Go Nuts! at John Thurman Stadium

Posted on April 21, 2012 by Maryann Spikes

Today my mother-in-law Jae and her new hubby Bobby took us to a Nuts game at John Thurman Stadium. We got together with some of their church friends and tail-gated pizza, hotdogs, grapes, chips and sodas in the Neece parking area before we went in. It was pretty cool watching the first pitches and participating in all the noise-making rituals.

Bobby bought the boys Nuts caps and I bought myself, the boys and Jae some icecream. There were some really exciting plays! We stuck around for a few innings. None of us care much for bleachers.

– Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Posted in Park-Hopping | Leave a comment

Christian Carnival, April 18, 2012

Posted on April 18, 2012 by Maryann Spikes

Welcome back to the Christian Carnival!  For those new to this gig, the Christian Carnival is a weekly collection of some of the best posts of the Christian blogosphere. It’s open to Christians of Protestant, Orthodox, and Roman Catholic convictions.  We invite submissions from bloggers and readers, and collate the submitted posts into one big round-up (or “carnival”) every Wednesday.  It is also called a carnival because it is hosted at a new blog every week–and this week, it’s my privilege!  One of the goals of this carnival is to offer our readers a broad range of Christian thought. This is a great way to make your writing more well known and perhaps pick up some regular readers.

Please kick up your feet and make yourself at home.  Don’t mind all the boxes, as I am still shaping things up in my new portfolio here.  I thought I’d break in to the freelancing scene :)  Need something written?  Have a look around!

We’ll start off with submissions, then finish up with some posts I gleaned from the web.  I am not including my own submission this time because I am still chewing on an idea for an article that talks about the difference between Hume’s is-ought distinction, which maintains a valid distinction between ontology and epistemology, and the false is-ought dichotomy, which keeps values outside the realm of truth.  One can rightly reject the false dichotomy without rejecting the is-ought distinction.  I think making clear the differences between the two will help further the dialogue in this area of philosophy and apologetics.  If you want to see my past posts on Hume’s is-ought, scroll to the “Euthyphro, Hume, Plato, Gettier” section here.  Favorite topic!

Submissions:

Displayed in the order of submission:

Continue reading →

Posted in Carnival | 2 Comments

This week’s Christian Carnival is…

Posted on April 18, 2012 by Maryann Spikes

…here.  I host it at my new on-line portfolio blog :)  I am not including my own submission this time, because I am still chewing on an idea for an article that talks about the difference between Hume’s is-ought distinction, which maintains a valid distinction between ontology and epistemology, and the false is-ought dichotomy, which keeps values outside the realm of truth.  One can rightly reject the false dichotomy without rejecting the is-ought distinction.  I think making clear the differences between the two will help further the dialogue in this area of philosophy and apologetics.  If you want to see my past posts on Hume’s is-ought, scroll to the “Euthyphro, Hume, Plato, Gettier” section here.  Favorite topic!

Posted in Carnival, Is-Ought Fallacy | Leave a comment

In the mood for some GenX poetry?

Posted on April 13, 2012 by Maryann Spikes

If so, check this out, nested under the Poetry & Prose page.

And feel free to share your GenX poetry in the comments :)

Posted in Poetry, Poetry and Fiction | Leave a comment

Yo quiero choco-latte! :)

Posted on April 9, 2012 by Maryann Spikes
Abuelita

Abuelita (Photo credit: rachel a. k.)

Choco-latte is a Mexican mocha I ‘think’ I just invented.  If nobody has it yet–why not?!!!  Sure, it could be called the Abuelita mocha, but choco-latte sounds so much more chocolattey and you don’t have to pay Abuelita to use the name.  I thought of this because it was Easter yesterday, and I always pronounce chocolate with a Mexican accent.  By the way, under no circumstances should this drink be called a shock-o-latte, except perhaps on Halloween, sprinkled with bat and pumpkin marshmallows or other coffee-appropriate candies in black and orange.

