Humorous Way to defeat "Virgin Birth parallel" arguments of atheists and skeptics

Lutheran Satire has done it again! _____________

-----------

HT:  David Wood of AnsweringMuslims.com

No Muslim can deal with Mark 10:23-27

See the full article at my other blog:  No Muslim can deal with Mark 10:23-27

Nor Matthew 5:21-26

Nor Matthew 5:27-30

Nor Mark 7:20-23

In Evangelism with Muslims, use these passages often and repeatedly, to emphasize sin, internal sin, that no one can cleanse their hearts from these sins, and that Jesus said that these internal sins make us guilty to be sent to hell.

The Real Root of Reza Aslan's Worldview and book, Zealot

This interview of Reza Aslan by Jennifer Danielle Crumpton reveals the real underlying worldview and presuppositions of Reza and his book, Zealot.  Jennifer Crumpton got her M. Div. from Union Theological Seminary, no surprise there, and is ordained in the "Christian Church" (Disciples of Christ) denomination.   Jennifer is a Pastoral Associate of Park Avenue Christian Church in Manhattan, New York.  This is one of the most liberal of all mainline churches; along with the United Church of Christ and affiliated denominations.  (Hard to say which one is the most liberal.)

She also says she is a blogger and minister to young people, Gen-Xers and Millennials, etc. a "Femmevangelical" (her web-site), and most of what she writes seems to be similar to other post-moderns and Emergent/Emerging church thinking.  She writes for the Huffington Post and other liberal leaning blogs.   If you look further at her web-site and videos on You Tube, it is obviously she is against the complimentarian position of women's roles in the Bible and church and family, and very negative against Patriarchal society in the Bible.  Unfortunately, the past sins of some men against women are being imputed to God and the Bible itself. (Nothing new there either.)

The scholars who have criticized Reza Aslan's book, Zealot, have focused on the fact that his theory that Jesus was a revolutionary against Rome is not new, but not many of them talk about the roots of his worldview in the book, and the separation of "the Jesus of history" vs. "the Christ of Faith".

A roundup of significant reviews of Zealot:

John Dickson - this one seems to me to be the most devastating to Aslan.  (per Denny Burk's blog)
seems like Denny Burk's blog is being hacked, or having problems sometimes, so below is the direct link:

John Dickson

Justin Taylor at The Gospel Coalition. 

Darrell Bock.

Craig Evans.  (Per Denny Burk again) 

Larry Hurtado  (by way of Ben Witherington III) 

Calvinist International 

The Economist

The Weekly Standard. 

Warning - this link shows Reza Aslan's frequent cursing, dirty language, and bullying on twitter and media outlets, with anyone whom he doesn't agree with. (on the second page)

Aslan is classic liberalism that has come back with a vengence in our society through the Emerging/Emergent church movement and their spokespeople like Brian McLaren, Rob Bell, and Rachel Held Evans.

It is the same classic Rudolph Bultmann type stuff I heard in the liberal United Methodist Church that I grew up, in the 1960s and 1970s.   But the ministers never admitted it until the Lord saved me in 1977 as a teenager, and then, later, in 79-81, when I went and asked them specific questions, I learned where they were coming from.  

The biggest problem is that in sound bite media and Reza Aslan's interviews (like on PBS programs and the Daily Show and Huffington Post type blog/video interviews, and this one above; is his views are "baptized" in the general idea that "The Jesus of History" is separate from "The Christ of Faith", and that seems to be overall worldview of most liberal and modern scholars today - John Dominic Crossan, Marcus Borg, Bart Ehrman, etc. - they don't allow truth of theology and miracles to be brought into history or historical research. Doubt and skepticism toward the gospels and Bible are the takeaway message in our sound-bite culture.

Most people seeing these things (interviews, media videos and blogs) don't care about Reimarus or S. G. F. Brandon, (Though it is good for thoughtful readers to know about that and that those theories have already been dealt with in earlier times); but what dumbs everything down and the basic message that gets spread, is that Jesus existed and was crucified, but beyond that, we cannot trust anything else, because it is suppossedly out of the realm of the canons of historical research to allow miracles or theology into it.

