|In their article “Is the Shroud of Turin Authentic – or Is it a Forgery” Creation Ministries International (CMI) supports the theory that the Shroud of Turin is not the authentic burial shroud of Christ – it is a medieval forgery. This article refutes that theory, along with the main reasons CMI gives for rejecting authenticity.
This article relies primarily on the testimony of Shroud of Turin Research Project (STRP) members and other expert testimony to demonstrate there is a wealth of evidence CMI apparently did not consider before drawing their conclusions. This article is intended to inform the reader of those evidences and make available the testimony of the STRP members and other expert witnesses so that readers may judge for themselves whether CMI has reached the correct conclusion. It is the position of this article that they did not. The reader is encouraged to click on the links to view the referenced testimonies.
10 Young earth evidences and why they’re needed
Does the age of the earth matter to your faith? The witnessing approach known as Evangelism Explosion was known for its diagnostic questions, so let me take that approach and ask a few diagnostic questions. Answer yes or no to the following:
Question 1: Does the account of the creation of the universe as presented in Genesis depict literal events in a historical manner the way the gospels present the life of Jesus in a historical manner?
Question 2: Is it important to stand up for a “literal” understanding of the creation of the universe as depicted in Genesis the way we stand up for a “literal” understanding of the death and resurrection of Jesus?
Question 3: Are you as proud and willing to stand for and defend the doctrine of creation as depicted in Genesis – in 6 days – as you are to stand for and defend the resurrection of Jesus on the third day?
A Resurrection Day Meditation
The Apostle Thomas has been under-appreciated and unfairly characterized as “doubting” – as we understand doubting. Rather than doubting, Thomas is better described as the ultimate realist. He doesn’t put on rose colored glasses and see an idealized world. He sees things as they are in the real world. As such he provides one of the best proofs of the resurrection recorded in the Bible. A good thing to realize as we celebrate resurrection day. Let me explain why. Continue Reading
This is another installment in the series on how to answer atheists – in light of the many atheist memes out there. This article is a bit of a departure – instead of looking at graphical memes we’ll look at some of the overused but fallacious arguments. And since I was looking for the toughest arguments atheists present – you may or may not find memes for these: these particular arguments from atheists don’t necessarily lend themselves to a simple graphical presentation – though some are indeed out there. Continue Reading
Many atheists proclaim themselves to be bastions of reason and logic. They consider themselves to be free thinkers who are correct in their rejection of God. They believe themselves to be superior in their thinking when it comes to matters concerning God. That’s ironic since it can be easily demonstrated that 1. Many atheist claims are illogical and 2. an atheist cannot live consistently within an atheistic worldview. Since many will miss this second point, let me emphasize it by repeating it, atheists cannot live consistently within an atheistic worldview. In fact, no one can live consistently within an atheistic worldview. That is a sign that the atheistic worldview is not true.
Case in point: memes on morality and sin. They are problematic for atheists, though atheists apparently have not realized that yet. Let me explain why. Continue Reading
For people who pride themselves on their reason and rationality, it’s rather amusing to see this atheist meme which is full of logical errors. I can’t say I’m surprised though. Atheists and evolutionists alike often appeal to logical fallacies in their futile attempts to bolster their false claims.
This atheist meme is attributed to Richard Dawkins from his book, The God Delusion. It goes like this:
“We are all atheists about most of the gods humanity has believed in.
Some of us just go one god further.“
This is supposed to be cute and clever, and I’m sure some think it is. Some think its true. What most don’t realize is it’s just another logically fallacious and philosophically flawed statement. Here’s 4 logical reasons why, with a biblical reason thrown in as a bonus. Continue Reading
A Christmas Day Meditation
This will be a sign to you: You will find a baby wrapped in cloths and lying in a manger.” Suddenly a great company of the heavenly host appeared with the angel, praising God and saying,
“Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to men on whom his favor rests.”
When the angels had left them and gone into heaven, the shepherds said to one another, “Let’s go to Bethlehem and see this thing that has happened, which the Lord has told us about.” So they hurried off and found Mary and Joseph, and the baby, who was lying in the manger.
When they had seen him, they spread the word concerning what had been told them about this child, and all who heard it were amazed at what the shepherds said to them.
I often get the impression that many unbelievers think that if they themselves personally had a sign from God they would believe. Which leads them to wonder why God doesn’t give more signs.
This whole line of questioning of God’s use of signs makes me wonder – if you think God needs to provide you with a sign, if he did, would you believe him? As I’ve demonstrated previously, unless you’re already inclined to believe, the likely answer is no. Signs are a type of evidence. And unless you’re willing to believe what the evidence is pointing to, no amount of evidence will persuade you. Even so it appears to me God has left evidence more powerful than a sign. But before we can understand it, let’s look first at how God uses signs: Continue Reading
If you’re reading this, you likely have an interest in either finding evidence for the Christian faith, or presenting evidence to defend your faith. The endeavor to defend the faith is known as apologetics. When doing apologetics we often have a focus on presenting evidence or reasons to believe in the Christian faith. That is why you see apologetics ministries with names like Reasonable Faith or Reasons to Believe and even my own Rational Faith. In this age dominated by Science and scientism many have identified the need to defend Christianity against pervasive claims that modern minds cannot believe in the ancient claims of Christianity because many of those claims appear unscientific or outright impossible and are therefore unbelievable. After all how can the modern mind believe in a 7 day creation and a 6000 year old universe; and an original Adam and Eve when the modern scientific community is telling you the universe is some 13.7 billion years old, and humans were not created, they evolved?
In part 1 of this series, I pointed out that God will not allow liars into heaven (Rev 21.8), and then pointed out some of the lies that will keep you from heaven. Some wanted to make a distinction between those actively lying by trying to deceive, and those duped by the lies. But those who read closely understood that objection was answered implicitly with the analogy of poison: It doesn’t matter if you drink poison because someone lied to you and told you it was a harmless soft drink; Or because you’ve deceived yourself and are now convinced that the poison – say arsenic – is not really poison at all, and it won’t harm you, in fact it’s good for you so you consume lots of it. (Think “did God really say…” Gen 3.1) – regardless of what causes you to drink the poison whether you’re actively deceiving (yourself) or are merely deceived and believe the lie, if you drink it, you will die. Continue Reading
No doubt the first thing someone will ask me is, “what are you talking about ‘my evolutionist’? People don’t have evolutionists!” To which I say sure they do. Everyone does. Perhaps it’s your biology teacher – the one you think is so great, who so diligently teaches the evolutionary line, refusing (perhaps for fear of losing her job) to even mention the problems of evolution, or the alternatives to it. Perhaps he’s that famous author you love to quote because he makes you feel intellectually fulfilled. Or perhaps he’s that smug cosmologist you find so funny because he likes to mock those who don’t toe his materialistic evolutionary line. Well article titles are supposed to be short and attention getting. And “Lies that my favorite evolution promoting – biology teacher, author or science guy – told me” is a bit too long for a title. I trust the title, short as it is, has served its purpose. There’s nothing else to see here so let’s move along to matters of substance.