A Slice of Apologetics:

Every Thought Captive has a couple good ones today.

#5 in his “Is Apologetics Necessary” series.

Many are proclaiming that the idea of truth, as it has been understood for centuries, has been successfully pulled apart by various forces in the postmodern world. I, however, read things differently.

He also points us toward a New Atlantis symposium piece – “Acorns and Embryos”. He says “The New Atlantis is a great and relatively new resource on the web. The latest edition contains this article on embryos and personhood as part of a symposium on the issue. I would encourage you to read through these essays thoughtfully if you have the interest to do so.”


(I know. I couldn’t resist.)

Evangelical Underground has a couple good ones also.

They inform us of Rolling Stone’s Anti-Religious policy here.

They repost an older entry, entitled “Did Jesus Teach Tolerance or Love?

The answer of course, is “love.” Now you may be scratching your head, curious as to what the difference is between the two.

Well let me begin by saying that I’ve been conversing with a self-proclaimed “mainline” Christian who subscribes only to the teachings of Jesus, and nothing else. Just Jesus. The rest of the Bible he considers “tainted” and he calls fundamentalists like myself, “followers of Paul.” (keep in mind he refuses to this day answer my query as to which books Jesus wrote, and who does he think wrote down what Jesus said.)

Anyway, on with the story.

So… go read it. All of it.

He also celebrates (as do I, as I live one state over, in Mississippi) that Louisiana’s Supreme Court “unanimously reinstated the anti-gay marriage amendment to the state constitution that was overwhelmingly approved by voters in September.

The high court reversed a state district judge’s ruling in October striking down the amendment on the grounds that it violated a provision of the state constitution requiring that an amendment cover only one subject.”

Good news is music. Good music. I’ll agree with Andrew’s comment to it… “It’s good to see the courts actually upholding the will of the people for once…”

You got that right.

firstPete315 has a nice “rewind” post, highlighting some of their posts from the last year. Go check them out.

They also gave the Apologetics Aggregator a nice flog.

AllThings2All has a new series calledScene and Heard“, spotlighting what she’s seen and heard around the ‘sphere.

She speculates on what my name means in the first one – and points out a bunch of (other :D) notable female bloggers in the god-blogosphere in the second.

She also added an entry to the Jesus the Logician Project.

Weapons of Warfare (I dub thee “Andrew the Lionhearted!” – and you can quote me!) defends the Faith in a response to “The Angry Agnostic“s post concerning Jesus’ “so-called Divinity“, in a post of his own, entitled “Was Jesus Divine”?

As a side note: This was EXACTLY what I was talking about, when I say “engaging the culture”. Andrew pointed this out to me yesterday, and I didn’t catch it. Make up assignment complete!

He also has a slightly different take on AllThings2All’s “Pascal’s Wager” posts

He also has a JTL project entry

He looks at The Mystery of the Goodness of God:

One classic paradox presented by atheists to theists, presumably to disprove the existence of God, or more likely to show that even if he did exist, he’s not much of a God, is a discussion about God’s moral directives to humanity. This discussion doesn’t do much for the atheist in the end, but I, as a theist, think that it’s well worth giving considerable thought to.
The question is presented thusly: “On basis does God declare what is good?” There are two answers, says the stater of the paradox.

(1): God declares what is good because he knows it to be good.
(2): God declares what is good simply because he declares it so.

The formulations I’ve given here are somewhat cryptic, because this paradox isn’t usually stated so formally, but the following discussion will serve to show what is meant by each stance, and what the consequences of each are.

Take some notes, apologists.

He also (He’s on fiiiiiire!) takes on Evolution, Neodarwinism, and the Establishment Clause, in response to a post on A Physicist’s Perspective discussing a Washington Post article.

He ALSO posts an excerpt from Tractatus Logico-Theologicus. Which, as it happens, Every Thought Captive also comments on.


So, there’s your Daily Cut – apologetics style. By the way, Catez – what do you think my name means, anyway? 😀 (It wasn’t conceived in a very profound way, though. I’ll let you all guess – and wait with bated breath (laugh…) until I tell you tomorrow…

Also, don’t forget that Vox Apologia II is coming up fast. For the curious, look up, and to the right. Subject, host, and date for current, upcoming (and, starting Monday, PAST) Vox Apologias are all conveniently listed for you. Finally, there’s a short explanation of the Vox Apologia now posted.