Saturday Selections – Nov. 16, 2024

Click on the titles to head to the linked articles... How knock-knock jokes are a problem for evolution (14 min) If you found a knock-knock joke carved on a rock in the forest, you'd know that it wasn't the result of natural forces randomly acting over time. And the origin of life is way more complicated than that! This winsome Intelligent Design presentation also highlights 5 problems the evolutionary account can't surmount. (This is worth watching twice!) The porn talk – 9 ways parents can lead children The first might be the biggest: cultivate the conversation – don't avoid it, seek it out. What two unbelievers got right about morality (10-minute read) Tim Keller on how two unbelievers – philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) and historian Tom Holland (1968- ) – still recognize that without God there is no basis for right and wrong. The two-book fallacy... again (15-min read) God revealed Himself to us in one book, the Bible, and in a second volume too, which we could call the "book" of creation (Romans 1:19-20, Ps. 19:1-4). But some Christians buy into evolution because they think that this second book is every bit as clear and authoritative as Scripture. Practically speaking, that has them reinterpreting the Bible in light of what evolutionary scientists say they've discovered in Creation. But in this article, Dr. Lisle rebuts this belief and a particular gentleman who holds to it. He writes “If Shane disagrees with my conclusion that words are far superior in communicating truth than rocks and fossils are, then I would ask him to reply using only rocks and fossils – no words please.” Why do even kids' movies take God's Name in vain? Otherwise-family-friendly fare will routinely throw out an abuse of God's Name. Nobody blurts out Mohammad or Allah. No one drops an f-bomb. So why God's Name, so often? The folks at the Christian film review site MovieGuide.org offer their best explanation. The bee-apocalypse: there's always another scare Environmental groups have their apocalyptic bent, and reporters have their own "if it bleeds it leads" motivations, so when they pitch doom and gloom, we shouldn't just swallow their warnings. John Stossel is, of course, not free of his own biases, so caution is needed in ingesting his conclusions here too. But what he highlights that you probably didn't hear about before, is the human cost that comes with the pesticide bans that were pushed. In our fallen world, there is no perfect, negative-free solution – there are always tradeoffs – so we need to hear about the other side, which is on offer here (Prov. 18:17). ...