Update:  After scavenging Google, I found a place called Java Hut with a Mexican mocha.  I think choco-latte is more catchy, although Google shows there is an actual shop with that name.  And I bet they don’t use Abuelita syrup!

Posted in Inventions | 1 Comment

Is there no truth, are all beliefs true, or is there only one truth?

Posted on April 7, 2012 by Maryann Spikes

cropped-contradict01This is something to consider in relationship to these objections to the objective truth of Christianity:

1) Claiming that Christianity is “the” truth steps on other people’s toes.

2) Science doesn’t even know the answers, and yet you claim to.

3) Like saying chocolate is your favorite icecream, faith equals opinion.

I jotted down those three objections during a round table discussion at a Reasonable Faith chapter meeting back in January and am finally getting around to including them in this post.

These are the options regarding objective truth:

No truth: The idea that it is true that there is no truth is self-contradictory. If there is no truth, the statement “there is no truth” cannot be true, either.

All true: “To deem all beliefs equally true is sheer nonsense for the simple reason that to deny that statement would also, then, be true,” (4, Zacharias, “Jesus Among Other Gods”). So, if you deem all beliefs true, then you deem true even the belief that “Not all beliefs are true.”

One truth: That is what we are left with, and what we ought to do our best to seek until we find it (or until it finds us).

Students of logic:  Regarding the square of opposition… The options are some/all/no. In my post, one=some, but the some is only one, because 1) there is only one reality to which all true beliefs may correspond, so that 2) the points where various conflicting and distinct worldviews agree and are true, correspond to one reality. If one takes away all the false, conflicting beliefs from every worldview, only one true worldview can be left.

In reply to the above objections: We can seek truth without trying to offend people, and if we avoid that pursuit in order to please sensitive people, we need to work on our boundary issues. Sometimes science does get it right, which can be seen in the progress it has made, and we can get it right by examining the historical evidence for the resurrection and the arguments for God’s existence from natural theology. And, lastly, genuine faith equals trust and is never blind (See Genuine faith is never blind).

Posted in Apologetics Toolbox | Leave a comment

Problem: If God is good and all-powerful, why does he not prevent evil, suffering and hell?

Posted on April 2, 2012 by Maryann Spikes

tumblr_m2y99iXTVp1r8bkolo1_500-300x217My thoughts on the solution:

1. Unconditional love is impossible if suffering and evil are impossible. God, like a good father, allows us to learn from our mistakes, rather than dysfunctionally protecting us from them by a) preventing us from making them, or b) preventing us from experiencing the consequences. If all suffering were made impossible, we would never learn what it means to love and be loved unconditionally.  It would be worse to make a world where unconditional love is impossible, than to allow all evil and suffering.  Love covers over a multitude of things.  Better off are those who love and lose, than those who never love at all.  Love is worth it.  That’s what Jesus died to show.
2. Similar to 1, Heaven (ultimate love) is impossible if it is not a choice.  If there is no alternative choice–hell–then heaven is not a choice, it is a prison.  “On the question of a loving God sending people to hell, Keller writes that God gives people free choice in the matter. ‘In short, hell is simply one’s freely chosen identity apart from God on a trajectory into infinity’ (p.78). In other words, those who end up in hell chose that destination by rejecting God.” (Penguin) Heaven wouldn’t be heaven if we had no choice but to be there.
3. If there is no God making the idea of “good” true to reality, there is no “problem” of evil, suffering, or hell. That one senses a problem is a clue to there being a God–an always good being to which the idea of “good” is true.  Without a real “good” there is no real departure from good, and thus no problem of evil.  “Paraphrasing C.S. Lewis, the author states: ‘… modern objections to God are based on a sense of fair-play and justice. People, we believe, ought not to suffer, be excluded, die of hunger or oppression. But the evolutionary mechanism of natural selection depends on death, destruction, and violence of the strong against the weak – these things are all perfectly natural. On what basis, then, does the atheist judge the natural world to be horribly wrong, unfair, and unjust’? (p.26)” (Penguin).  The naturalist has their own “problem of evil” to answer, since the only being to which the idea of “good” can be real is God.
Posted in Apologetics, Apologetics Toolbox, Problem of Evil & Hell | 4 Comments

