Muddling Toward Maturity Blog

Stephen Meyer and Michael Shermer discuss Meyer's latest book—Return of God Hypothesis: Three Scientific Discoveries Reveal the Mind Behind the Universe

Stephen Meyer, author of  Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design and Darwin's Doubt: The Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the Case for Intelligent Design, has now published yet another major book, Return of the God Hypothesis: Three Scientific Discoveries That Reveal the Mind Behind the Universe.   Meyer is one of the foremost advocates of Intelligent Design and his latest book constitutes perhaps the most comprehensive book available on the subject.  In this video, well-known skeptic Michael Shermer and Stephen Meyer carry on an irenic, valuable conversation.  If you are like me, you will be highly impressed with Meyer's mastery of his subject matter.

MOVIE REVIEW: "THE CASE FOR CHRIST"

UPDATE 4/8/2017  - I saw the movie today and agree with both Ed Morrissey's review (below) and that of Steven D. Graydanus'.  Both reviews acknowledge that this faith-based film evidences the genre's maturation.  One can watch it without cringing.  I found the acting very good, and the emotional responses of Erika Christensen (who played Strobel's wife, Leslie), particularly outstanding.

Here is a trailer followed by Lee Strobel's talk at a church last month in which he tells his story in his own words. 

Original post:

Ed Morrissey, whose opinion I regard highly, gives five stars to The Case for Christ movie.   It opens in theaters across the U.S. tonight.  Strobel is the author of the best-selling book (over 14 million copies) The Case for Christ.  Here is Morrissey's review:.

The faith-based film industry has both grown and matured over the last several years as filmmakers and investors see enthusiasm from audiences for these offerings. The new film The Case for Christ, based on the real-life conversion story of former Pulitzer-nominated journalist Lee Strobel and taken from his 1998 book of the same title, provides further evidence of this maturation.

In fact, the pursuit of evidence forms the core of the film’s narrative. In 1980, Lee Strobel (Mike Vogel) finds his marriage and professional life turned upside-down when his wife Leslie (Erika Christiansen) converts from their shared atheism to Christianity. Convinced that his wife has been brainwashed by a cult — being just a couple of years removed from the Jonestown massacre — Strobel decides to apply his journalistic expertise to debunk the central core of the Christian faith: the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Can Strobel find an evidence-based argument to refute Christianity, or will he be forced to face his own biases and assumptions?

The Case for Christ models a familiar tension for believers between faith and reason. People come to Christianity through both paths and generally find ways to accommodate both. Leslie’s conversion comes through an emotional tie to faith, but Lee clings to his vision of reason. That dichotomy plays out in their interactions, depicted realistically and very believably between Vogel and Christiansen on screen. For most of us, who struggle to blend the two, we will recognize ourselves in Lee and Leslie.

JOHN LENNOX: WHY GOD? DO WE NEED GOD IN THE GOOD TIMES?

I love John Lennox for his clarity of thought, genial personality, and forthright evidence-based Christian faith.  The video below is not of the best quality, but if it proves too bothersome, one can just listen without watching.  I have blogged about Lennox before with other (and better quality) videos on various topics.

 

MARCO RUBIO OFFERS A REMARKABLE RESPONSE TO AN ATHEIST'S CHALLENGE

Listening to this interchange has raised my respect for Marco Rubio very high indeed.  It happens that I am a Ted Cruz supporter at this point, but I am truly impressed with Marco Rubio's response.

 

 ** Interesting update (1/21/16):  Evangelical leaders support Rubio by a wide margin but evangelical rank and file support Trump by a wide margin.  Story here.

OXFORD MATHEMATICIAN JOHN LENNOX AT YALE - "IS ANYTHING WORTH BELIEVING IN?"

Yale professor Greg Ganssle interviews Oxford scholar John Lennox on questions of reason, faith, and the nature of evidence at The Veritas Forum at Yale, 2013.  

 

I love listening to Dr. Lennox, Professor of Mathematics and the Philosophy of Science at the University of Oxford and a professing Christian.  Lennox has debated Princeton ethicist Dr. Peter Singer and Oxford's evolution propagandist Dr. Richard Dawkins among others.  Lennox is the author of the following books:

-  God's Undertaker: Has Science Buried God?

-  Seven Days that Divide the World: The Beginning According to Genesis and Science.  

-   God and Stephen Hawking: Whose Design is it Anyway?

-  Gunning for God: Why the New Atheists are Missing the Target.

I have blogged previously of John Lennox speaking in New Zealand on "Natural Disasters, Pain and Suffering" and at Harvard in 2012 on "Miracles: Is Belief in the Supernatural Irrational?"

The Lennox-Singer debate can be found here and his first debate with Richard Dawkins in Alabama here and a follow-up with Dawkins at the Oxford Museum of Natural History here.   

DENNIS PRAGER OFFERS A RESPONSE TO RICHARD DAWKINS

Talk-show host Dennis Prager writes:

This past Friday CNN conducted an interview with Richard Dawkins, the British biologist most widely known for his polemics against religion and on behalf of atheism.

 Asked "whether an absence of religion would leave us without a moral compass," Dawkins responded: "The very idea that we get a moral compass from religion is horrible."

This is the crux of the issue for Dawkins and other anti-religion activists -- that not only do we not need religion or God for morality, but we would have a considerably more moral world without them.

This argument is so wrong -- both rationally and empirically - that its appeal can only be explained by a) a desire to believe it and b) an ignorance of history.

First, the rational argument.  [more. . .]

MILITARY CENSORS CHRISTIAN CHAPLAIN, ATHEISTS CALL FOR PUNISHMENT

See what you think of the following news report.  If it doesn't make you angry, you don't have an appropriate appreciation for  the role of chaplains in the U.S. military or the free speech protections afforded by the first amendment to the U.S. Constitution.  What is particularly galling is the collusion between the Defense Department and President Obama in kowtowing to militant atheist groups.   Can anyone imagine Ronald Reagan kowtowing to atheists?   Ken Klukowski writes:  (HT: Drudge)

A Christian chaplain in the military is being officially censored for engaging in free speech, and anti-Christian activists are demanding he be punished.  

