Archive for June, 2014

20140624-062026-22826185.jpgPhoto by James Thompson through a CC Attribution 2.0 License

“Before I can call upon Christ as my Savior, I have to understand that I need a savior. I have to understand that I am a sinner. I have to have some understanding of what sin is.I have to understand that God exists. I have to understand that I am estranged from that God, and that I am exposed to that God’s judgment. I don’t reach out for a savior unless I am first convinced that I need a savior. All of that is pre-evangelism. It is involved in the data or the information that a person has to process with his mind before he can either respond to it in faith or reject it in unbelief.”
—R.C. Sproul (From, Defending Your Faith)

via http://www.thepoachedegg.net/the-poached-egg/2014/03/apologetics-training-is-no-longer-an-option-12-quotes.html?utm_content=buffer8ecc6&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

The Reformers thought of saving faith as being composed of three characteristics:

1) notitia- brute facts of Christ’s saving work
2) assensus- acknowledging these brute facts
3) fiducia-trust in Christ’s saving work

The work of pre-evangelism falls under notitia. Make no mistake, however. If people do not have the knowledge of Christ, or their own need for Him, or have their immediate questions answered, there will be no assensus or fiducia.

simul iustus et peccator,

Eric Adams

Advertisements

20140621-122649-44809928.jpgImage title Playing Safe by Brett Jordan through a CC 2.0 Attribution License

“Although morality is arguably just as murky for the religious, at least there is some bedrock belief that gives a reason to believe that morality is real and will prevail. In an atheist universe, morality can be rejected without external sanction at any point, and without a clear, compelling reason to believe in its reality, that’s exactly what will sometimes happen.”

Read that last section carefully, because Baggini is arguing, as we have argued here many times, that atheists have a hard time grounding morality, much harder than the religious do.  Speaking to his atheists friends, he says, “Anyone who thinks it’s easy to ground ethics either hasn’t done much moral philosophy or wasn’t concentrating when they did.”

Baggini also admits that “in an atheist universe, morality can be rejected without external sanction at any point, and without a clear, compelling reason to believe in its reality, that’s exactly what will sometimes happen.”  In other words, on atheism, the ability to rationally reject morality is built into the system.  There is nothing that ultimately guarantees that morality can be grounded, and so an atheist who decides that morality is simply optional is within their rational rights to do so.  And, according to Baggini, that is exactly what sometimes happens.” — Bill Pratt

via Can Atheism Lead to Nihilism? | Tough Questions Answered.

simul iustus et peccator,

Eric Adams

20140621-121245-43965997.jpgImage by Nemo through a Public Domain CC0 License

“Hall claims that Atheism’ logical conclusion is a more humane way of living. This is simply not the case. Atheism, if taken as derived from a Naturalistic worldview is Darwinian in nature, which, as said above, does not lead to any sense of morality to speak of. If we are, as the naturalistic view would have us, without value, worth, meaning, purpose, or morality, we are merely animals, and in this world “might makes right.” Its easy to sit back in a first-world country and give platitudes of morality that we all respect, but tell that to those who were under the rule of Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, or Joseph Kony. If God does not exist, then there is no objective morality to speak of or to adhere to. Morality does not begin and end with us, as Hall states. It begins and ends with God, who is also the one who create all men in his image, which gives us intrinsic value, worth, meaning, and purpose.”
-Matt V. Walker, Anchor a Apologetics

via http://anchorapologetics.com/2014/06/09/is-atheism-in-america-undergoing-a-radical-change-a-response-to-salon-magazine/

simul iustus et peccator,

Eric Adams

20140621-115214-42734210.jpgImage by the_steve_cox through a CC License

“An atheist is one of the most daring beings in creation,—a contemner of God, who explodes His laws by denying His existence.”
-John Foster

URLhttp://www.bartleby.com/348/106.html

simul iustus et peccator,

Eric Adams

20140613-162339-59019061.jpgImage from the Boston Public Library through a CC License. This image has not been altered from the original.

“Religions merit our attention for their sheer conceptual ambition; for changing the world in a way that few secular institutions ever have. They have managed to combine theories about ethics and metaphysics with a practical involvement in education, fashion, politics, travel, hostelry, initiation, ceremonies, publishing, art and architecture – a range of interests which puts to shame the scope of achievements of even the greatest and most influential secular movements and individuals in history.”
-Alain de Botton, (Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believer’s Guide to the Uses of Religion, 18)

via http://www.christianapologeticsalliance.com/2013/06/18/an-atheist-admires-the-contributions-of-religion/

Well said. The rise of Scientism has obscured the long held value of metaphysics and the ethics of religion-especially Christianity. Even science has unprovable presuppositions that are based on philosophy, logic, or metaphysics. It is historically arrogant to dismiss metaphysics and theology as a foundational science, simply because we think we know better now because of science. Scientific inquiry will only be beneficial so far. It can never lead to moral improvement, or the appreciation of truth, beauty, or the good. It can never lead beyond the beginning of the universe. It can never lead to the universal cry for meaning and purpose in life. It can only lead to despair.

simul iustus et peccator,

Eric Adams

.

20140613-155826-57506647.jpgimage titled Eliza Looks Surprised at Something, by Bradley Gordon, through a CC License 2.0. This photo has not been altered.

“Blow is worried about the fact that “nearly a third of Americans continue to believe that the Bible ‘is the actual word of God and is to be taken literally, word for word.’” This shouldn’t be a surprise. I think most people approach a written text with the assumption that it should be taken literally, unless the text itself dictates otherwise—or there is some ulterior motive to read our own views into the text. Where there is this confusion over Biblical literalism, you will often find the fueling desire to change what Scripture says or undermine its authority, even to the point of subverting centuries-old historic understanding of Christian teaching. But the same folks who by default assume the Bible should not be taken literally generally expect their own words to be interpreted literally. Don’t be afraid to call them out on that. Then do more than just point out their inconsistency… preach. Literally.”

-Mike, from the God and Neighbor blog

via http://feedly.com/k/UzZT06

I’ve had political liberals as well as so-called “Christian liberals” act shocked that any one could believe in that archaic book called the Bible before. As if the modern or postmodern worldview has advanced man morally. They haven’t. It is Scripture that lifted man out of his mud-wallowing. Secularism is returning man to the pig stye. The more anti-intellectual and Biblically-illiterate our society becomes, the more it degrades morally.

If I write a letter to my wife, you’d better bet I want her to take me literally, whether I’m giving her instructions on how to reset a breaker, or if I’m writing her a love sonnet, or if I’m just letting her know when I’m coming home.

The author above is correct-somewhere in the buried motivations for not wanting to take the Bible literally, is a desire to evade or escape some portion of Scripture they don’t like.

Well, suck it up buttercup, ’cause the Bible gets all up in your bidness. It’ll either change you, or you’re going to have to try to change it. Good luck with the latter.

Thus endeth my rant-lol.

simul iustus et peccator,

Eric Adams