Explore by Topic
Explore by Format
Search Results | 40 results found
I would like to offer you, in a nutshell, what I think is the simplest, most powerful way, strategically, to make your case as a Christian. I would like to offer you, in a nutshell, what I think is the simplest, most powerful way, strategically, to make your case as a Christian. I have been using it a long time in a variety of ways, though it really came together for me quite by accident recently when my eldest daughter, then about eight years old, asked me an important question.
If you do have rights of any kind you need to offer a worldview in which rights claims have traction. A young and attractive newlywed was facing imminent death due to brain cancer. Her name was Brittany Maynard. She was 29-years-old and married just over a year. There was no way to stop the growth of the tumor. Anticipating her imminent death, she decided to take matters into her own hands and die on her own schedule.
If they can, does this refute Christianity? I had an interesting question asked of me last week. It had to do with what philosopher's call the mind/body problem. I answered that question with an illustration and I have gotten a response in the mail to the question that was raised. I want to spend some time responding to this because it really helps us to work through this issue. It helps to make a case, I think, for the existence of the soul, which is very important.
Can science disprove the existence of the soul? Here Greg deals with advances in computer science and neurology, and the limitations of science.
Can one question evolution on a nonreligious basis? Greg discusses how the problems with the theory of evolution are rooted in science, not religion.
Greg sees a parallel between the evidence for grand design in nature and the fulfillment of Messianic prophecy by Jesus.
In scientific debate, the Christian is often saddled with a handicap similar to that of the famed Australian racehorse Phar Lap.
Many scientists exclude God as an explanation for any event. In some cases, agent causation is the only rational conclusion.
The search for missing links assumes the truth of evolution. One big assumption is that similarities in the bodies imply a biogenetic relationship and ancestry.
Greg shows that Darwinism is driven by philosophy more than science. I'm mystified by the opening sentence of an article in Friday's Union Tribune (October 25, 1996). It says, "In his most comprehensive statement yet on evolution, Pope John Paul II insisted that faith and science can co-exist."