Lt. Col. Kenneth Reyes is a Christian chaplain currently serving in the U.S. Air Force. He is stationed at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Alaska. As an ordained clergyman whose duties are to provide religious instruction and spiritual counseling, he has a page on the base’s website called “Chaplain’s Corner.”

Reyes recently wrote an essay entitled, “No Atheists in Foxholes: Chaplains Gave All in World War II.” This common saying is attributed to a Catholic priest in World War II, made famous when President Dwight D. Eisenhower said during a 1954 speech: "I am delighted that our veterans are sponsoring a movement to increase our awareness of God in our daily lives. In battle, they learned a great truth that there are no atheists in the foxholes."

As reported by Fox News’s Todd Starnes, when Reyes referenced this famous line in his essay, the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) contacted the base commander, Col. Brian Duffy, demanding he take action on Reyes’s “anti-secular diatribe.”

MRFF’s letter says that by Reyes’s “use of the bigoted, religious supremacist phrase, ‘no atheists in foxholes,’ he defiles the dignity of service members.” They accuse him of violating military regulations.

ATHEISM AND ITS SCIENTIFIC PRETENSIONS: A CONVERSATION WITH DAVID BERLINSKI

David Berlinski, a philosopher and mathematician who is agnostic about God and does not speculate on the origins of life, is the author of The Devil’s Delusion: Atheism and its Scientific Pretensions (2011).  (HT: Justin Taylor)

 

About Justin Taylor

 

Follower of Christ. Husband of one, father of three. Elder at New Covenant Bible Church. VP of Editorial at Crossway. More…

 

 

• Subscribe via Feed
• Subscribe via Email

• Subscribe via Kindle
• Follow on Twitter

 

 

 

Sponsors

Advertise Here

Blogroll

 

• 9Marks Blog
• Albert Mohler
• Andy Naselli
• Cranach Blog
• Denny Burk
• Desiring God Blog
• Evangel
• First Thoughts
• Girl Talk
• In Light of the Gospel
• Jim Hamilton
• Joe Thorn
• Josh Harris
• Kevin DeYoung
• Kingdom People
• Ligonier
• Radical Womanhood
• Resurgence
• Russell Moore
• Scriptorium Daily
• Stand to Reason
• TGC Blog
• Thabiti Anyabwile
• The Sola Panel
• Tim Challies
• Tullian Tchividjian
• Vitamin Z
• What's Best Next?
• Worship Matters

 

Magazine & Journals

 

• Books & Culture
• Boundless
• Christianity Today
• First Things
• Journal of Biblical Counseling
• Modern Reformation
• Reformation21
• Tabletalk
• The Briefing
• Themelios
• Touchstone
• World Magazine

 

Ministries

 

• 9Marks
• Acts 29
• Biblical Spirituality
• CBMW
• CCEF
• Centre for Public Christianity
• Crossway
• Desiring God
• Founders Ministries
• Grace to You
• Ligonier
• Matthias Media
• Sovereign Grace Ministries
• Stand to Reason
• TGC Reviews
• The Gospel Coalition
• Truth for Life
• White Horse Inn

 

Archives

 

May

20

2013

Justin Taylor|7:00 am CT

Atheism and Its Scientific Pretensions: A Conversation with David Berlinski

David Berlinski, a philosopher and mathematician who is agnostic about God and does not speculate on the origins of life, is the author of The Devil’s Delusion: Atheism and its Scientific Pretensions (2011).

WHY DO ATHEISTS LIKE DAN BARKER ABANDON THEIR FAITH?

Wintery Knight's post of the same headline as mine reads:

Unbelievable’s latest radio show featured a discussion with former Christian Dan Barker, the founder and co-President of the Freedom From Religion Foundation.

The MP3 file is here. (60 minutes)

And then Wintery Knight offers four major reasons why people leave Christianity:

1. They want to do something immoral with impunity. This type of person wants to do something immoral that is forbidden by Christianity, like pre-marital sex. They dump Christianity in order to feel better about seeking happiness in this life, apart from God and his moral duties.
2. They want to pursue happiness in irresponsible ways. This type of person thinks that God’s job is to save them when they act irresponsibly while pursuing happiness. When God disappoints them by not giving them what they want in order to be happy, they leave the faith.
3. They want to be loved by people, not by God. This type of person thinks that Christianity is a tool that they can use to become popular. When they first try to articulate the gospel in public, they find that people don’t like them as much, and they feel bad about offending people with exclusive truth claims that they cannot back up using logic and evidence. So, they water down Christianity to get along with atheists, liberal Christians and other religions. Finally, they jettison Christianity completely and focus on making everyone feel good about whatever they believe.
4. They don’t want to learn to defend their faith. This type of person is asked questions by skeptics that they cannot answer. Usually this happens when people go to university after growing up in the shelter of the Church. The questions and peer pressure make them feel stupid. Rather than investigate Christianity to see if it’s true and to prepare to defend it in public, they dump it so they can be thought of as part of the “smart” crowd.

WK then analyzes the interview Dan Barker gave.  Highly recommended.  It's important to know (as you will soon realize) that WK believes in a highly rational, thoughtful, truth-filled, approach to Christian faith.  I do too.   Read WK's analysis.

DENNIS PRAGER - THE INTELLECTUAL AND EMOTIONAL EMPTINESS AT THE HEART OF ATHEISM

In an attempt to show that atheists can offer consolation to victims of tragedies like Sandy Hook, atheist Susan Jacoby, writing in the New York Times ("The Blessings of Atheism"), cited approvingly Robert Ingersoll who "tells us that death, even at its worst, is only perfect rest . . . The dead do not suffer” (ellipsis in original).

Prager, a practicing Jew, says "in terms of consolation, there is no comparison between 'The dead do not suffer' and 'Your child lives on and you will be reunited with her.'"   A truthful atheist, he says, would have to state something like the following:

“As atheists, we truly feel awful for you. And we promise to work for more gun control. But the truth is we don’t have a single consoling thing to say to you because we atheists recognize that the human being is nothing more than matter, no different from all other matter in the universe except for having self-consciousness. Therefore, when we die, that’s it. Moreover, within a tiny speck of time in terms of the universe’s history, nearly every one of us, including your child, will be completely forgotten, as if we never even existed. Life is a random crapshoot. Our birth and existence are flukes. And you will never see your child again.”

