“This is a real creation,” wrote David Hume, “a production of something out of nothing; which implies a power so great that it may seem at first sight beyond the reach of any being less than infinite.”(Hume 1881:343-4) Hume captured our modern and classical material ontology understanding of creation. Coming into being, in our modern understanding, means acquiring material (or immaterial) properties. We intuitively presuppose that an entity was created if prior to the moment of its creation was not there. It is, thus, not surprising that we read this presupposition into Genesis 1’s creation account.
In their co-authored work, Creation out of Nothing: A Biblical, Philosophical, And Scientific Exploration (2004), Paul Copan and William Lane Craig also read this presupposition into Genesis 1. They presupposed that ancient Near East (ANE) also understood creation as defined by substance and properties, largely the material (and immaterial) properties. I think Copan and Craig are wrong in their presupposition. So one of the things I have to do is to explain why they are wrong¹.
It is said that any fruitful criticism of any writer must generally begin by finding some common ground. Copan and Craig are correct that the Holy Writ explicitly conveys creatio ex nihilo (John 1:3 and Romans 4:17 cf. 2 Maccabees 7:28 and 2 Enoch 24:2). My criticism ought not, thus, be understood as questioning whether creatio ex nihilo is true. It is true. Where I diverge from Copan and Craig is on viewing Genesis 1 as also teaching such a doctrine.
Continue reading →
Consider the following representative scenario theological studies’ students find themselves in: You have a theological claim C to argue for or against. You’re expected to offer supporting evidences for the position you come to hold. You’re equally expected to interact with historical and contemporary sources dealing with claim C.
As a brilliant theological studies’ student, you must show that you are aware of other possible interpretations of the supporting evidences you have provided for your case. You’re required to demonstrate that you are conscious of possible objections to your position, their merits and shortcoming. When required, you need to show where you agree or(and) disagree with the opposing views. Before offering a rebuttal of opposing views, you must show that you have fully understood their positions.
For such tasks, you need the right resources to read and interact. You have to research and be familiar with both past and present sources. Logos Bible Software 5 is just a tool you need to assist you for this kind of tasks. Here I shared 4 reasons I use Logos 5 Diamond package as a biblical and theological studies’ student. Continue reading →
Library assistant was one of the most beautiful job I had as a young teenager who was methodical, passionate, and enthusiastic about the value of books. Assisting others to find the right books, journals and other information was more than a job for me, it was an utmost privilege that brought me joy.
Logos Bible Software 5, multi-platform Bible study software, does not only have an incredibly rich theological library on PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone, and Android but also a personal library assistant that is revalorizing the way we interact with the Bible.
Logos is the most advance Bible software that will assist you in your academic studies, articles or sermon preparation, and personal education or devotion. It is powerful tool that brings you closer to the Word of God.
This is a short synopsis of Logos Bible Software 5 Diamond based packaged and the two features that will bring you closer to the Bible.
Diamond package is for those who seriously want to study the Bible. This package contains over 2000 magnificently rich resources for all Bible students and scholars. 659 volumes of Bible commentaries, 241 volumes of biblical studies, 395 volumes on church history and theology, 99 rich original language grammars, lexicons, word studies and much more. Continue reading →
A non-Christian, Edward L Winston, went into detail examining the truthfulness of internet’s most popular myth known as Copy-Cat theory. The basic claim of Copy-Cat theorist is that Christianity is a copy of many other ancient sun-god religions. Winston used Peter Joseph’s Zeitgeist movie as his source for copy-cat theorist claims.
“If they say something in the film not included in the transcript, I will insert it in red. As you can see below, their claim is indented, and below it I will correct anything that is inaccurate. As I said on the main page, some things are true, such as that the zodiac exists and that Horus was an Egyptian god, so I will not touch things like this. I should note that just because it contains grains of fact, does not make the movie factual.”
When I dealt with this topic, Copy-cat theory apologist tagged me a Bible-brainwashed Christian. Well here is skeptic and a non-Christian, Edward L Winston, refuting the same claim: Zeitgeist – Part I: The Greatest Story Ever Told
Zeitgeist – Companion Guide – by Edward L Winston
Busting The Dying And Rising Gods Myths – by Prayson Daniel
You must be logged in to post a comment.