

Share

The Atheists and the Thought that Ends All Thought

In a recent post, I talked about Richard Dawkins’ discussion in his Delusion about why children gravitate towards fantasy and myth, etc, and alluded to GK Chesterton’s arguments about the ‘thought that ends all thought.’  This sentiment emerges in Chesterton’s book Orthodoxy in a chapter appropriately called The Suicide of Thought.  The previous post was […]

Share

Apologetics Academy of Atheists, Seekers, and Christians (Fall Session with Habermas)

The ministry hosting this website (sntjohnny.com) also puts on an online apologetics academy.  The fall session is coming up.  Dr. Gary Habermas will be guest lecturing on the historical Jesus and the evidence for the Resurrection.  It is possible to attend these lectures without being enrolled in the academy.  Those enrolled in the academy, regardless […]

Share

A Defense of Antony Flew’s “There is a God” from his Own Letters

A Defense of the Integrity of Antony Flew’s “There is a God” From His Own Letters

On Kindle | On the Nook

Several years ago, word came out that Antony Flew had rejected his atheism. What he accepted was in doubt and in dispute. In a conversation with Dr. Gary Habermas, I was informed that Flew was very disappointed with the introduction to “God and Philosophy” which was to have addressed his views. Concerned that Flew might die before he had a chance to set the record straight, I asked for and received Flew’s mailing address. I contacted him, urging him to settle things. To my surprise, he replied…

Share

Infatuation with the ‘New’: A Defense of the Old

‘New’ arguments would actually serve to put into doubt humanity’s epistemological foundations. Better- it isn’t a question of ‘new’ evidences or ‘new’ arguments, but a new perspective on what weight we give old evidences and arguments. I think that is a mark of sanity and maturity; I for one would view any ‘new evidence’ or ‘original argument’ or ‘innovative idea’ with great suspicion, especially if it implies we were all off our rockers before it was offered.

Share

The New Argument of the New Atheists

I don’t hate atheists.  I don’t like arguing for the sake of arguing and don’t have a ‘thing’ about winning a debate.  I discourse with atheists because I love them, and because I believe that I am right in my belief that God is going to call this world to account and if we do […]

Share

Time to crack down on the Christian Fundamentalists!

Given how bad, bad, bad, Christians are, we’ll see calls that its time to crack down on Christian fundamentalists. The best part: they are unlikely to put up a fight.

Share

On the muzzling of climate change skeptics and your gullibility

The media knows that they have a significant role in shaping public opinion. They know that if they don’t report the ‘minority’ position you, my dear reader, will likely never hear it. If you are lucky enough to ever hear it, they can count on you to dismiss it without further thought, “If it was a valid viewpoint it would be in the papers” “This flies in the face of the scientific consensus, you idiot! They said RIGHT ON THE BBC that this is the SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS!” or “Why would the governments of the world be pushing this way if it weren’t true?”

But this article allows one to pull back the curtain, just a shade, to see the truth. They are manipulating you. You are being manipulated. You are a regular reader of the news and keep abreast of current affairs by watching the nightly news. You think you are informed. You aren’t. You are a gullible dolt being led by the nose by the powers that be to believe just whatever it is they want you to believe right now. At least, that is what the media thinks, and this article implies. And why would they think that way if it weren’t true?

Share

Epistemological Confusion about revelation and Revelation

When a Christian apologist invokes ‘revelation’ it is often understood by atheists and skeptics to refer to the “writings of the flawed goat herders of a bygone era that have been shown by modern science to be outdated, outmoded, and absolutely in error.  Certainly not the stuff we can think of as ‘divine revelation.’”  This […]

Share
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 14 15 16 Next