This was the formal Muslim-Christian Debate held at UC Davis on November 30, 2006. Ali Ataie and Michael Licona debate whether Jesus Christ was resurrected or rescued.
NOTE: This youtube player is setup with a playlist for all 14 parts of the debate. The playlist will pop up whenever a video finishes or whenever you move you mouse across the bottom of the video area. You can select what ever part of the debate you want to watch with this playlist feature. Enjoy!
then all that exists is time and chance acting on matter. If this is true then the difference between your thoughts and mine correspond to the difference between shaking up a bottle of Mountain Dew and a bottle of Dr. Pepper. You simply fizz atheistically and I fizz theistically. This means that you do not hold to atheism because it is true , but rather because of a series of chemical reactions… … Morality, tragedy, and sorrow are equally evanescent. They are all empty sensations created by the chemical reactions of the brain, in turn created by too much pizza the night before. If there is no God, then all abstractions are chemical epiphenomena, like swamp gas over fetid water. This means that we have no reason for assigning truth and falsity to the chemical fizz we call reasoning or right and wrong to the irrational reaction we call morality. If no God, mankind is a set of bi-pedal carbon units of mostly water. And nothing else.”
“You shall not kill the child by obtaining an abortion. Nor, again, shall you destroy him after he is born.†(Barnabas, 70-80 AD, 1.148)
“You shall not murder a child by abortion nor kill one who has been born.†(The Didache, 80-140 AD, 1.377)
“We say that those women who use drugs to bring on abortion commit murder. And we also say that we will have to give an account to God for the abortion.†(Athenagoras, 175 AD, 2.147)
“In our case, murder is once for all forbidden. Therefore, we may not destroy even the fetus in the womb, while as yet the human being derives blood from other parts of the body for its sustenance. To hinder a birth is merely a speedier way to kill a human. It does not matter whether you take away a life that has been born or destroy one that is not yet born.†(Tertullian, 197 AD, 3.26)
“Indeed, the Law of Moses punishes with appropriate penalties the person who causes abortion. For there already exists the beginning stages of a human being. And even at this stage, [the fetus] is already acknowledged with having the condition of life and death, since he is already susceptible to both.†(Tertullian, 210 AD, 3.218)
“Are you to dissolve the conception by aid of drugs? I believe it is no more lawful to hurt a child in process of birth, than to hurt one who is already born.†(Tertullian, 212 AD, 4.57)
“There are some women who, by drinking medical preparations, extinguish the source of the future man in their very bowels. So they commit murder before they bring forth.†(Mark Minucius Felix, 200AD, 4.192)
“The womb of his wife was hit by a blow of his heel. And, in the miscarriage that soon followed, the offspring was brought forth, the fruit of a father’s murder.†(Cyprian, 250AD, 5.326)
“The soul is not introduced into the body after birth, as some philosophers think. Rather, it is introduced immediately after conception, when the divine necessity has formed the offspring in the womb.†(Lactantius, 304-313AD, 7.297)
“You shall not slay your child by causing abortion, nor kill the baby that is born.†(Apostolic Constitutions, 390 AD, 7.466)
[HT: James Grant]
[HT: David Wood]
This is a good interview on Wright’s latest book, Surprised by Hope. I would encourage everyone to buy it and read it if they want to get a better understanding of the Biblical teaching on Heaven and the New Creation. Enjoy the interview from last night’s report.
This is an awesome example of GOOD Christian Apologetics being applied against an agnostic scholar (Bart Ehrman). The best part about it is the fact that it is Stephen Colbert telling Bart Ehrman that an agnostic is just an atheist without balls! 🙂
Here it is… Enjoy! Please comment and share your thoughts and reactions.
Notice the dichotomy that Miller brings to the forefront by claiming the Bible is a spiritual document and therefore cannot address scientific ideas. This may seem true at first glance, but it is only a bad ploy that many evolutionists use to snuff out the Bible’s claims about the creation account. It is true that the Bible is not a sciencetific document and that the Bible is not trying to give scientific details about the creation. BUT, please note the BUT…
The Bible is an historical document. This is very important for people to understand. If we do not ackowledge that the Bible records accurate historical material about the creation account, then where does that leave us with the rest of the 66 books of the Bible? You don’t have to be a scienctist to record the fact that God made the world in 6 days… I mean, come on people!
