Along the way, he also applied those skills to the evidence for and against Christianity, with the result that he came to be a follower of Jesus Christ. Now he teaches others how to learn and apply the same skills.
Each of the eight sessions will be an hour long, with a 10-15 minute video presentation by Wallace, followed by questions and discussion led by HillFaith founder and editor Mark Tapscott.
This Zoom class is full, but it will be repeated in the near future for congressional employees, and other classes will also be offered, in 2021, including Dr. Frank Turek’s “I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist.”
If you would like to receive scheduling and content information on future HillFaith class offerings, send your name and email address to: email@example.com
Hugh Ross of Reasons to Believe is the astronomer referenced in the headline of the post, while Jeff Zweerink is the astrophysicist. Both of these men are followers of Jesus Christ.
Ross and Zweerink discuss in the following video why they find the biblical account of the creation of the universe consistent with the best science in their respective fields.
“What was really unusual, because I looked at the other holy books first, and reading Genesis 1 the scientific method leapt off the page and that really impressed me,” Ross explains at one point. The video is 7:19 in length and will introduce you to some fresh perspectives on the Bible, creation, science and faith.
There are dozens of measures of the Earth and throughout the universe that are so precisely calibrated that even the tiniest deviation would render life as we know it impossible.
But what if what appears to us as precisely calibrated is in actual fact no more than the way the Earth and indeed the universe came into existence from the beginning?
Here’s how J. Warner Wallace of Cold-Case Christianity puts it: “At both the foundational level, at the regional level and at the local level of our planet, things appear to have been tampered with, set up perfectly, not so that a death would occur, but so that life would occur.”
But what if it “just happened that way?” Is that a reasonable conclusion based on the available evidence. Wallace answers that question in the following video:
Even if you’ve been a follower of Jesus Christ who has attended church regularly since childhood, the odds are very good you have little or no idea of just how massive the evidence from multiple fields is for Christianity. There has been a veritable explosion in Christian apologetics research in recent decades.
Same applies if you are an agnostic or an atheist because you almost certainly approach whatever arguments you’ve ever encountered on behalf of, for example, the Resurrection or the reliability of the Bible, with certain presuppositions that makes it all but impossible for you to see the whole picture.
Now along comes Cold-Case Christianity’s J. Warner Wallace, a man who for much of his adult life was an atheist, to demonstrate just how complex and detailed is the case for the most influential faith in all human history. Pay especially close attention when the chalkboard comes on the screen:
Baby Mary might have been born and grown up to become the medical researcher who discovered the cure for cancer, but instead she was aborted in the 18th week of her mother’s pregnancy.
But despite being aborted, Baby Mary today still has a role in medical research. Or at least a piece of her scalp does. When Baby Mary was killed in her mother’s womb and her tiny body dismembered, a piece of her scalp containing hair follicles was sold on the fetal tissue gray market.
Have you ever thought about the distance from a giraffe’s heart to its brain? Me, neither, until today anyway, when I watched the following video from Eric Lyons of Apologetics Press.
Think about it, it’s approximately eight feet from the adult giraffe’s heart to its head.
When the giraffe reaches up into trees to eat, that’s eight vertical feet the heart must pump blood to its brain, while maintaining sufficient blood pressure that, by the way, is substantially greater than you or I require in our bodies to continue living.
So why should you care about this? It’s the difference between mere chance and purposeful intention. By definition, the former isn’t a reliable source for the required heart, while the latter requires will and thus indicates design. But that leads us to you know where! Regardless where you stand on evolution vs intelligent design, this video will make you think twice:
If evolution is true, then it is singularly responsible for life on earth. We are just material beings, nothing else. In fact, we don’t have free will, or the ability to make choices. We are just moist robots.
But I think this evolution produces false beliefs. I’d never thought about this idea much until I heard MaryJo Sharp addressing the topic at the recent “Unbelievable” conference here is southern California.
If you know anything about biochemistry, you know about “Beilstein’s Handbook of Organic Chemistry.” It is a database with 10 million or so data-points that provide pretty much whatever you need to know about any organic compound, according to biochemist Fazale Rana of Reasons to Believe (RTB).
“The utility of Beilstein’s Handbook is endless and its applications far-reaching. In fact, Beilstein’s has even served as the inspiration for origin-of-life chemists seeking to make sense of prebiotic chemistry and chemical evolution,” Rana writes in a lengthy November 4 post on TRB’s web site.
“These investigators think that if they can master an approach to prebiotic chemistry called a Beilstein synthesis, then they may well gain key insight into how chemical evolution generated the first life on Earth.”
Yes, you read that right and you will very likely want to read the rest of Rana’s post. It is, as I said above, lengthy, and rather technical at multiple points. Also, I want to make it clear that I’m a journalist, not a biochemist, and so I make no claim to scientific competence.
Even so, this topic is fascinating to me and I suspect that it will be for more than a few people working on the Hill, as well as for anybody interested in knowing more about how we all came to be here. Go here to read the balance of Rana’s post.