I am still reading the book Zealot, I have probably read 3/4 of it; but to be honest, it is boring!!  Liberalism is boring to me; and before I cull together specific quotes and specific problems, I thought I would give an overview of the basic worldview first.

See also my earlier post about "Understanding John Dominic Crossan". 

Using Zombie Movies for Apologetics

No, I have not seen World War Z, though there's probably a good chance I will at some point (the notion of Brad Pitt in a zombie movie is intriguing). A good friend of mine has two teenage boys that were telling me about this upcoming movie for last few months.  They went to see it at... a drive in theater (I actually saw the first Star Wars movie this way). Anyway, here were a couple of quick comments I thought I might share with these young guys. They probably have been stated much more eloquently with much greater thought by someone else, I'm sure. Feel free to riff (not "rip") of any of these, and add your own:

1) The mass of humanity is the living dead, the spiritually dead, and at every moment defy their creator. Like the driven anger(?) of the zombies, the hatred towards a Holy God is so strong the spiritually dead would kill this Holy God if they could.

2) The idea of "living dead" could be used as an example of an innate human belief in immortality and a cheap imitation of the final and holy resurrection of the dead.

3) The living dead, feed off the living, in the same way many live people typically suck the life out of other people. In other words, a zombie represents human selfishness to a superlative degree.

4) Zombie movies represent an innate fear within humanity. We are wired in such a way that we know we're eternal (at least in the future direction), but a strong fear is losing our "selves" or our individuality. For those worldviews that believe that matter is eternal and the soul is not (humanism, atheism), zombie movies are like, their worst nightmare- that their bodies live on while their souls (or personality, consciousness, etc.) do not. Matter is eternal... while consciousness is not?

Witnessing to some Muslims online (Part 1)

I have been witnessing and interacting with some Muslims on line recently, at Paul Bilal Williams blog.
Interesting that Paul Williams then grabbed a few "choice quotes" and says that they "go to the heart of the matter".  Indeed, the heart of the matter is the human heart, which is full of sin(Genesis 6:5), in bondage to sin(John 8:34), and causes us to be unclean and defiled, and is the root of sin and causes us to be guilty enough to be sent to hell.  Jesus said this in Matthew 5:21-26 (the roots of murder are anger and hatred); Matthew 5:27-30 (the roots of adultery are sexual lust) and Mark 7:20-23 (the roots of all sins are the evil thoughts within the heart.)

Here is some of it reproduced below, with 3 (or 4) Muslims, Muhammad Al-Hakeem, Abbas, and Erik, and also some one who goes by "Semsav12"   - with some editorial changes for space reasons.  There are some things I took out and some things I added, but the ideas were from other sections of our exchange, in order to make it understandable.  Feel free to visit the link above and see other details and more interaction in the com-boxes.  I am not reproducing everything here.

.    Muhammad Al- Hakeem wrote:


.     

.    Not to mention that God’s true love, justice and mercy is about simply forgiving those who sincerely repented;


Ken writes: 

You assume that humans can sincerely repent. (without the grace of God in regeneration) Romans 3:9-23 – there is no one who is sincere and no one seeks for God and no one has perfect repentance. Not committing physical adultery is not enough; for you have selfish lusts in your heart. (Matthew 5:27-30) And that lust sends you to hell. Isa Al Masih said this. Not committing actual murder is not enough, for you have hatred and anger in your heart, and that anger and hatred sends you to hell. (Matthew 5:21-26) That anger and hatred sends you to hell. The roots of sin are in the thoughts, and motives in the heart. (Mark 7:20-23) External washings cannot cleanse your heart of your jealousy, pride, selfishness, lust, anger, self-pity, foolishness, rancor, bitterness. God does not wink at sin. You denigrate the holiness of God. Forgiveness was based on the sacrifice/atonement in the Torah and Old Testament. Why do you think God set up the sacrificial system in the book of Exodus and Leviticus? Why did God substitute an innocent ram in the place of Abraham’s son? (Genesis 22) Yahya [the Arabic Qur'anic form for John the Baptist]  said and about Jesus (Isa Al Masih), “Behold the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.” (John 1:29) 