On the point of creation/evolution, the Bible has much to say about this in terms of the historical record. Both modern evolution and Biblical creationism are addressing the issue of history and where man came from. Therefore, on that point, the two must either agree or one of the two be proven wrong and thus a lie.
If evolution is true, then man is not made in God’s image. If evolution is true, then we humans are not special creatures made to rule the creation by reflecting God’s glory into it.
Here’s the video:
[HT: Christendom]
Tonight, I just finished watching the PBS Nova special on the Dover School Board controversy over Intelligent Design and Evolution. It is called “Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial” if you want to search for it online.
The most amazing thing about the whole show was the glaring BIAS that Nova had for the whole controversy and the very good, but extremely BAD, acting that they portrayed in the trial reenactments at the courthouse where the controversy took place most noticeably. In other words, Nova made the Intelligent Design proponents look like goof balls and the Evolutionary proponents look like saints and eloquent speakers who had everything figured out to a tee.
This is just plain silly. And Nova knows that the controversy is so much bigger than this. So much so that they had to make the Intelligent Design viewpoint look like inconsistent, Muslim terrorists in order to make their case (and make themselves feel better). 🙂
In the end, they still did nothing but preach to the choir and try to make the uninformed members of the choir feel more fear and worry about the whole situation than they already felt before the broadcast.
If Nova really wants the respect of non-Evolutionary sympathisers and proponents… then they are just going to have to do a better job in the future. Nova needs to stop their fear mongering and start talking about important things… like the reason why Evolution has been around as popular science for ONLY 150 years and not longer. The point being… yes, Evolution has helped us understand some things better. But it’s search for the “origin” of species, ad infinitum, will never come to a concrete answer because the history records show that God created all creatures according to their OWN KIND. This implies that the links between animals is not a tree of common descent, but a web of common structures built by their Creator God who sought to reveal His glory in and through the whole creation.
In my opinion, the more important topic of study is Baraminology, the study of animal kinds. This field of science that studied animals WITHOUT respect to “common descent” theories of Evolution. This is the type of tried and true science that has been done for millennia, seeking to understand God’s creation that reveals more about Him and His goodness, greatness, and power. The honest truth is that all the great scientists of old who made great advancements and achievements and who helped us better understand the world we live in today… they all believed in a Creator God and sought to think His thoughts after Him and discover the glory of His creation.
Nova’s problem is not its failure to see the fallacies within Evolutionary theory. Instead, Nova’s problem is its failure to glorify God in all things. If Nova desired to think God’s thoughts after Him and to understand His creation in order to better understand and enjoy God… well… things would be a whole lot different now wouldn’t they? 🙂
Enough of the commentary. Enjoy your week and seek first God’s Kingdom and His righteousness and all these other things will become clear in their own time.
In Christ and In Defense of the Faith,
I would like to point everyone to a very interesting and informative interview with Dr. Darrell Bock that was recently conducted by Midlands Bible College. He discusses a variety of topics and it is very enjoyable to read. Here is an excerpt:
A short while ago, you wrote widely on matters relating to the DaVinci Code. Is this subject something that you intend to keep at the top of your agenda?
Well, not the DaVinci Code, but I do plan to keep writing in areas where the culture interacts with the Jesus and the Bible. There are so many crazy ideas out there. I distinguish between Christianity, where Jesus is unique and Messiah versus Jesusanity, where Jesus is just a great religious teacher but he is not Messiah nor unique. I will continue to write about the difference and the issues tied to that discussion.
What impact, long-term, do you think the DaVinci Code and similar works will have on the general public perception of the historical Jesus? In other words, do you think the negative effect of these works will be short lived?
