Commentary

Do miracles imply a violation of natural laws?

10 Comments

Article here.

Excerpt:

Are miracles really possible? I’m not talking about how some describe a baby being born as “the miracle of life.” I’m talking about biblical reports of Jesus walking on water, healing the blind, and physically rising from the dead. Atheists sometimes say miracles overturn the laws of nature—and that’s not possible. Before considering the evidence, however, many skeptics have already decided that naturalism is true. But what about this? Do miracles—by definition—really overturn the laws of nature?

In the foreword to The God Conversation, Lee Strobel notes how J.P. Moreland responded to this challenge with a simple defense: ”The laws of nature are the way we describe how the world usually works. If someone drops an apple, it falls to the floor. That’s gravity. However, if someone were to drop an apple and I were to reach over and grab it before it hit the ground, I wouldn’t be overturning the law of gravity. I would simply be intervening. In a similar way, God is able to reach into the world that he created by performing a miracle. He isn’t contravening or overturning the laws of nature. He’s simply intervening” (7).

Human beings are non-material minds. We have bodies that our minds can control. We cause effects on our bodies by using our free will. And God is a non-material mind just like us. Only he doesn’t have a body, so he can intervene at any point in space and exercise his will. It’s not a violation of natural laws when we do it, and it’s not a violation of natural laws when he does it.

News

Sex education for kindergarteners proposed in Helena, Montana

2 Comments

From the Family Research Council. (H/T Muddling)

Excerpt:

Unfortunately, sex education that indoctrinates children into a liberal sexual ideology is no longer being found just in big cities and liberal “blue states.” It’s reaching even small cities in the heartland, like Helena, Montana–where Tuesday night, parents and other citizens will have their first chance to respond to an outrageous new K-12 health curriculum (pages 45-50) that’s been proposed there.

It would teach kindergarteners the names of male and female sex organs, first graders about homosexuality, and fifth graders about “oral or anal penetration.” It would also teach sixth graders about sex changes, and high schoolers would be taught to “understand erotic images in art.” These lessons aren’t age-appropriate, and may result in more confusion than understanding. For example, in elementary school virtually all children like their own sex better than the opposite sex–we should not be planting the idea that this might mean they are “gay.” In fourth grade they would learn that “taunting” and “teasing” may be illegal sexual harassment. Sadly, teasing and taunting are sometimes a fact of life for fourth graders, but they have nothing to do with sex. And here’s the kicker–the program’s implementation may be paid for with federal “stimulus” money.

You can kind of get an idea of what their goals are for your children. They want your children to oppose chastity and oppose traditional marriage, etc. and they think that these attitudes are healthy.They want your children to normalize behavior that you might think is unhealthy and immoral. And they don’t ask parents for permission to indoctrinate your children. They take your money, and change your children’s beliefs to match their worldview. And they tell the children not to tell their parents anything of what goes on in the classroom. In some places, there is no parental notification, and no opt out.

Here’s a video with a sex educator squaring off against an FRC scholar.

There are real people pushing this on children – your children – and they’re not sorry! And these are the people who decide how MY tax dollars will be spent, and the rules by which my kids and the neighbor’s kids will be educated. This is what you get when you vote for Democrats.

Remember Kevin Jennings, Obama’s safe schools czar. A vote for Obama was a vote to sexualize children.

Videos

Stephen C. Meyer explains why intelligent design is science

1 Comment

Video here. (H/T Uncommon Descent via ECM)

And one more – what is the effect to be explained in the origin of life?

There was a recent radio debate on the topic of whether intelligent design is science: Stephen C. Meyer vs. Chris Mooney on the Michael Medved radio show.