Muhammad Al-Hakeem:  not by making the [cross/atonement/Christ's sacrifice] only way to wipe out sin –


The Scriptures are clear – Without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sin. Hebrews 9:22  [see also 1 John 2:2; Revelation 5:9] The whole book of Hebrews, especially chapters 8, 9, and 10 explain how Christ’s death was the final sacrifice and final atonement for sin, and fulfillment of the sacrificial system in the Torah and Old Testament.

and not by punishing an innocent man (only the human nature died, as you claim) for the sins of billions of other sinners.

.     


This sentence is understandable and an objection to the Christian message from an Islamic viewpoint, ok. Since we believe that the Son voluntarily came and became flesh and voluntarily gave His life out of love for mankind, it is wrong for you to keep communicating what we believe without the aspect of voluntary love for sinners. Jesus said, “no one takes My life from Me, I lay it down voluntarily on my own authority and initiative. I have authority to lay it down and take it up again. (John 10:18)

 
I used to be quite curious about and respecting of the famous Christian “God is Love” statement, until I knew what it really is about. I now don’t know how much “love” can really be attributed to the Christian God. Please stop deceiving people.


Do you even know where the phrase “God is love” is located? I would encourage you to actually read and study it and think about it. It actually explains all the details. 

1 John 4:7-21 is the full paragraph that answers many of the questions and objections you have. 

Then read the entire book of 1 John (5 short chapters) slowly with aql (عقل = mind, reason, thinking) and ta'amoq (تعمق = deep thought)  and tafakkor. ( تفکر  = meditation ) 


7 Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. 8 The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love. 9 By this the love of God was manifested in us, that God has sent His only unique Son into the world so that we might live through Him. 10 In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation [satisfaction of justice/ turning away of wrath] for our sins. 11 Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. 12 No one has seen God at any time; if we love one another, God abides in us, and His love is perfected in us. 13 By this we know that we abide in Him and He in us, because He has given us of His Spirit. 14 We have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son to be the Savior of the world.
15 Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God. 16 We have come to know and have believed the love which God has for us. God is love, and the one who abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him. 17 By this, love is perfected with us, so that we may have confidence in the day of judgment; because as He is, so also are we in this world. 18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves punishment, and the one who fears is not perfected in love. 19 We love, because He first loved us. 20 If someone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for the one who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen. 21 And this commandment we have from Him, that the one who loves God should love his brother also. 



.    Ken Temple 
May 17, 2013 at 12:42 pm 


Abbas wrote:

Your people saw the crucifixing from afar. That is what the Quran is saying that is a conjecture. Why didn’t they go close to witness it first hand?


         John(an apostle/disciple and eye-witness), Mary, Jesus’ Mother, and other women were close and witnessed the crucifixion. You left out that part that I gave you – John chapter 19. Since Mark wrote for Peter, we can conclude that Peter was further back, but close enough to witness it; same with Matthew, who was an eyewitness. Luke interviewed Mary and the rest of the apostles/disciples/ eyewitnesses. There are so many details of the trials, arrest, crucifixion, resurrection in all four gospels that you cannot just dismiss them. At first, when they arrested Jesus, the disciples fled out of fear that they would be arrested also. But the text says that Peter came back and followed at a distance. I already gave you all the references. There are so many details of the crucifixion in all four gospels, and in other historical writings, that it is the Qur’an that has been proven to be false in 4:157. 



.     

.    Ken Temple 
May 17, 2013 at 12:48 pm 


Erik wrote that the crucifixion and the Father punishing the Son was "child abuse" - "stop cosmic child abuse"


It is not child abuse if the Son voluntarily out of love for human sinners gave His life because He wanted to (John 10:18; Mark 10:45); and the victory of the resurrection over death and sin and Satan shows that God won the victory by humility and love and power – the power of allowing someone to defeat you – by not fighting back or taking vengeance/revenge. When you leave out the love and voluntarily aspect and when you leave out the victory and power of the resurrection, you distort the Christian message. 