One thing you don’t want to do if you encounter a Bombardier Beetle is give it the idea that you are threat to it. Why? Because you don’t want to be sprayed by this little beast’s machine guns.
Machine guns on a bug? That’s right, as Apologetics Press’ Eric Lyons explains in the following video, this bug resembles the famous B-17 “Flying Fortress” of WW II in having a swivel turret with double guns that fire a 212 degree chemical mixture at long distance against its enemies with tremendous accuracy.
No, I am not making this up. The bug has only two guns whereas the Fortress had, depending on the model, between 8 and 11 defensive machine guns. But, as Lyons explains, evolution cannot explain how the bug got here with such a fine defensive mechanism:
Don’t remember the “Cambrian Explosion,” that sudden eruption in distant Earth history during which hundreds of new species suddenly appeared on the scene?
Intelligent Design advocates have for years argued that the Cambrian Explosion required the creation of original genes, but Neo-Darwinians retorted that a variety of environmental factors could account for the sudden emergence.
Now comes a new genetic study — “The Genetic Factors of Bilaterian Evolution” — that concludes at least 157 new genes were required to produce new animals with bilateral symmetry. “Evolution News & Science Today” has the fascinating details.
If the headline above makes no sense at all, that’s almost certainly because most folks have never heard of Mantle Bottom Pancakes since they have nothing to do with breakfast. They have everything to do, however, with places like the Hawaiian Islands in the Pacific Ocean.
The Mantle is what’s below the surface of the Earth on which we live and, as Reasons to Believe’s Hugh Ross points out, it makes up more than 80 percent of the total volume of the Earth. And, he points out, it produces tremendous benefits for us on the surface in at least five ways.
And what does this have to do with working on Capitol Hill, or believing in God? Science is a major issue in countless ways in Congress. The more is known, the better life can be. Or to put it another way, the more we know about science, the more clear it becomes that Creation happened by design, not by chance.
As an astronomer, Ross is usually looking up and away from Earth, but in this fascinating article, he’s looking downward, and the results just may give you a new insight into the world we inhabit and why.
“Against the Tide: Finding God in an Age of Science” is a new documentary from Pensmore Films featuring Oxford Mathematics Professor Emeritus John Lennox and actor Kevin Sorbo, to be aired in more than 600 theaters across the country on November 19.
Kevin Sorbo is known to millions of Hollywood fans around the world as the lead character in one of the most successful syndicated TV series ever, “Hercules: The Legendary Journeys,” as well as “Andromeda” and “Supergirl.”
More recently, Sorbo has become known for his faith as a follower of Jesus Christ. “I am frequently berated by Hollywood compatriots for my Christian faith,” Sorbo said. “This seemed a great opportunity to learn how to respond from a master in turning the atheist manifesto on its head. Furthermore, I get to appear as ‘myself!’” Not every successful actor gets to appear on screen as themselves.
For more information on tickets and where the film is being shown, go here.
There is a a frequently heard claim by prominent atheist advocates like Sam Harris that Christians who argue for the existence of God are merely using God to explain the gaps in human knowledge about how the universe came to be, the origin of life, and other mysteries.
“Hey, we don’t understand how the world was created, or even if it was or has just always been, so that must be explained by a god,” is the alleged process atheists accuse Christians of following.
If you are a congressional aide who works on either of the Senate or House committees that deal with science and technology, odds are good you’ve heard this argument articulated more than once.
But, guess what, the same reasoning can be applied to “science of the gaps,” according to J. Warner Wallace of Cold-Case Christianity and NBC “Dateline” cold-case detective renown. “To deny personhood of the First Cause is science of the gaps,” he argues in the following video:
If you’ve heard it once, you’ve probably heard it often: The Bible was written by a bunch of fallible human beings, therefore it cannot be taken at face value as true and accurate.
Here’s the logic train: Humans are fallible. The Bible was written by humans. Therefore, the Bible is fallible. That logic train, by the way, is the product of a human, too, so, should it be accepted as true? That’s a discussion for another time.
And while we’re on the topic, when was the last time anybody told you humans are fallible, “Origin of the Species” was written by the human Charles Darwin, therefore Origin is fallible?
Anyway, Cold-Case Christianity’s J. Warner Wallace knows a thing or three about determining the credibility of witnesses (something that every legislative director and assistant on Capitol Hill must also know), and he has some even more arresting thoughts about that logic train in the following video:
Hummingbirds are supposed to be able to fly, but they do. In fact, they move in ways that remind us of helicopters, hovering in place this second, then streaking off in a new direction. The maneuverability of common house flies is even more amazing.
So what have hummingbirds and common house flies to do with anything? They are inspirations of a developing field of technology known as “biomimicry.” It’s the adaption of capabilities and designs found in nature to improving the way we humans live. Congressional staff will do well to become familiar with the technology and its possibilities.
But biomimicry also points us toward a crucial fact about the natural world — the amazing capabilities nature displays in countless ways are collectively a strong argument for an intelligent designer. Kyle Butt of the Apologetics Press explains: