Blog Archive

Followers

Come Reason's Apologetics Notes blog will highlight various news stories or current events and seek to explore them from a thoughtful Christian perspective. Less formal and shorter than the www.comereason.org Web site articles, we hope to give readers points to reflect on concerning topics of the day.

Powered by Blogger.

Tuesday, January 29, 2013

He Needs to Be Committed: Touré's Abortion Double-Speak

Last week we marked the 40th anniversary of the infamous Roe vs. Wade decision, a particularly bad bit of legalese that opened the door to more than 55 million babies being slaughtered in the U.S. to date. There were many articles commenting on the decision, from both pro-life and pro-choice camps. One that specifically caught my attention was from the MSNBC commentator Touré (nee Touré Neblett) who said in a video commentary that abortion had "saved my life."



Touré's monologue began:

"This week brought us the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade and made me reflect on a moment from about fifteen years ago when I was in a committed relationship with a woman who I knew was just not the one.  She probably also knew it wasn't gonna work out… and then she got pregnant. And I was terrified. I've always known the importance of family and building kids into strong adults. And I know I would not be who I am if not growing up under the watchful eye of two people who loved me and loved each other.  I knew that pregnant woman and I were not gonna be able to form a lasting family. She decided it was best to have an abortion and days later she did; we did. And in some ways that choice saved my life. I was not yet smart enough or man enough to build a family or raise a child and I only would have contributed to making a mess of three lives."

Touré goes on to say how years later, after he married his current wife and they were expecting their first son, his belief in abortion was shaken by viewing 3-D ultrasounds.  "But in the end I remain committed to being pro-choice because I cannot image arguing against a woman's right to control her body and thus her life." He then dismisses babies in the womb by saying that "there is a reasonable and unsolvable medical debate about when exactly life begins."

Now, there is so much terrible thinking here that I could write a book about it, but if I were to be given the chance to talk with Touré, I think I would ask him two questions.  First, notice his opening sentence. He said, "I was in a committed relationship with a woman who I knew was just not the one." Hmm. What do you mean by "the one" Touré? The context seems to imply that you didn't truly love her (remember families are built by two people who love each other), or you at least didn't love her to commit to forsake all others for her. So, if that's the case, then tell me what exactly was it that you were committed to? How can one be in a "committed relationship" without committing to the person for life?  The only answer I can come up with is that he was committed to the sex. He states that "She probably also knew it wasn't gonna work out... and then she got pregnant." So, she got pregnant after they both knew it wasn't going to work out? Touré's understanding of commitment is about as fast and loose as one could have.

Secondly, Touré said that the experience of prenatal care and the technology of ultrasounds made him question his position on abortion. His only escape from the fact that medical science through ultrasound showed that there is a live human being in the womb was to assert that "there is a reasonable and unsolvable medical debate about when exactly life begins." Perhaps the debate is unsolvable medically (the question of the soul would be a metaphysical question and thus lie outside the purview of science), but my question would be so what? There is an equally unsolvable medical debate about when exactly life ends.  However, we don't throw up our hands and claim that we can never recognize a patient from a corpse.

No, Touré is doing a brilliant job of Orwellian double-speak here.  He wants to be committed when it's not a commitment and he claims that any small area of doubt is justification to deny the facts of science that are presented to him directly so he may hold onto his politically correct ideology. It is just this type of propaganda and self-denial that allows the slaughter of the innocents to continue. If Touré was truly held to "a woman's right to control her body and thus her life", he wouldn't stand for destroying both those bodies and those lives in utero, before they ever had a chance to grow and thrive.



Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Monday, January 28, 2013

Why Appeal to the Existence of Evil?

A fairly constant objection to God's existence is also one of the oldest objections.  It centers on the existence of evil and how any all-good, all-knowing God would allow any evil to exist in His creation. It was first widely voiced by the ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus who asked:

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing. Then Whence Cometh Evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"

Skeptic David Hume repackaged the riddle and it's been highly popular with skeptics and atheist ever since.

The problem with this objection is that it assumes there are only two factors to consider. But if we add a third proposition, say that God may allow evil to exist temporarily for a higher purpose, then the argument simply crumbles.

For fun, I've thought about reformulating the argument and turning it on its head. It would go something like this:

Atheists have a true desire to use Epicurus' Riddle in toppling the belief in God for rational people.
Atheists claim that Epicurus' Riddle is powerful enough to topple belief in God for rational people.
Yet rational people still believe in God.

 So, why appeal to Epicurus' Riddle?