So, Paul, your selective choosing of a few statements was not a good Da’awah.



Lord willing, more to come. 

What Every Christian Needs to Know About the Qur'an, by James R. White

Just got this book yesterday; have not read it word for word yet, but I am jumping around to get the overall feel and then I will be reading it slowly.  It is excellent, from what I can tell.  I pray that God will use this for His glory to equip many Christians to "be prepared to give an answer for the hope that is within them"; remembering also to first, "sanctify Christ as Lord in their hearts" (1 Peter 3:15)

I also hope many Muslims will be open to reading this book, and give it a fair and respectful reading.  I wish this book was around back in 1983 when I first started reaching out to Muslims by playing soccer (the true football) with them, visiting them in their homes, having them in our home, playing chess and backgammon, drinking hot tea, Arabic and Turkish coffee, eating shish kebabs, cucumber salads, hummus and pita bread, and roasted pumpkins seeds, Iranian Ghormeh Sabzi قرمه سبزی (stew made with five green vegetables, beef, kidney beans, onions, and the famous dried lemon from Oman), over hours of discussion about God, heaven and hell, judgment day, Jesus, the atonement of Christ, salvation, faith, sin, original sin, politics, history, the Bible and the Qur'an, and many other topics.

Most Muslims are fun people to reach out to!  Christians need to crucify their fears. (Galatians 2:20; Luke 9:23; Galatians 6:14)  They are very hospitable and most Muslims are not afraid to talk about spiritual things.  O Fellow believers in Christ! - combine your study and growth in apologetics, theology, Bible and church history and historical theology knowledge with bold outreach of actually getting to know Muslims and spending time with them and listening to them.  Witness, preach the gospel, and provide the context of "eating with sinners and tax-collectors", as Jesus did.  (Luke 5:29-32; Mark 2:14-17; Luke 15:1-32)


Order from Alpha and Omega Ministries.  

Textual History of Qur'an and NT compared

Textual Criticism, The New Testament, and the Qur'an, by Larry Hurtado -

Larry Hurtado, a New Testament scholar, has given a review of Keith Small's book, Textual Criticism and Qur'an Manuscripts.

Link to the book itself at Amazon.

James White mentioned this on his Dividing Line web-cast recently, and points out that he used it for his upcoming book, What Every Christian Needs to Know about the Qur'an

I look forward to reading both of these books.

In his own words . . .

@barackobama Your words about Sandy Hook murders applied to abortion youtu.be/Opl0jnKbn5Y#ABC #CNN #Foxnews #NBC #CBS #ProLife #Abortion
— Ken Temple (@Kenneedsgrace) January 12, 2013

Government use of scientism as power

Below are two videos.  The first one is about the dangers of western secular scientism - and C. S. Lewis' warnings against governments using scientism for power.  The second video is about how Iran allows and helps fund sex change operations and gender re-assignment.

I thought this first one was a very well done video.  This video is very timely in light of many recent effects of President Obama's first term and re-election victory.  The video starts with President Obama's statement in his first inaugural address of "we will restore science to it's rightful place".   Was this a reference beyond "global warming" and renewable energies? Was he  implying other issues related to ObamaCare, like eugenics and euthanasia (mercy killing) and other uses of technology that go beyond moral bounds? - gender re-assignment, sex-change operations - forcing companies to provide insurance for those things also - like the "woman" in prison who got government funds for "her" hormone therapy and sex-change operations?

Also in light of the case of our government forcing Hobby Lobby to provide Insurance that provides for abortions and abortifacient drugs, this video is very timely.    ObamaCare is not just economically stupid and a step in socialism; but it is evil coercion by our government; violations of freedom of religion and speech.   It is the result of our culture leaving it's Judeo-Christian roots.   The film quotes C. S. Lewis as writing, "I dread government in the name of science, that is how tyrannies come in."  I tried to find the quote on line or in my own copy of The Abolition of Man, but could not find the exact reference for the quote. This article seems to indicate that the statement is a summary of what Lewis thought.   In that article, it  quotes Lewis again on the problem with Theocracy: (From the context of the 1950s and 1960s, and Lewis as an Englishman, one can discern that "democrat" does not mean what it does today in the USA.)