Prager:  "An atheist with the courage of her convictions would have written that. But the New York Times would not have published it."

AMERICAN ANIMALIST ASSOCIATION CONFUSES PLURALISM WITH ANTI-RELIGION

From the Family Research Council:

One Nation Under [Censored]

The new Congress hasn't even been sworn in yet, but that hasn't stopped atheist groups from lobbying the incoming freshman. Less than 24 hours after the elections, the American Humanist Association was already warning new representatives about any involvement with the Congressional Prayer Caucus (CPC). "Incoming House members should know that approximately one in five of their constituents are not religiously affiliated, and even more insist on maintaining the wall of separation between church and state."

The letter, posted here, accuses the Congressional Prayer Caucus as relegating people who don't pray as "second-class citizens"--a ridiculous allegation, in part because the CPC is about a lot more than prayer. Just last week, the bipartisan group published a special booklet outlining all of their projects from the 112^th Congress, which show that secularists--not the CPC--are the real threat.

Congressman Randy Forbes (R-Va.), a good friend of FRC's and co-chair of the CPC, was on "Fox & Friends" this morning to talk about the Association's letter. "They don't want anyone in government to be able to even mention or say anything related to God, faith, or religion. And they don't want anyone in the church to say anything about government. That's clearly not the intention of the First Amendment and the Constitution as most of us know it!"

Note:  I got the term "Animalist" from Vishal Mangalwadi whom I heard use the term  "secular animalism" (for "secular humanism") in a radio interview in July, 2012.  Indian-born Mangalwadi recently authored  The Book That Made Your World: How the Bible Created the Soul of Western Civilization. 

An important review of the book may be found here.
The broad-brush thesis of this book is this: without the Judeo-Christian worldview, there would be no Western civilisation as we know it. The Hebrew Old Testament and Greek New Testament have contributed more to the development of the West than any other single factor.

In over 400 information-rich pages the Indian-born scholar documents how the Bible directly and profoundly contributed to the rise of the West. And not only has the West benefited immeasurably - so too has the rest of the world. Indeed, he argues that the "Bible was the force that created modern India" as well.  [more. . .]

--  See my previous post on Mangalwadi here which contains strong endorsements of the book from outstanding Christian thinkers including Chuck Colson, Dallas Willard, Ravi Zacharias, and David Lyle Jeffrey.

MICHAEL SHERMER & DINESH D'SOUZA DEBATE - "IS CHRISTIANITY GOOD FOR AMERICAN POLITICS"

October, 2012

 

LACK OF FAITH THE RESULT OF FATHERLESSNESS?

Michael Brown discusses the fatherlessness of famous atheists and the growing faithlessness of our contemporary, fatherless, younger generation.

A SAD DAY - CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS IS DEAD (1949–2011)

Hitchens, the well-known atheist, has passed away.  It is indeed a sad day.  Vanity Fair reports: (HT: Drudge)

In Memoriam: Christopher Hitchens,

By Gasper Tringale.

Christopher Hitchens—the incomparable critic, masterful rhetorician, fiery wit, and fearless bon vivant—died today at the age of 62. Hitchens was diagnosed with esophageal cancer in the spring of 2010, just after the publication of his memoir, Hitch-22, and began chemotherapy soon after. His matchless prose has appeared in Vanity Fair since 1992, when he was named contributing editor.

“Cancer victimhood contains a permanent temptation to be self-centered and even solipsistic,” Hitchens wrote nearly a year ago in Vanity Fair, but his own final labors were anything but: in the last 12 months, he produced for this magazine a piece on U.S.-Pakistani relations in the wake of Osama bin Laden’s death, a portrait of Joan Didion, an essay on the Private Eye retrospective at the Victoria and Albert Museum, a prediction about the future of democracy in Egypt, a meditation on the legacy of progressivism in Wisconsin, and a series of frank, graceful, and exquisitely written essays in which he chronicled the physical and spiritual effects of his disease. At the end, Hitchens was more engaged, relentless, hilarious, observant, and intelligent than just about everyone else—just as he had been for the last four decades.

“My chief consolation in this year of living dyingly has been the presence of friends,” he wrote in the June 2011 issue. He died in their presence, too, at the MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas. May his 62 years of living, well, so livingly console the many of us who will miss him dearly.

 Doug Wilson, a Christian and debate partner, wrote his reflections.

1949–2011

SCIENCE AND RELIGION WITH DAVID BERLINSKI (VIDEO)

Peter Robinson's interview with David Berlinski is a lot of fun to watch.  The interview focuses on Berlinski's book, The Devil's Delusion: Atheism and Its Scientific Pretensions.  The full 42 minute video can be seen here.   If you prefer, you can watch it in five part segments at the NRO website:

Part 1  David Berlinski introduces The Devil’s Delusion.

Part 2  David Berlinski discusses why he thinks Darwin’s theory is flawed.  

Part 3   Is the Big Bang theory consistent with Christian beliefs? David Berlinski responds.

Part 4  David Berlinski discusses right and wrong.    

Part 5  Can scientists disprove the existence of God? David Berlinski responds.

What initially attracted me to the video was the extraordinary quote I came across on the NRO website linked to Part 5, quoting Berlinski:

 “The Old Testament is the greatest repository of human knowledge and wisdom in the history of civilization, any time, any place…. [E]very attitude current today in the discussion from Richard Dawkins to me to Christopher Hitchins, the lonely pastors in the Bible Belt on Sunday morning ranting from a particular text, is discussed in the Bible. There is a character in the Bible who expresses that point of view and there is sympathy expressed for that point of view and there are reservations expressed for that sympathy. It is enormously complex, rich, and dramatic piece of work.”

This is all the more fascinating coming from a self-described secular Jew and agnostic.  David Berlinski received his Ph.D. in philosophy from Princeton University and was later a postdoctoral fellow in mathematics and molecular biology at Columbia University. He has published widely across multiple academic disciplines.  Wikipedia has more...   Note also his book, The Deniable Darwin and Other Essays. 

On the subject of Darwinism and evolution, it's a good idea to regularly consult Evolution News and Views, something I need to do myself.

