I know I said that was my last blog post, but I need to do one more. This is for those who subscribed to this blog. I did work out the details and you can subscribe to my new blog at http://www.stephenjbedard.com and I hope you will follow me there. I am blogging about more than apologetics there, but I promise that apologetics, biblical studies and theology will be a regular part of what I do there. I look forward to seeing the notices that you have subscribed to me. Thank you and God bless.
This is my last post on this blog. I know that there are a number of regular readers of this blog. I hope you will not give up on me. I am still going to blog. Until this point, I have been running three blogs. I am merging all three into one blog which you will find at www.stephenjbedard.com. You will find the same sort of posts that you have found here, apologetics, biblical studies and book reviews. Please come there with me. Thank you for all your support.
The Rise of the Anti-Hero – Lenny Esposito
But I can’t See God – Eric Chabot
A Look at Acts 17 – Eric Chabot
Are Demons the Cause of All Human Illnesses? – J. Warner Wallace
From My Blogs
Evangelicalism is known for being intolerant. But in responding to this supposed intolerance, secularism has embraced intolerance itself. You need some examples?
One example is that of universities that are coming down on Christian campus groups. The problem is, as you can read in this article, is that the universities want leadership of the groups opened up to all students, even if they have nothing in common with the purpose of the group. This is completely foolish. This is not because of my bias toward Christianity. It would not make sense to have a fundamentalist Christian in leadership of a LGBTQ group, nor would it make sense to have a Russian student in leadership of Caribbean student group. A leader should come from the same background as the purpose of the group. If you blend all the groups together, then you have missed the point of having campus groups.
Another example? Yesterday, the Law Society of British Columbia voted to reverse a decision that would allow graduates of Trinity Western University Law School to practice law in British Columbia. The reason that people oppose TWU is they have a lifestyle covenant that requires students abstain from premarital sex (whether heterosexual or homosexual). They also define marriage as one man and one woman. This is understood as being anti-gay. Law societies across Canada are trying to shut down the law school before it even starts.
They would say that they are combatting intolerance and yet they are being intolerant. Even though TWU accepts gay students, the law societies will not accept evangelical students from this school. Instead of seeking a tolerance of a sexual persuasion and a religious group, they have chosen to embrace one and persecute the other.
As saddened as I was by this decision, I was pleased by something. A British Columbia lawyer named Jessica Derynck was at the meeting and blogged about the decision. Jessica who is non-religious and a lesbian, the kind of people that the law societies claim they are protecting, voted against the measure to punish TWU graduates. She sees this issue for what it is. You can not protect one group from being persecuted by persecuting another.
The hope was that the secularization of society would lead to a more tolerant culture. The truth it has not. There simply has been switch of which group will not be tolerated.
An interesting post by Francis Schaeffer’s son Frank Schaeffer.
Originally posted on CNN Belief Blog:
Opinion by Frank Schaeffer, special to CNN
(CNN) — All the public debates between celebrity atheists and evangelical pastors are as meaningless as literary awards and Oscar night.
They are meaningless because participants lack the objectivity to admit that our beliefs have less to do with facts than with our personal needs and cultural backgrounds.
The words we use to label ourselves are just as empty.
What exactly is a “believer?” And for that matter what is an “atheist?” Who is the objective observer to define these terms?
Maybe we need a new category other than theism, atheism or agnosticism that takes paradox and unknowing into account.
Take me, I am an atheist who believes in God.
Let me explain.
View original 667 more words
One of the important aspects of my life is apologetics. I enjoy studying the New Testament and other areas of apologetics. I love to dig deep into my faith and to encourage others in theirs.
But I am not just an apologist. I am a husband, a father, an ex-pastor, a social media guy, a writer, an editor, science fiction fan, a sarcoidosis sufferer, an army chaplain, a parent of special needs children and a few other things. This blog is not the place to talk about these things (at least most of the time). But there is a place that I do talk about these things. If you are interested in what I am doing when I am not doing apologetics, you can check out my personal blog. I hope you will find somethings that interest you.