I believe in political equality. But there are two opposite reasons for being a democrat. You may think all men so good that they deserve a share in the government of the commonwealth, and so wise that the commonwealth needs their advice. That is, in my opinion, the false, romantic doctrine of democracy. On the other hand, you may believe fallen men to be so wicked that not one of them can be trusted with any irresponsible power over his fellows. That I believe to be the true ground of democracy. I do not believe that God created an egalitarian world. . . . [S]ince we have sin, we have found, as Lord Acton says, that “all power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” The only remedy has been to take away the powers and substitute a legal fiction of equality. . . . Theocracy has been rightly abolished not because it is bad that priests should govern ignorant laymen, but because priests are wicked men like the rest of us.  (C. S. Lewis, The Weight of Glory and other Essays, pp. 168-169.)  (pages 113-114 in my copy of an older edition.) 

The second video is also very well produced, but disturbing in the realities it exposes in our fallen world today.  The other danger is when a false religious system is the government and then approves of sex-change operations, helps fund them, and uses technological advances to perform them.  The Sunnis are embarrassed by this phenomenon in Iran.  (Warning: the comment section on the YouTube site is full of inappropriate language.)

Here is a disturbing, shocking, and ironic video documentary of sex-change operations in Iran, a Muslim country where Shiite Sharia Islamic law is supreme.  It is ironic because one would have thought that religious Muslims would view all sex-change operations as wrong and sin.   Homosexuality is illegal in Iran and punishable by death, but if one changes himself or herself first, then it will be ok for that person to fulfill their desires and attractions.  They can then marry the opposite sex or they can, in Shiite Iran, sell themselves for temporary marriage.  (Farsi:  صیغه - pronounced: Seegheh or Siqeh;  Arabic:  مُتعه (mota'eh, or it is usually written in English as Muta. Iranians pronounce Arabic words differently, that is also why you will see "Moslem" - the more Iranian way of pronouncing it; and "Muslim" - the more Arabic way of pronunciation.) (*see  more at bottom) This (the Muta issue) is revealed at the end of the film, after one of the main characters in this documentary changes himself into a woman and then sells "herself" in order to make a living.  Wow.  Very disturbing stuff.  They never explain how they understand the contradiction/tension of Allah creating someone "with the wrong body" is justified.    This issue came up in my own evangelism with Iranians, and discipling and pastoring and counseling former Muslims.  It created doubts and struggles in the minds of some of the other Iranian believers as we taught them apologetic issues and how we as Biblical Christians respond to these realities of our fallen world.  How do believers in Christ respond to the struggles that some people have that we don't have?  We had an Iranian lady visit our church who claimed she was created in the wrong body, and she used Gnosticism and Gnostic writings and material from Elaine Pagels and the DaVinci Code type reasoning to argue her points against me.  She came a dozen or so times to church over several months, and heard the gospel and I was able to explain what the Bible says more in depth to her questions after several church services. (Eventually she never came back.  I pray that the message of the gospel will be haunting her mind and heart, from hearing it clearly in her own language, and that God would draw her to Himself, wherever she is now.  John 6:44; Acts 16:14)

Does Islam believe that creation is fallen? (Genesis 3, Romans 8:21) I honestly don't know how they explain these things.  The Bible explains that after God created all things, that after sin, then corruption and decay entered our world   After the fall - after sin entered the world, came decay, corruption, and death.  Birth defects are part of that corruption.  Creation today is "enslaved to corruption" because of sin.  Islam is adamant in denying original / inherited sin, but it seems that with this, they are agreeing that creation has defects/corruptions in it now.  At one point early in the documentary, the doctor is heard and seen saying to one of his patients, "nature has created you this way."  I wonder how religious this doctor is.  I suppose he could agree that nature has been corrupted from Allah's original design, but I wonder how they explain the corruption - since Adam, in Islamic theology, did not become a sinner by nature, nor pass that sinful nature on to his children.