Blogger "Wintery Knight" has a great many posts on evolution worth perusing.

C.S. LEWIS - "MERE CHRISTIANITY" and THE SIGNIFICANCE OF "DESIRE"

I am facilitating a Sunday morning discussion class on C.S. Lewis's "Mere Christianity."  In the process I came across a wonderful 60 minute audio introductory lecture to "Mere Christianity" by Boston College philosophy professor Peter Kreeft. 

Also, I was pleased to discover a helpful outline/summary of the book here.

One of my favorite chapters in Mere Christianity is Lewis's chapter on "Hope."  Here he touches on the theme that lies at the center of his life:  human desire and longing as a pointer to God and heaven.  We  experience it as "joy".  This feeling of longing and desire is what the Germans call "sehnzucht," which Louis Marcos explains as:

 a German word that means "longing" or "yearning."  Lewis often used it to signify moments in his life when he felt an intense, overwhelming desire for an indefinable, numinous "something" that was just beyond his grasp.  For Lewis, the reality of these moments of longing (he more often calls them simply, "joy") and the stubborn fact that he could find no object for them, either within himself or the natural world, proved to him that their source must be supernatural (a "proof" of the existence of God and heaven that is  generally referred to as the "argument by desire").  - From Louis Markos, Course Guidebook to "The Life and Writings of C.S. Lewis," published by The Teaching Company.

Perhaps Lewis's premier discussion of longing and desire may be found in his masterful sermon preached at Oxford University, "The Weight of Glory", which some regard as the best sermon of the 20th century.

Boston College philosopher Peter Kreeft dissects the subject in his internet article, "The Argument from Desire." He offers a longer discussion in his contribution to G.K. Chesterton and C.S. Lewis: The Riddle of Joy, (a wonderful book for anyone interested in GKC or CSL).  Check also his audio lecture here.

Finally, I will simply add that I thoroughly enjoyed and profited from a book I read shortly after it was published in 1974, Bright Shadow of Reality: C.S. Lewis and the Feeling Intellect by Corbin Scott Carnell.  It is still in print, though with a revised subtitle: "Spiritual Longing in C.S. Lewis."  Highly recommended.

A RESPONSE TO "THE CHRISTIAN DELUSION"

From Justin Taylor:

For those who may have come across the book The Christian Delusion: Why Faith Fails, edited by John W. Loftus, here is a free online book responding to it: The Infidel Delusion. Click here for an overview.

ATHEISM VS. CHRISTIANITY: MICHAEL SHERMER & GREG KOUKL HASH IT OUT

They do so on the Hugh Hewitt radio program, the transcript of which Wintery Knight helpfully formatted:  Koukl offers as his final summary statement the following:

I started out talking about worldviews. And as a man trying to make sense of my world and finding a worldview that seems to fit reality as I experience it, I think atheism is way too austere for me, Hugh. It  commits me to too many counterintuitive things – everything comes from nothing, life comes from nonlife, consciousness comes from matter, morality comes from a reorganization of molecules. None of this seems to make sense to me. There is another alternative that seems to make a lot more sense, that a big bang needs a big banger, that a moral law comes from a moral lawgiver, that design comes from a designer. These notions are captured well, I think, in the Biblical account of life. And the person of Jesus, especially, exemplifying these notions, and then giving us a way to live that makes sense. And this is why I’m a Christian and not an atheist. I think it makes the best sense of the world as we know it. 

Me:  As I read the lengthy exchange between Shermer & Koukl, I felt something serious was left out.  Both men agree that there is inbred morality in human beings, though they arrive at that conclusion via vastly different means.  But the next step was never taken.  "So what happens when one breaks the moral law?  Is there such a thing as genuine "guilt"?  How does one deal with that?"    Such an existential dilemma -- it can be of crisis proportions -- they never dealt with.  I would have liked to have heard Shermer's response, especially since he takes inward intuitions seriously.

SELECT POSTS FROM WINTERY KNIGHT BLOG

I have some catching up to do with what Wintery Knight has been up to.   Following is a selection.  All are worth "clicking through" to read:

-  How good are the arguments in the new book by Richard Dawkins?

-  Skincare company uses aborted fetal tissue in anti-aging cream

-  American Library Association silent as librairies ban books about ex-gays

- UK Woman gets police visit after writing letter protesting gay pride parade (Must read)

- Hindu/Christian debate on anti-conversion law in India

- New books of interest to Christian apologists

         Update:  One of the books listed is Dr. Stephen Meyer's Signature in the Cell about which Charles Colson has important things to say.  Dr. Douglas Groothuis, for his part, rhapsodizes:

The book is no less than magisterial, an adjective that curmudgeons such as myself seldom use. At every level--philosophical, scientific, historical and literary--it is a superb treatise.    Reading every word of its 508 pages of text (not counting end notes)--as I did--repays the reader greatly.

QUOTE OF THE DAY

Atheist Christopher Hitchens offers this discovery as a result of his numerous debates with theists:

I have discovered that the so-called Christian right is much less monolithic, and very much more polite and hospitable, than I would once have thought, or than most liberals believe.

Me:  That comes as no surprise to me.  I am glad that the Christians he has debated, and those in the audience,  have displayed manners.  Hitchens, of course, has much more to say.

Update 10/27/09 - Something of the flavor of the Hitchens - Doug Wilson debates can be found in this Huffingtron Post exchange.

RANDY ALCORN'S BOOK: "IF GOD IS GOOD . . . FAITH IN THE MIDST OF SUFFERING AND EVIL"

From Between Two Worlds:

Randy Alcorn's new big book on the problem of evil and suffering is now available: If God Is Good: Faith in the Midst of Suffering and Evil (Multnomah).

You can read the table of contents and some excerpts at EPM's page, read an interview that Andy Naselli did with Randy here at Between Two Worlds, or read a review of the book by Tim Challies.

Me:  I've clicked through the links.  This book looks tremendous!  I'm reminded of his earlier blockbuster, Heaven, which I have on my shelf and need to get to soon.

SALMON RUSHDIE CLAIMS THE NEW TESTAMENT IS UNRELIABLE BECAUSE IT WAS WRITTEN (HE SAYS) 100 YEARS AFTER THE EVENTS IT DESCRIBES. IS HE RIGHT?