In both instances, it strikes me that the logic is the same.  If my argument above doesn't logically follow, then I would think that the argument from evil also doesn't logically follow. Even given that the second argument is not discussing a perfect being, the premises are not as bold and rational people will seek to make rational decisions. One may say "perhaps the rational person is biased by his emotions, or perhaps he doesn't  understand the implications of the argument."  Those points are very possible and make the argument invalid, but prove my point--when other factors can be considered, the either/or structure of both arguments fail.

Monday, December 31, 2012

2012 Top Ten #Apologetics Social Media Links

Beyond Come Reason's articles and features, our social media sites also try to keep you up to date on important or relevant articles and events relating to faith, culture, and the Christian worldview. Below are the top ten stories that were clicked on from our Twitter and Facebook pages.
  1. Setting the Record Straight - YouTube Video Playlist  (Originally tweeted on Sep 28)
  2. What's Wrong With "Why I Hate Religion, But Love Jesus"? (Originally tweeted on Jan 13)
  3. Why I Secretly Root For the Atheists in Debates…  (Originally tweeted on Aug 23)
  4. Billy Graham, Mormonism, and the word "Cult" (Originally tweeted on Oct 23)
  5. Group sex is the latest 'trend' for teenage girls, disturbing report reveals  (Originally tweeted on Dec 29)
  6. Why do they always ask about rape and incest? (Originally tweeted on Oct 24)
  7. Planned Parent Info for Teens: It’s great to be a slut  (Originally tweeted on Nov 12)
  8. Come Reason's Free mp3s (Originally tweeted on June 5)
  9. Answering Bill Nye's Video on Creationism   (Originally tweeted on Sept 7)
  10. Should a Christian Vote for the Lesser of Two Evils?  (Originally tweeted on Nov 5)

Sunday, December 30, 2012

2012 Top Five Apologetics Podcast Topics

The Come Let Us Reason Together podcast has been one of the most popular features of our ministry. With nearly 125,000 downloads last year we saw our podcast audience grow by about 40%.  This weekly series continues to provide thoughtful instruction on important apologetics issues.  We've been blessed to again be counted among the top 16 apologetics podcasts by the well-respected Apologetics 315 web site.

Below are the top five topics downloaded in our 2012 releases. If you haven't yet subscribed to the podcast, you may do so via iTunes or by RSS.
  1. The Case for the Resurrection
  2. Talking About God at Starbucks
  3. Does God's Predestination Contradict My Freedom to Choose?
  4. Separating Science from Scientism
  5. Talking about the "God" Particle—Interview with Dr. Barry Ritchie

Friday, December 28, 2012

2012 Top Ten Apologetics Blog Posts

2012 is coming to a close, and as I did last year, I'd like to take a moment and look back on some of the more popular posts from the last twelve months. Come Reason has continued to reach farther than I would've imagined, with over 300,000 unique visitors from all over the globe reading our articles, posts, and interactions  Add to that the highly popular podcasts and the various peaking engagements, and we've been very blessed this year.

Below are the top ten blog posts for 2012. My series on the "Top Ten Neglected Books for Apologists" really resonated, making six of the ten spots on the list.  But the most popular post by far was my response to Jefferson Bethke's viral video "Why I Hate Religion but  Love Jesus". It seems that everyone had an opinion on this, I only hope that my thoughts add to a better understanding of approaching Christianity as a thoughtful faith.

The other top posts dealt with the Billy Graham organization's purging the word "cult" from their web site during Mitt Romney's campaign as well as an internal contradiction within the Book of Mormon itself. All ten posts are linked below. Which was your favorite?
  1. What's Wrong With "Why I Hate Religion, But Love Jesus"?
  2. The Book of Mormon's Slip is Showing
  3. Billy Graham, Mormonism, and the word "Cult"
  4. Top Ten Neglected Books for Apologists - #10 Theory of Knowledge
  5. Top Ten Neglected Books for Apologists - #5 The Edge of Evolution
  6. Top Ten Neglected Books for Apologists - #4 In Defense of Miracles
  7. Top Ten Neglected Books for Apologists - #6 The Christians as the Romans Saw Them
  8. Top Ten Neglected Books for Apologists - #7 Questions That Matter
  9. Top Ten Neglected Books for Apologists - #9… A Romance Story?
  10. Should the Gospel accounts be taken as history or as propaganda?
Come Reason brandmark Convincing Christianity
An invaluable addition to the realm of Christian apologetics

Mary Jo Sharp:

"Lenny Esposito's work at Come Reason Ministries is an invaluable addition to the realm of Christian apologetics. He is as knowledgeable as he is gracious. I highly recommend booking Lenny as a speaker for your next conference or workshop!"
Check out more X