It actually is that the DaVinci Code reflects issues that have been in the public square and now, popularized, reflect how many people are coming to see Christianity as a political creation of Constantine that has little, if anything, to do with the historical Jesus. Now Constantine did have a tremendous impact on Christianity, but the theology of the church long predates him as does the church’s view of Jesus, as that is rooted in the experience of the disciples and Jesus’ own teaching. But fighting the impression made by this other story that now shows up in novels and TV specials on Jesus and Christianity is going to be an ongoing task for the church—and many in the church have no idea how to respond to such claims. They sense these alternative ideas are wrong but do not know what to say when “experts” or books say otherwise. Thus the church needs to do a better job of instructing its own on such idea.
For Christians who want to know more about this, there any other books or resources that he would recommend?
There are dozens of books in the DaVinci Code. However there are very few on the early history of Christianity that deal with these issues. Among those that exist are my The Missing Gospels: Unearthing the Truth behind Alternative Christianities; Craig Evans’ Fabricating Jesus; Dan Wallace and two others have Reinventing Jesus. My blog at www.bible.org/bock also discusses these issues now and again. (Read More…)
N.T. Wright’s recent visit to Nashville, TN, included an interview with the Tennessean. It includes some very interesting comments regarding hell and the final state of those who reject God’s Glory and Gospel. While I do not share his views on hell in full, I would say that his heart to see the world renewed is a blessed hope and central teaching of the Bible that we should all think about regularly and share with our family and friends. Below I have reproduced the article found here:
————————————-
Bishop bucks views of heaven
Long-held notions not biblical, he says
By BOB SMIETANA
Staff Writer
Heaven is not retirement on steroids, where people sit around doing whatever they like, with nothing but time on their hands.
Instead it’s more like going on vacation. You rest, relax, stop and smell the roses, and then get back to work. At least, that’s what the Bible says.
“The book of Revelation talks about God making us kings and priests,” said N.T. Wright, bishop of Durham, England, and author of Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church. “It isn’t just salvation and now you can sit back and relax. It’s that we are saved to be God’s agents and stewards in this new creation.”
Wright who was in Nashville on Tuesday speaking at West End United Methodist Church, believes the notion of going to heaven after death isn’t found in the Bible. Instead, he says, God brings heaven to earth.
“It’s like this world with all the beauty and the grandeur and the power,” he said, “but unfettered by death and decay.”
The Church of England bishop says that he isn’t trying to come up with a new or inventive view of heaven and resurrection. Instead, he is trying to point people to the Bible.
“The odd thing is that I don’t think I am saying anything remotely unorthodox,” he said. “I am trying to give people back some bits of the Bible they have forgotten about … Resurrection may be crazy, but it is what Christians are supposed to believe.”
That’s a notion that appeals to Scotty Smith, founding pastor of Christ Community Church in Franklin. Smith is currently preaching a series on heaven based on the book of Revelation.
He says that evangelical Christians, in particular, have replaced a biblical view of heaven with a romanticized view.
“It (heaven) is going to look a little more like this world than a place filled with cherubs sitting around and singing Bill Gaither songs,” Smith said. “The story the Bible tells is one of redemption, not replacement.”
Resurrection is the focus
Wright, appointed bishop of Durham, a diocese south of Scotland, in 2003, says the Bible and the Christian creeds speak more about resurrection than about going to heaven.
“Without resurrection you are left with a theology which says that the present world of space, time and matter is just junk, and God is going to throw it in the trash,” he said. “If you say this world is basically junk and trash, you can exploit it, you can exploit people. You can abuse the world, and you can abuse people and it really doesn’t matter.”
This focus on resurrection and not just getting to heaven also appeals to Gavin Richardson, director of youth ministries at Faith United Methodist Church in Hendersonville.
“It’s not just ‘get Jesus and you are good to go’,” he said.
In all his talk of heaven, Wright still believes in the reality of hell. He says that, in the end, people are free to choose to be separated from God.
“The Bible doesn’t talk about heaven and hell side by side. The Bible talks about God bringing all things on heaven and earth together. Heaven and earth will be joined. That is the great renewal and God’s victory over evil and suffering and death,” he said. “At the same time, the Bible talks about the certainty of final loss for those who choose not to worship the God in whose image they were made. And it seems to me that the New Testament doesn’t leave us with the option of saying all will be saved. I often wish it did, but it doesn’t.”
