Reset What?

Reset What?

This is a book review of the latest Answers in Genesis (AiG) Book; “Gospel Reset”. Now, with that in mind I have been extremely critical of AiG in a past article. However, I wanted to reject my presuppositions and come at this from a fresh take. I have engaged numerous people as of late who have unequivocally supported AiG as a Godly organization. This support has opened me up to giving AiG and more specifically Ken Ham a second chance. I truly did the best I could to free my mind from expectations and look for the best AiG had to offer, especially since this was sent to thousands of churches around the country. Even so, my expectations were a book that I might disagree with but could respect for its support of a literal Genesis and a presuppositional apologetics approach. Were my minimal expectations met? Read on to see and judge for yourself.

Atheism and Intuitive Morality

Atheism and Intuitive Morality

Studies that show that religion is just the result of intuitive thinking  have become a very tempting carrot to more outspoken skeptics - the ones who compare religion with so much vapid self-delusion. The unspoken (and frequently spoken) conclusion being that "if you just thought about it, you'd never believe it." 

There is, however, one area in which the roles are oddly reversed: morality. 

The religious have a very rational grounding for their belief in morality: If the universe has a Designer, then morality is a function of design. Free-will, choice, justice, and intelligibility all flow from this concept of designer and design. Atheists, on the other hand, tend to use intuition as the basis for morality.

Question of the Week: Solipsism?

Question of the Week: Solipsism?

On October 3rd, the Mentionables received this question from Rachel Harper:

I found this group through Theology Gals where Tyler did an episode on presuppositional apologetics.
I have been having doubts related to the philosophical idea of solipsism and was wondering if you guys could please help me see what are the errors with this view and how do I get around it?
Thank you!
~Rachel

For the sake of the reader, Solipsism is the idea that one can only be certain that their own mind exists - and that anything outside of one’s own mind may be real, or may be an illusion of the mind.

Here are the answers from the team:

Question of the Week: When was Jesus made Perfect?

Question of the Week: When was Jesus made Perfect?

On September 17th, 2018, Brian Goad sent the Mentionables this question:

In Hebrews 5:7-8, it talks about Christ working through the trauma of what was about to happen on the cross with tears and loud crying and prayers, and that through this suffering it led him learning obedience. Then in verse 9, it mentions "having been made perfect" he became the source of eternal life. 

Does this mean that through his final testing to align his will with the Father ("not my will, but your will" he prayed in the garden) and his resolution of obedience to suffer and die on the cross, at that point he became perfect? If not, when did he became perfect (as the wording seems to indicate that he was made perfect at some point). 

Also, I'd like some info on any heresies that might be related to this question, as I'm concerned that this is towing a fine line in the question of impeccability and Jesus' Divine vs human nature.

These are the answers from the team.

Putting them on the Defensive

Putting them on the Defensive

I’d like to suggest a technique I’ve been trying that seems to have amazing results. Too often, we have taken upon ourselves the assumption of modernity. This modern view cuts off the beliefs of the ancients and says that we must answer the knowledge (Though I’d say it’s what is falsely called knowledge) of today and if we believe God exists or morality is objective or miracles can happen, we’d better give a strong reason why.

Five Proofs that the Old Testament is not Mythology

Five Proofs that the Old Testament is not Mythology

hile far from universally accepted, even the most strident critic must admit that the Christian New Testament has a great deal of historical relevance. It is correlated in numerous areas by contemporary first century writings and archeology such that even those who regard it as basically a religious text will still lean on it as a historic reference in some areas. 

Not so with the Old Testament. A large portion of the contemporary world - academic and non - considers the Christian Old Testament/Hebrew Tanakh to be purely a work of fiction, borrowing heavily from Egyptian and Babylonian myths.