Walk to the Cross (Easter Prep), pt.2: External/Internal Evidence

Posted on March 31, 2012 by Maryann Spikes

Back in February I posted part one of a lecture series on the Gospels by Tim McGrew entitled “Who Wrote the Gospels?”  Then, mid-March I posted Professor McGrew’s answer to my question, “Did Christians ‘reinterpret’ Old Testament passages to be prophecies fulfilled in Jesus, or did Jews always interpret those passages to be messianic?”  That was part one of this “Walk to the Cross” series in preparation for Easter.

For part two, here is the rest of Dr. McGrew’s series on the Gospels:

Part 2: External Evidence for the Truth of the Gospels andActs

Part 3: Internal Evidence for the Truth of the Gospels

You can find links for the PowerPoint slides and handout at Brian Auten’s site, here:

Dr. McGrew writes via email, “Needless to say, we’re just scratching the surface of the evidence here. But sometimes it is better to make a start than to do nothing at all.”

So in the coming week that remains before we remember the resurrection, I hope you will make time to brew a pot of choice coffee, sit down under an old quilt and drink in this lecture series, and sift through the historical evidence of fulfilled messianic prophecies.

It will greatly enrich our celebration of Easter if we know that we are celebrating the REALITY of God’s demonstration in time and space that he loves (and forgives) us no matter what–even his own willing death.  No greater love has any man than that.

Posted in Apologetics, Apologetics Toolbox, Tim McGrew | Leave a comment

Groothuis’ "Christian Apologetics" ch.4: The Christian Worldview

Posted on March 28, 2012 by Maryann Spikes
“Thus from a Christian perspective, we perennially face the dual temptation either to demote ourselves below what we truly are (despair) or to promote ourselves above our true status (hubris).  All in all, humans are unique among the living.” p. 86 (Groothuis’ Christian Apologetics)

“The Christian view of humanity exalts neither the immaterial at the expense of the material (as in idealism, pantheism, gnosticism) nor the material at the expense of the immaterial (as in physicalism).” p. 86-87

“…redemption must originate from beyond the royal ruins of the self…” p. 88

(discussion index)

Posted in Against Gnosticism, Apologetics, Groothuis' 'Christian Apologetics', Reviews and Interviews | 2 Comments

True Reason apologists not welcome at Reason Rally of atheists

Posted on March 24, 2012 by Maryann Spikes
Tom Gilson’s morning view of rally
The Reason Rally of atheists and skeptics is gathering today upon the National Mall in Washington, D.C. to celebrate a common lack of belief in any particular faith and to demarginalize as a collective voice. But today is not so much about good reasoning as it is about:

…drawing attention to our movement. This is about getting media attention. This is about getting all those people not attending the rally (or who don’t even know there are so many other atheists out there) to notice us… —FriendlyAtheist

Invitations to reasoned debate and dialogue from Christian apologists of the True Reason collaboration have been abruptly declined, whereas an invitation to the rally was graciously extended to Fred Phelp’s infamous Westboro Baptist Church, attracting objectionsfrom bloggers of the Christian Apologetics Alliance and Ratio Christi. It seems Reason Rally organizers so highly esteem publicity that they will invite it even when it runs completely counter to reason.

Peer review is completely lacking in refusing to encourage dialogue with those critical of the atheist worldview and trained in reasoned debate. Rather, the rally organizers create an atmosphere of mutual ridicule, inviting Westboro Baptist.

Edited by Tom Gilson and Carson Weitnauer, the book side of the True Reason response includes contributions from William Lane Craig and Sean McDowell and discusses the “Explanatory Emptiness of Naturalism”, how evolution and God’s existence do not conflict, “Historical Evidences of the Gospels”, the problem of evil, slavery, “Did God Command the Genocide of the Canaanites?” and how the New Atheist movement’s persuasive techniques rely more on rhetoric and appeal to emotion than reason.

Posted in Apologetics, News | 1 Comment