* You can see a discussion of Muta here, even by Sunnis calling for it to be allowed in the current civil war in Syria and quotes from the Hadith that mention it. )



Another disturbing and evil thing, is that if the liberal / gay agenda keeps advancing, the liberal /big government in the USA will be forcing religious institutions to pay for abortions and sex-change operations, not just contraception and abortifacient drugs.

Debate - Thanks again Doug Wilson for telling the truth!

This is a recent debate:
Issue:  "Do Gay Rights Conflict with Conservative Christian Values?"
Douglas Wilson vs. R. Clarke Cooper

- Douglas Wilson - says "yes, they do conflict"; vs. R. Clarke Cooper, Executive Director of Log Cabin Republicans, says "no".   

Thanks again Doug Wilson for telling the truth and engaging this cultural issue!




I found out about this from Denny Burk's blog.

2 Science "Guys" respond to "the Science Guy" Bill Nye

Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis has made a blog response to Bill Nye.  It includes the video above and also a link to the original video by secular evolutionist Bill Nye, "the Science Guy".  

The two science "guys" are Dr. David Mention, a Phd in Biology from Brown University and Dr. Georgia Purdom, a Phd in Molecular Genetics at Ohio State University.

Significant points:

1.  Belief in a creator (God) and against Naturalistic Darwinian Evolution is not unique to the USA.

2.  Dr. Georgia Purdom:  A big problem with Evolutionary Theory is "the complete lack of a genetic mechanism that allows organisms to gain genetic information to go from simple to complex over time."

3.  The difference between "Observational Science" (Observation, experimentation) vs. Historical Science (the origin of the universe and life and how it came into being).

4.  An Evolutionist admitted that most scientists who don't believe in Evolution "can conduct their work quite happily without particular reference to evolutionary ideas".  (see the video for exact names and references.) This means that they can really do excellent work in Observational science; which is the opposite of what Bill Nye the Science Guy suggests.

5.  This means that belief in creationism and that God created all things as Genesis teaches does not hinder one from doing excellent work in observational science and experimentation.  

6.  The complexity of the hummingbird and its need for having all its parts to work all at once in order to survive, points away from a slow process of evolution and toward a special creator who said, "Be! and it was so".  Similar to the principle of "irreducible complexity" that Michael Behe explained so well in his ground breaking book, Darwin's Black Box.  Irreducible complexity is illustrated in a really neat way in the DVD presentation, Unlocking the Mystery of Life.
7.  People who believe in God and Creation and the truth of Genesis don't mind teaching our children about the theory of evolution; we just want the freedom to critique it - and the public government schools should allow the other views to challenge the theory of evolution and have open and rational debate about it.  Darwinian Naturalistic Evolution should not be taught as dogma in our public schools.  Intelligent Design and Creationism (whether Progressive, 6 Day, Day-Age, or even Theistic Evolution (as oxymoron as it is) and the problems with the theory of evolution should also be examined.  Let the students and parents decide by honest and open debate, but allow the problems with the philosophical worldview of Evolution and the problems with scientific evidence for it be questioned and examined.  The problem with the public government schools is that they don't allow any one to question the theory and point out it's problems. [ * see at bottom for more]

Al Mohler reported on this also - Bill Nye, "The Science Guy"  says Creationism is not appropriate or good for children.   He also mentions news about trends in sex selection abortions.

http://www.albertmohler.com/2012/08/29/the-briefing-08-29-12/

Bill Nye wants parents who believe in the one creator God to stop teaching their children that God is the creator, and Genesis is true.  

Dr. Mohler points out that other famous atheists, like the late Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins have said the same thing. 

One of the reasons why so many Christians send their children to private Christian schools or they home-school their children, is because the government schools push the same agenda that Bill Nye wants.  Public government schools teach a secular humanist and Evolutionary Atheist worldview.   The secular atheists want to steal our children’s minds.  As a result of this dominant worldview in the past 40 years, it permeates our culture and has affected beliefs about ethics, morals, and what is truth, and what is "right and wrong".  If Darwinian Atheistic Evolution is true, then there is no judge or judgment day.  If there is no judgment day, then there is no right and no wrong; society just decides what right and wrong is.   And we are seeing the devastating effects of that philosophy today.  

Mohler talks about how the atheists and scientists like Bill Nye are upset with “American parents”.  Apparently, Bill Nye and others like him, think European parents are more enlightened.  Look at what happens in Europe when they as a culture have left the idea of a Almighty Good and Holy Creator God.  

Maybe the recent sentencing of terrorist Anders Behring Breivik to just 21 years for killing 77 people in cold blooded calculated murder and bombing is indication of the lack of moral grounding in what is right and what is wrong; the lack of carrying out the death penalty in justice in Norway against Anders Breivik comes from this worldview also; rejecting God’s law against murder. (I believe he should be executed:  Genesis 9:6; Romans 13:3-4; Ecclesiastes 8:11) See here for more details on the sentencing of Anders Breivik.  What is really weird is how the Norwegian population feels good about themselves for being tolerant and merciful in giving him such a light sentence, yet they mostly agree that they don't want him released after 21 years and do agree that he is evil and sick. 

Back to the response to Bill Nye "the Science Guy": 

Mohler says, “Americans are recalcitrant in accepting the theory of Evolution” and it frustrates Evolutionary scientists and educators.   

Darwinian Evolution – that all life forms, including humans, “developed from a process of random genetic mutation and natural selection” - as Dr. Mohler pointed out,  “is also a religious creed”, a worldview, a philosophy of assumptions that has devastating results in today’s society.    

Some of the results are the radical experimentation with sex selection abortions, and experimentation with human cloning; and other genetic technologies that make marriage and a sexual relationship between one man and one women not necessary, at least for the homosexuals.   Homosexuals are able to not only adopt children that neither partner contributed to;  but now they are, because of advances in technology and genetic engineering, they also are able to have a child from at least one of the male partners by finding a surrogate mother, and using advanced technology of implanting his sperm into that woman.  (surrogate mother) Lesbians are able to have children because one of them gets a sperm bank donation or uses “In Vitro fertilization”.   Homosexual male couples who want to have children have to get a woman donor who agrees to be the one to have one of their sperm implanted into her and she carries it to term.  As Douglas Wilson pointed out in his lecture on Design Sexuality – the worldview of these actions come from a belief that creation is moldable and malleable and we can change nature; a pagan worldview.

So, which philosophy/worldview/religion is really not good for children?

* Addendum:
Children, teenagers, college students should at least be taught that there are intelligent critiques of evolution and allow and investigate other good books and sources such as:
Darwin on Trial by Philip Johnson
Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds by Philip Johnson
Not a Chance by R. C. Sproul
Answers in Genesis - Ken Ham, already mentioned above.
Michael Behe's book, Darwin's Black Box, linked above.
Books by Stephen Meyer, William Dembski, and many others.  (too numerous to cite here)
The Genesis Debate (3 views debate each other)
Creation and Change - Douglas Kelly
Added on July 15, 2013:
Why Does the Universe Look so Old? by Al Mohler
The Face that Demonstrates the Farce of Evolution, by Hank Hanegraaff  (does not discuss the age of the earth or "day" of Genesis issues)  
The Battle for the Beginning, by John McArthur
John Piper says it has to be either the young earth view or John Sailhamer's view explained in the book, 
Genesis Unbound. 
Reviewed here by Answers in Genesis.

Other Responses to Bill Nye, "the Science Guy"
C. I. Bolt at Choosing Hats
This conclusion was very good:
"In my view, Cornelius Van Til is right about the quagmire of evolutionary debate when he writes, “It is quite hopeless to fight evolution in the public schools and think that in doing so you have gone to the bottom of the trouble. Back of evolution lie relativism and impersonalism.” (Cornelius Van Til, Foundations of Christian Education, 9) Back of relativism and impersonalism lie atheism. Naturalistic evolution is a symptom of a deep spiritual problem, not the problem itself."

Bill Nye and Pie and in the Sky  (by Matthias McMahon; also at "Choosing Hats")