Why Christianity? discussion

Mine is Alvin Plantinga.

Ravi is the Man.

I'll vote for Alexandra!

Ravi *is* the man! I'll also add Alistair Begg and (on certain things) John MacArthur.

Well said. Even though John MacArthur is more a theologian, pastor and scholar. He is definitely my main source on all defences of Christianity.

Just adding to the list: Greg Koukl.

Josh McDowell and Tim Keller

Folks - these authors are good for flavor but little else to the thoughtful Biblical explorer. Scientists make an observation; formulate a hypothesis about that observation; and prove or disprove the hypothesis. This takes original thought. Instead of reading commentary, listening to monotonous new-age religious music (read: noise), and believing the tired-old sermons of mind-numbingly dull preachers, believers might try reading ACTUAL Scripture with a critical perspective. Who knows what new insights might emerge if the brainwashed discovered, like the strawman, that they actually had a functioning cerebrum. Maybe altar boys wouldn't be marched to their priestly slaughter anymore.

Have you read any of these authors Rod?

Sorry meant to right robert

I don't think Robert has.

Apologists are not the same as scientists.

Robert, why do you assume these apologists don't read scripture and numerous scientific explorations in these areas?
Every good apologists I know indeed does.

The real question is the limits of science. If you disprove Darwin: a million grumpy people will be out of work with egg on their face. Even people who draw unicorns for a living cling desperately to their funding and cred.

Rod - one can neither prove nor disprove Darwin. He initiated a rather broad theory, some of which is undoubtedly true and much of which is likewise false. As a geneticist, I can make a fairly accurate guess as to which is which, but not with a high enough degree of certainty to discredit him. Until solid proof or a more popular theory supersedes On the Origin of the Species, it remains viable. With regards to Apologists, when they can actually do a quantitative case study, like Darwin did with his finches, I'll pay attention to them, but, until then, they're just commentators profiting from people's gullibility.

Has anyone heard of Richard Swineburn? Or perhaps even read him?

I believe Swineburne is a Christian philosopher. He's very concerned with the philosophy of science.
His name pops up everywhere.

I think I heard him on the "unbelievable" show.