I was disheartened the other day as I began browsing in Ibn Warraq (ed) The Quest for the Historical Muhammad.  On page 15, Warraq embeds a quote from Salmon Rushdie:

"... Our records of Christianity date from about a hundred years after the events they represent.  It's a really long time.  The degree of authority one can give to the evangelists about the life of Christ is relatively small." 

My instant reaction:  "How sad for him to be so tragically misinformed!"  It struck me as similar to those Jews at the time of Christ who dismissed Jesus' Messianic credentials outright because they thought he had been born in Galilee, and they knew that the Messiah had to be born in Bethlehem.  [John 7:40-44] Their misinformation represented a fundamental error of factual knowledge that could easily have been corrected.  (Jesus had  been born in Bethlehem!)

In the case of Salmon Rushdie, how I wish he (and others similarly mislead), knew some of the facts that can be found in Frank Turek and Norman L. Geisler's book, I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist and similar sources.

There is actually only a 15 to 40 year gap between the life of Christ and the writings about him.  Turek and Geisler headline one section of their book: "Some New Testament Books were Penned in the 40s and 50s A.D., with Sources from the 30s  (Only a Few Years After the Death of Jesus).  (p. 241) They write:

"There is no doubt from anyone--including the most liberal of scholars--that Paul wrote his first letter to the church at Corinth (which is in modern-day Greece) sometimes between 55 and 56.

Faith and Reason (Apologetics): More Resources

The following comes courtesy of Wintery Knight blog.  He spotlights a recent apologetics conference held at Rick Warren's Saddleback Church.  For a video and audio of the following lectures, click here.

• How Can I Know God Exists? – Dinesh D’Souza
• How Did the Universe Begin – William Lane Craig
• If God Exists, Why is there Evil? – Norman Geisler
• Has Science Made Belief in God Obsolete? – J.P. Moreland
• What Do the Gospels Really Say About Jesus? – Darrell Bock
• How Can I Defend My Faith Without Sounding Defensive? – Greg Koukl

Wintery Knight also includes the following new audio lectures and video from William Lane Craig:

Can We Be Good Without God? (National Faculty Leadership Conf. 2008)  Audio

Why Does Anything at All Exist? (National Faculty Leadership Conf. 2008)  Audio

Healthy Relationships (National Faculty Leadership Conf. 2008) Audio

Who Does Jesus Think He Was? (National Faculty Leadership Conf. 2008)  Audio

Why Does Anything at All Exist? (Wake Forest University)  Video

Response to Richard Dawkins book, The God Delusion (University of Florida) Audio

One Question: The top 3 questions Univ. of Florida students are asking God (University of Florida)
Audio

"BETWEEN TWO WORLDS" BLOG KEEPS PRODUCING INCREDIBLE MATERIAL

If you don't yet regularly visit, "Between Two Worlds," you will unquestionably miss valuable stuff.  Here are some items from recent posts that I am glad to know about:

- (Atheist) Michael Ruse: Why I Think the New Atheists Are a Bloody Disaster

- Matt Harmon:  How Did We Get Out Bible and Has It Been changed?    (Terrific 12-page study sheet)

- John Piper:  C.S. Lewis and Jonathan Edwards on Layers of Self -Admiration

- Dan Wallace - Response to the video suggesting Obama may be the Anti-Christ

- Matt Anderson:  Perinatal hospice offers an alternative to the trauma of aborting a disabled child(World Magazine)

 - C. J. Mahaney Interviews David Powlison

- For Whom did Christ Did: 3 views

• Paul Helm (Calvinist View)
• Michael Jensen (Amyraldian View)
• Ben Witherington (Arminian View)  Update: On the general Arminian-Calvinist debate, see Wintery Knight's blog post wherein he invokes the Middle Knowledge perspective of Dr. William Lane Craig.

            - Justin Taylor:  John Piper answers the following questions in the latest Bible Study Magazine:

• How do you keep from growing indifferent to the Bible when you're so familiar with it?
• How do you approach the Bible?
• How can we make time for the Bible?
• How do you memorize Scripture?
• Is the Bible easier for you to understand than for other people?
• What would you say to someone who hasn't read their Bible in a long time?

RANDOM OBSERVATIONS BLOG

If you haven't yet discovered Tim's "Random Observations" blog, it wouldn't surprise me if you wanted to add it to your bookmarks. When I pop by every so often, I am invariably treated to several original thought pieces of an extremely high caliber.  Tonight, for example, I greatly appreciated his post, "Detecting Religion in Atheists." I also valued his post, "The Origin of the Flat Earth," which taught me that "no one before the 1830s believed medieval people thought the earth was flat."  That was a charge invented, or should I say, "concocted" by atheists.  I appreciate his level-headed, dispassionate observation displayed in his post, "What's at Stake in the Intelligent Design Debate?"  There's a lot more to be found at his blog.  Happy reading! 

SUGGESTIONS ON PREPARING TO MEET ACADEMIC INTIMIDATION

After linking to one of my posts, Wintery Knight (whose blog should be read on a daily basis) went on to offer advice to prospective conservative and Christian students.   One would do well to click through to the links embedded in his post.  He wrote:

. . . young conservatives and Christians need to get used to staying calm while ideas that they don’t agree with are shouted in their faced in the typical vulgar, abusive manner that secular leftists seem to find so fetching these days. The best way to do that is to watch as many debates as possible in advance and get used to sitting still and disagreeing while someone else explains their point of view. . .

Other points of view are only annoying if you have lousy reasons for your own point of view. If you put the time in learning your arguments and evidence, and the best that could be argued against you from the other side, then there should be no problem. . .

We need to start making it common knowledge that atheism does not ground morality and that is a worldview that is responsible for hundreds of millions of deaths in the last 100 years alone.  That point must be made over and over – that when someone claims to be an atheist it should be immediately put to them that meaningful morality is not rationally grounded by their worldview. Don’t let them make any moral judgments without challenging them on the foundations of morality.  . . .

FOUR-MINUTE OVERVIEW OF 11 ARGUMENTS FOR CHRISTIANITY BY WILLIAM LANE CRAIG

Wintery Knight Blog has much outstanding material, especially on Christian apologetics.  I am indebted to that blog for the video of William Lane Craig's interaction with Christopher Hitchens mentioned in the title of this blog post.  The short video clip offers a well-done "taste" of the solid, persuasive material William Lane Craig brings to his dialogs.

40% OF FRENCH BELIEVE THERE'S NOTHING AFTER DEATH

Denis Boyles notes a poll,

one conducted by Sofres just in time for Easter and reported on Europe 1. It shows that 40 percent of  the French now believe there's "nothing after death." France is nominally Catholic, of course, but it's Catholic sort of the same way Kathleen Sebelius is "Catholic"  . . .   Maybe that's why, according to this poll, more French Catholics hope for reincarnation than believe in resurrection. The thought must be that if you could just get a do-over, you'd get it right the second time around.

Here's the French article, should anyone want to brush up on their high school or college French (like me):

40% des Français affirment qu’il n’y a rien après la mort, soit 13 % de plus qu’en 1986,

DAVID HART'S BOOK: "ATHEIST DELUSIONS: THE CHRISTIAN REVOLUTION AND ITS FASHIONABLE ENEMIES"

R.R. Reno offers a review of David Hart's Atheist Delusions: The Christian Revolution and Its Fashionable Enemies (Yale University Press).  Here's an excerpt from Reno's review:

“But,” as Hart writes in one of those sentences that makes the writer in me jealous, “atheism that consists in vacuous arguments afloat on oceans of historical ignorance, made turbulent by storms of strident self-righteousness, is as contemptible as any other form of dreary fundamentalism.”

So, yes, the modern era presents Christianity with deep and profound challenges, challenges we should engage, because they have the power to reform and deepen our faith. Hart points to David Hume and Edward Gibbon, and especially Friedrich Neitzsche. But it seems that our postmodern age has seen a definite drop in the quality of unbelief. “By comparison to these men,” writes Hart, referring to the serious atheists, “today’s gadflies seem far lazier, less insightful, less subtle, less refined, more emotional, more ethically complacent, and far more interested in facile simplifications of history than in sober and demanding investigations of what Christianity has been or is.”   [more . . .]    HT: Between Two Worlds

Me:  It looks like Hart's book reaches a new level of sophistication and depth and that he wields his verbal sword with notable dexterity.

ALVIN PLATINGA & DANIEL DENNETT SQUARE OFF AT AN AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL ASSOCIATION MEETING

Update: Plantinga's lecture (mp3) here: Religion and Science: Where the Conflict Really Lies. 

(Original Post)- Here's a report of the encounter (Ht: Jonah Goldberg):

For those of you who do not know, on February 21st, the Central Division of the American Philosophical Association - the main professional body of American philosophers - hosted a kind of debate. I say "kind of debate" because one philosopher gave a paper, the other commented and the first philosopher replied and the floor opened for questions. But in fact the session was a debate.

The debate was between Alvin Plantinga and Daniel Dennett. Plantinga is one of the founders of the Society of Christian Philosophers and one of the fathers of the current desecularization of philosophy. He is widely regarded - even by his critics - as one of the finest epistemologists of the last fifty years and one of the finest philosophers of religion since the Medieval period. Daniel Dennett is one of the New Atheists and is a well-known proponent of atheistic Darwinism and critic of religion. He is widely regarded - even by his critics - as one of the most important early philosophers of mind that opened the field to cognitive science and evolutionary biology. He has contributed enormously to the serious study of the mind and its relationship to the brain. Both philosophers are over sixty and perhaps at the height of their philosophical powers. They have also faced off before but, as far as I know, not in person.

MATTHEW PARRIS: "AS AN ATHEIST, I TRULY BELIEVE AFRICA NEEDS GOD"

What a stunning article!    (HT: Hot Air)    This is a "must-read," a great conversation starter.  After reading this article, it is hard for me to understand how Matthew Paris remains an atheist.  I'll give him credit for this: he is extraordinarily objective in his observations and perceptions. This may be one of the best pieces of Christian apologetics I have read in a long time.   Read it!

WILL THE REAL IRRATIONALISTS PLEASE STAND UP? -- Turns out to be the Atheists and Liberal Protestants, not Evangelicals

Jonah Goldberg links to a Mollie Ziegler Hemmingway Wall Street Journal essay, "Look Who's Irrational Now," and provides these excerpts:

"What Americans Really Believe," a comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows that traditional Christian religion greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of astrology. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in pseudoscience than evangelical Christians.

The Gallup Organization, under contract to Baylor's Institute for Studies of Religion, asked American adults a series of questions to gauge credulity. Do dreams foretell the future? Did ancient advanced civilizations such as Atlantis exist? Can places be haunted? Is it possible to communicate with the dead? Will creatures like Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster someday be discovered by science?

The answers were added up to create an index of belief in occult and the paranormal. While 31% of people who never worship expressed strong belief in these things, only 8% of people who attend a house of worship more than once a week did.

Keep reading. . .

MICHAEL NOVAK EXPLAINS THE POINT OF HIS NEW BOOK "NO ONE SEES GOD"

Novak says the point of his new book, No One Sees God: The Dark Night of Atheists and Believers, (to be published tomorrow) is the following:

There are three ways in which, in a twenty-first century context, we come to know the presence of God within us.

First, there is the memory of those in the Nazi and Communist interrogation cells, many of whom did not believe in God when they first went to prison — those who felt impelled not to agree to a lie, even if their bodies screamed under torture or under weariness or despair that they should just surrender and

RENOWNED PHILOSOPHER ANTHONY FLEW ON "MY PILGRIMAGE FROM ATHEISM TO THEISM"

Flew is not yet a Christian, but he has become a "theist."  For most of his long life he has an international reputation as a a formidable and well-known atheist.  Read the interview here (downloadable PDF available here.)  The interview was published in 2004.

"IS CHRISTIANITY GOOD FOR THE WORLD? - A DEBATE BETWEEN CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS AND DOUGLAS WILSON"

This debate (which I've not yet read) took place during May 2007.  It is available here and also here.  I saw an advertisement in a magazine yesterday that indicated Canon Press will publish the interchange in book form  (same title), September 2, 2008.

VOX DAY - "THE IRRATIONAL ATHEIST"

Joseph Farah interviewed Vox Day, author of The Irrational Atheist: Dissecting the Holy Trinity of Dawkins, Harris and Hitchens. The book is available as a free ebook here.  Vox Day's blog can be accessed here. From the inside cover:

The Irrational Atheist is not a theological work nor is it a conventional religious defense of faith. It contains no arguments for the existence of God and the supernatural, nor is it concerned with evolution, creationism, the age of Earth, or intelligent design. This book contains no arguments from Scripture. In attacking the arguments, assertions, and conclusions of the New Atheists, Vox Day's only weapons are the secular tools of reason, logic and historically documented, independently verifiable fact. The Irrational Atheist is not a book about God, but about those who seek to replace Him....

Arguments pro and con can be found here.

MARY EBERSTADT - "THE LOSER LETTERS" (SCREWTAPE LETTERS FOR OUR MESSED UP TIMES)

Update 6/7/13 - I discovered today that all the links below have died.  The articles have been compiled and published as The Loser Letters published February 2010.  Mary Eberstadt has also written Adam and Eve After the Pill: Paradoxes of the Sexual Revolution (2012) and How the West Really Lost God: A New Theory of Secularization (2013)  Last night I read her original 2007 essay published in Policy Review, "How the West Really Lost God."  Highly recommended!

** Original post:

This open letter to spokesmen of the New Atheism is a clever bit of Christian apologetics.  Supposedly written by a Christian convert to atheism, it turns out to be a witty and biting commentary on the sexual dystopia that atheistic secularism has produced.  More letters are said to follow.  (Edited 5/17/08)

Update 5/24/08 - Letter #2 - "Some Little Contradictions and How They Grew"

Update 5/30/08 - Letter #3 - "The Trouble With Good Works

Update 6/6/08 - Letter #4 - The Trouble with Dull Art

Update 6/13/08 - Letter #5- "About Those Totally Annoying Christian Convert Traitors"

Update 6/20/08  - Letter #6  -  "Query: Do Atheists Know Any Human Women, Human Children, or Human Families?

Update 6/29/08 - Letter #7 -  "The Unbelievably Annoying Problem of Christian Moral High Ground"

Updeate 7/11/08 - Letter #8 - From Baby Killers to Barnyard Mayhem: My Turn to Atheism, Part One

Update 7/24/08 - Letter #9 - My Turn to Atheism, Part Two. An Internet Café in Portland, the Little Debbie Tea Party, and You.

Update 7/25/08 - Letter #10 - Final letter - Onward, Anti-Christian Soldiers

http://www.amazon.com/Loser-Letters-ebook/dp/B003A2C3N2/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1370641950&sr=1-4&keywords=Mary+Eberstadt

IS ATHEISM GETTING A FREE PASS IN THE MEDIA?

From CBNNews.com:

Does broadcast and print media give atheism the same degree of scrutiny as Christianity and other religious faiths?

The Media Research Center's Culture and Media Institute says no. [Executive Summary here -"Apostles of Atheism."] 

The Institute examined the apparent "rise in atheism," subject covered in broadcast news programs, three leading weekly news magazines, and four programs on taxpayer-funded National Public Radio, all shown during 2007.

Gospel of Godlessness

Although only eight percent of Americans call themselves atheists, the report found that not only is the news media hostile toward religion, particularly Christianity, but the media may be spreading a "Gospel of Godlessness" on the American public.

"Whether deliberately or not, the news media did not subject atheism or atheists to the same skepticism to which they subject Christians and Christianity," the report said. "Journalists who look at America's majority religion through a skeptical prism should equally apply their critical faculties to atheism."

In their report, CMI details their discovery of imbalances in the media's coverage of the religion. Among the findings:

- Eighty percent of feature stories about atheism or atheists had a positive tone, 20 percent were neutral. No feature stories were negative.

- Atheists were used to challenge religious viewpoints more than journalists used religious viewpoints to challenge atheism. Fifty-four percent of atheist-themed stories included a religious counterpoint, but 71 percent of the Christian-themed stories included atheist counterpoints or were written from an atheistic perspective.

Double Standard

"By airing unchallenged interviews and reporting predominantly positive-toned features, the news organizations in this study effectively promoted atheism and held it in higher regard than other religions," the report said. "While the media are not

ANTHONY FLEW'S BOOK TELLS WHY HE ABANDONED ATHEISM

I have appreciated reading a review of Anthony Flew's There is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind.   Flew wrote:

I must stress that my discovery of the Divine has proceeded on a purely natural level, without any reference to supernatural phenomena. It has been an exercise in what is traditionally called natural theology. It has had no connection with any of the revealed religions. Nor do I claim to have had any personal experience of God or any experience that may be called supernatural or miraculous. In short, my discovery of the Divine has been a pilgrimage of reason and not of faith (93).

The reviewer noted:

There are three dimensions of nature that Flew sees as pointing towards God: natural laws, the teleological organization of life, and the very existence of the universe.

The reviewer noted further:

The existence of a God which flew has come to believe in is not the God of Scripture…but it is a step in the right direction. What is interesting about his posture is how open he is to understanding more about Christianity. I must agree with Scot McKnight’s review of this book in that the Appendix with Flew’s questions about Jesus answered by N. T. Wright is absolutely

"The Golden Compass" Revisited

Update 12/11/07 - I have produced a new post featuring Denver Archbishop Chaput's evaluation.

Update 12/7/07 - Albert Mohler  has a complete review of the movie.  I'll print one paragraph before printing the review in full.  Here's the paragraph (my underlining):

Philip Pullman [the author of the book on which the movie is based] has an agenda -- an agenda about as subtle as an army tank. His agenda is nothing less than to expose what he believes is the tyranny of the Christian faith and the Christian church.  His hatred of the biblical storyline is clear.  He is an atheist whose most important literary project is intended to offer a moral narrative that will reverse the biblical account of the fall and provide a liberating mythology for a new secular age.

And here is the review:

"The Golden Compass - A Briefing For Concerned Christians"

The release of The Golden Compass as a major motion picture represents a new challenge for Christians -- especially parents. The release of a popular film with major actors that presents a message directly subversive of Christianity is something new. It is not likely to be the last.

