Our current secular age would have us think that science is entirely the province of secularists. These two short videos from Hillsdale College give just a sample of the actual history of science – history that entire refutes that secular notion.
Science as a field of study is only possible because God has given us an ordered creation. PBS and NPR would have us believe that science is no place for God. Common sense – as well as history – tells us otherwise.
The first video lasts 1 min, 26 sec. The second video lasts 1 min, 34 sec.
Sally Lloyd-Jones is author of The Jesus Storybook Bible, a children’s book that helps show how the Old Testament teaches us about Jesus. (For more such books, though most are for adults, see Christ in the Old Testament.) This video of her lasts 2:59.
Sam Harris made this argument while standing on the upper side of a sphere, which spins at the rate of roughly 600 mph at his longitude, while revolving around the sun at the rate of 66,000 mph, together with the sun traveling at a rate of 432,000 mph through the Milky Way galaxy, and who knows what else – all without his flying off this ball or even getting chapped lips. What he calls “the laws of nature” represents a miracle of stupendous proportions. If he’s not willing to acknowledge creation as an act of God, why should we expect him to acknowledge any deviation from its routine order to be an act of God?
On Christmas Eve, I wrote part one of my review of Kurt Eichenwald’s piece, and highlighted not only the substantive and inexcusable litany of historical mistakes, but also the overly pejorative and one-sided portrait of Bible-believing Christians…I appreciate that even Kurt Eichenwald joined the discussion in the comments section.
But the problems in the original Newsweek article were so extensive that I could not cover them in a single post. So, now I offer a second (and hopefully final) installment.
Yesterday I drew attention to Michael Kruger’s scathing criticism of Newsweek’s recent major misrepresentation of the Bible. Another New Testament scholar, Daniel Wallace was similarly incensed.
Dan Wallace concludes his critique with this:
I applaud Kurt Eichenwald for stirring up Christians to think about what he has written and to reexamine their beliefs and attitudes. But his numerous factual errors and misleading statements, his lack of concern for any semblance of objectivity, his apparent disdain for and lack of interaction with genuine evangelical scholarship, and his über-confidence about more than a few suspect viewpoints, makes me wonder. I wonder why he really wrote this essay, and I wonder what he hoped to accomplish. The article reads like it was written by a political pundit who thought he might try something clever: If he could just link conservative Christianity with conservative politics, and show that Christians’ smugness about being Bible-based believers was both incorrect exegetically and had a poor, self-contradictory foundation (since the Bible is full of errors and contradictions), he could thereby deal a deathblow to both conservative Christianity and conservative politics. I do not wish to defend conservative politics, but simply point out that evangelicals do not fit lock, stock, and barrel under just one ideological tent. Eichenwald’s grasp of conservative Christianity in America as well as his grasp of genuine biblical scholarship are, at best, subpar. And this article is an embarrassment to Newsweek—or should be!
On December 23, 2014, Newsweek published a 9,000-word cover-story by Kurt Eichenwald titled “The Bible: So Misunderstood It’s a Sin.” Professor Michael J. Kruger of Reformed Theological Seminary in Charlotte gives it its due this first installment of a response.
My own response to this Newsweek “hit” piece can be seen in the following two comments I made to it on the Newsweek site:
I once held a view practically identical to the author of this article. Then I decided to read and study the New Testament for myself. It didn’t take me long to realize that the New Testament documents made more sense than the view I had held of it.
How does this writer claim to be dealing with the Bible when he fails to deal at all with the central claim of the Bible? That is, the New Testament repeatedly and emphatically declares that Jesus of Nazareth has been made Lord of heaven and earth by virtue of His resurrection from the dead according to the promises of God in the Old Testament. Do you wonder at all why the journalist devotes himself to majoring on minors?
While Dr. Kruger deals with Eichenwald’s errors of commission, I dealt with what I felt was far graver: his error of omitting discussion of the Bible’s central claim.
This Newsweek essay reminds me of how hostile modern culture has become to Jesus Christ. It also reminds me that half-truths are more pernicious than outright lies. Anyone who trusts Newsweek’s opinion of the Bible has put themselves in demonstrably unreliable hands. Do today’s journalists not realize that they have made “journalistic integrity” an oxymoron?
I only recommend that you read Kruger’s critique. Reading Eichenwald’s article is a punishment no one deserves.