Comments for Manawatu Christian Apologetics Society

Comment on Ouch. Intelligent Design Guys Put the Sleeperhold on Darwin’s Defenders by admin

admin — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 08:14:14 +0000

Excellent points re epistemology. Well, they just assume their foundations without proof. I think it is called FAITH

The problem Michael is the heart. As Scripture says, the heart is wicked and deceitful above all things. The more I meditate upon this teaching from Holy Scripture, the more profoundly revealing it is to me.

Cheers.

Comment on Ouch. Intelligent Design Guys Put the Sleeperhold on Darwin’s Defenders by Fr Michael Azkoul

Fr Michael Azkoul — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 02:56:26 +0000

Nothwithstanding the objectiion of some, metaphysical and epistomological presuppositions are unavoidable in any form of rational knowledge. I have yet to read an evolutionist apologia on this question. Inasmuch as evolutionary science has, at least, implicitly, “first principles” which seem not to have been acknowledge or justified, what is it that allows them to speak with such confidence (arrogance) on the theory of evolution. In addition, they live by the faith that sometime in the future all the questions raised by this theory will answered, including the gaps in the fossil record. Perhaps, too, when Darwinian eschatology is realized so will the greater question of the origin of all things be determined. Finally, I am curious why evolutionists are theoretically certain that the existence or non-existence of God should make no difference in their interpretation of the data.

Comment on William Lane Craig/Frank Zindler Debate by admin

admin — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 10:56:33 +0000

I think you can buy the DVD on eBay at a reasonable price…

Re Dawkins … it would only take a few seconds for him to look up Craig and his long list of debates. But of course Dawkins knows about Craig — how couldn’t he when he has written book and engaged in attacking religion? He would certainly have come across Craig many times as he is one of the most prominent defenders of Christianity and religion. No, Dawkins is scared he will get is butt kicked like he did against John Lennox There is a petition to sign on the internet somewhere to get this debate to happen.

Comment on William Lane Craig/Frank Zindler Debate by Justin

Justin — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 10:00:39 +0000

@Springheel Craig actually did debate Hitchens. It’s out on DVD. The biggest point I think could be brought up about that debate is that Craig was much more prepared. Dawkins is reluctant to debate Craig because he doesn’t believe Craig is famous enough to debate him. And I don’t know about Harris. Craig’s been doing many debates with atheists in his career, so he has a lot of experience in debating, I guess. But Craig did absolutely crush Zindler in this debate, with 3% of votes for Zindler and the rest of the 97% of the votes for Craig, and 87% for Craig out of the non-Christians.

Comment on Why do we not have the death penalty? by Capital Punishment – Is It Biblical? | iamjonnyking.com

Capital Punishment – Is It Biblical? | iamjonnyking.com — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 02:40:34 +0000

[...] seen the light of days for year upon years, but in “light” of this recent post asking, Why Do We Not Have the Death Penalty, I was reminded of it once again. Therefore, I have brought it out, and spruced it up, fit for [...]

Comment on Why do we not have the death penalty? by Christian News New Zealand » Blog Archive » OP-ED: Capital Punishment – Is It Biblical?

Tue, 23 Feb 2010 02:20:04 +0000

Comment on Why do we not have the death penalty? by Sam Winiata

Sam Winiata — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 08:55:23 +0000

It does seem unfair. Though, would it do any good to end his life also? Idealy, the justice system should have him put to hard labour/community work for the rest of his days. Not simply to just exterminate him.. There are much worse atrocities going on right now (not to belittle this case). Humans are in a horrid place at the moment. And yet, God is love and love is real, why is He not embrassed? (Humans have) so much potential, so much apathy. No one else to blame.

Does manawatu apologetics agree with the death penalty?

Sincerely, Sam.

Comment on Why do we not have the death penalty? by Darryl

Darryl — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 01:54:08 +0000

Yes, it seems wrong doesn’t it.

Comment on NZ Agnostic’s Campaign by admin

admin — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 08:36:00 +0000

Thanks Colin for the comment.

Well, I think William Lane Craig has won every debate I have listened to between himself and various opponents. I think the recent’ish debates he did in New Zealand were actually a bit embarrassing. John Lennox, Oxford colleague of Richard Dawkins, has debated Dawkins twice, and I think routed him. Stephen Meyer of the ID community recently had a nice chat with Oxford’s Peter Atkins (Atkins is a very clever chap, as we tend to use his textbook in physics/chemistry). This discussion I think really showed that the scientific/ID debate comes down to philosophy rather than the scientific evidence. Stephen Meyer versus Peter Ward was really good but a few years old now.

There are lots of other debates going on which is really great. Why should our society not aggressively wrestle with these big-picture issues? We should thank Richard Dawkins et al. for bringing these great debates back into the public arena

Warmest regards,

Rob

Comment on Glaciergate – should the public trust scientists? What about Darwinism? by JamesHip

JamesHip — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 03:01:16 +0000

I think that anything that shakes Man’s faith in anything that isn’t Jesus, can only be good. I see a real connection between “scientists” claims that Climate Change is settled, and Evolution is proved. These are both false statements, but pronounced from on high in the hallowed halls of false religion, science. It wasn’t always this way. Good science doesn’t have to be in conflict with the Gospel, but sinful men have twisted it that way.