Having seen the movie at an advance viewing and having read all three books of His Dark Materials, I can assure Christians that we face a real challenge -- one that will

Michael Novak on the Debate Between Christopher Hitchens and Dinesh D'Souza on Atheism

Novak writes:

Recently, I visited the website of the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, to listen to a debate between Christopher Hitchens and Dinesh D’Souza on atheism. This is the first debate that I have ever heard Christopher lose.

Actually, a faster way to get to the debate would be to click here.  The topic was "Is Christianity the Problem?"  It was held at King's College, New York City, on October 22, 2007.  Audio and video are available.

Dinesh D'Souza has written What's So Great About Christianity?  Christopher Hitchens has written God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything

Christopher Hitchens and Alistair McGrath Debate: "Poison or Cure: Religious Belief in the Modern World"

Last week the Ethics and Public Policy Center and Georgetown University hosted a debate betweenChristopher Hitchens and the Oxford Theologian Alister McGrath   The video is here.

Christopher Hitchens and the "New Atheists" Evaluated

Peter Berkowitz offers an excellent critique of Christopher Hitchen's book, "god is not Great."  See also  the 10-part series by Pastor and New Testament scholar, Dr. Mark D. Roberts.  Roberts posted his series after interacting with Christopher Hitchens on the Hugh Hewitt talk show program.  Roberts is specially strong on matters related to the New Testament.  Robert Miller scorns the New York Times for assigning Michael Kinsley to review Hitchens book.  Miller views Kinsley as manifestly incompetent to review it.

Update: Michael Gerson, President Bush's former speech writer, weighs in with a thoughtful article.  He poses the question, "If the atheists are right, what would be the effect on human morality?"  (Read on)      (See also my other posts on the new atheism)

Update #2: Eugene McCarraher at Commonweal offers a blistering review.

Dennis Prager: "Why Are Anti-Religious Books Bestsellers?"

The ever-thoughtful Dennis Prager offers answers and a warning.  I recommend clicking through to read the entire article.   Here are a few excerpts:

In just the last few months, three books attacking belief in God and making a case for atheism have been national best sellers: The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins; God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything by Christopher Hitchens; and Letter to a Christian Nation by Sam Harris. A fourth book, Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon by Daniel C. Dennett also sold very well.

In my opinion -- and I dialogued with three of the four authors on my radio show (Dawkins has refused to come on) -- the arguments put forth

Hitchens vs. Hitchens: Atheist vs. Theist

Christopher Hitchens, the commentator, journalist, and most recently author of a book on atheism (God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything) has a brother, Peter Hitchens, also a journalist and author, and member of the Church of England.  In a recent article, Peter writes:

Am I my brother’s reviewer? A word of explanation is needed here. Some of you may know that I have a brother, Christopher, who disagrees with me about almost everything.

Some of those who read his books and articles also know that I exist, though they often dislike me if so. But in general we inhabit separate worlds – in more ways than one.

He is of the Left, lives in the United States and recently became an American citizen. I am of the Right and, after some years in Russia and America, live in the heart of England. Occasionally we clash in public.

  Peter Hitchens describes their upbringing and then says,

Christopher is an atheist. I am a believer. He once said in public: "The real difference between Peter and myself is the belief in the supernatural.  I’m a materialist and he attributes his presence here to a divine plan. I can’t stand anyone who believes in God, who invokes the divinity or who is a person of faith."

I don’t feel the same way. I like atheists and enjoy their company, because they agree with me that religion is important.

Of Christopher's book, Peter says:

I liked and enjoyed this book, and recommend it to anybody who is interested in the subject. Like everything Christopher writes, it is often elegant, frequently witty and never stupid or boring.

I also think it is wrong, mostly in the way that it blames faith for so many bad things and gives it no credit for any of the good it may have done.

I think it misunderstands religious people and their aims and desires. And I think it asserts a number of things as true and obvious that are nothing of the sort.

Concerning Christopher's atheism, Peter sees various problems.  For example,

Where is his [Christopher's] certain knowledge of what is right and wrong supposed to have come from?   

How can the idea of a conscience have any meaning in a world of random chance, where in the end we

THE NEW ATHEISTS: ARROGANT, RIGID AND CHARMLESS

I borrowed the above heading from Verum Serum's reference to a Sam Schulman article in the Opinion Journal.  Schulman writes:

What is new about the new atheists? It's not their arguments. Spend as much time as you like with a pile of the recent anti-religion books, but you won't encounter a single point you didn't hear in your freshman dormitory. It's their tone that is novel. Belief, in their eyes, is not just misguided but contemptible, the product of provincial minds, the mark of people who need to be told how to think and how to vote--both of which, the new atheists assure us, they do in lockstep with the pope and Jerry Falwell.

For them, belief in God is beyond childish, it is unsuitable for children. Today's atheists are particularly disgusted

Anti-Christian Books on Best Seller List: Sam Harris' "Letter to a Christian Nation" and Richard Dawkins's "The God Delusion"

Chuck Colson's Breakpoint essay today spotlights a couple of anti-Christian books on the New York Times' Best Seller list, namely Letter to a Christian Nation by Sam Harris and  Richard Dawkins’s The God Delusion.  I like the fact that Colson always includes a suggested reading list at the conclusion of his articles.

Update 11/30/06 - Scott McKnight and "RJS" (a scientist at a research university in the USA) have filed a first response with reader response following.  I expect to post additional updates from McKnight's blog as well as others.  Update #2 - 12/7/06 is here.  Check the reader responses also.  They're often helpful and stimulating.  Update #3 - 12/13/06.   McKnight and RJS offer a response to Richard Dawkins' third and fourth chapters.  Two summary statements:  "As with so many of his argument he argues by assertion, discounts evidence to the contrary, relies on ad hominem, and emphasizes ridicule."   "As a proof for the nonexistence of God, Dawkins’ argument seems so circular as to be laughable."  Update #4 - 12/25/06 - Peter Williams offers four talks in response to Richard Dawkins.   Professor Alister McGrath of Oxford will be publishing The Dawkins Delusion in the UK, February 2007 (SPCK) and in the United States in May 2007 (IVP).