Apologist Frank Turek on Real Science Radio

* Bob Enyart and Frank Turek Talk Apologetics: RSR co-host Bob Enyart interviews famed apologist and Christopher Hitchens debate opponent, Frank Turek on his observation: It’s not that the argument for atheism fails but rather, if atheism were true, every argument fails. Bob highly recommends Dr. Turek’s book, Stealing from God (whether in print, digital, or audiobook format). The two discuss the law of causality, immaterial reality including the laws of logic, irrationality including theoretical physicist (emphasis on the theoretical) Lawrence Krauss, and the atheists’ problem of evil.

* When the Cat's Away: After Dr. Turek leaves the program Bob continues to discuss this tremendous apologist and his great book. But Bob also highlights a few areas of disagreement including timelessness and the Big Bang. Dr. Turek rightly rejects the materialist explanation for the diversity of life of Earth, i.e., Darwinism, and he also rightly rejects the Christianized version of that theory, theistic evolution. However, unfortunately Frank accepts the big bang theory, and worse, uses the big bang as evidence for God, via a Christianized version of that materialist explanation for the development of the universe. If you take the time to review our rebuttals to these claims of Dr. Turek, please send along your thoughts to Bob@rsr.org. See:
- God Has a Past at kgov.com/time showing that the doctrine of divine timelessness cannot withstand the Incarnation
- Google: big bang predictions, and then click on the #1 top-ranked article which happens to be ours, at KGOV.com (aka rsr.org/bbp). Or for an easier read, just search for: evidence against the big bang, and then click on our KGOV article atop those results, or find it at rsr.org/bb.)

* Solving the Full Euthyphro's Dilemma: In their brief comments, the guys agreed on this topic. But you might want to see our Euthyphro article which goes beyond the typical apologist's response and answers not just the argument as thrown at us by atheists. We go further to answer the deeper included question of: How can God Himself know that He is good? (Hint: A unitarian deity like Allah, if he existed, would have a way of determining for certain that he were evil, if he were; but he could not determine for certain whether he were good.) Thinkers like Dr. Jonathan Sarfati and Dr. John Lennox have noticed our article, which you can read at rsr.org/euthyphros-dilemma.

* By the Way, Our Two James White YouTube Videos: are about to hit 3,300 and 20,000 views. This first 2-minute video of excerpts presents The Shocking White/Enyart Debate Aftermath. In the aftermath, and for the reason explaned just below, R.C. Sproul Jr. and Dr. James White both startlingly deny that God the Son took upon Himself a human nature.
- Sproul: "God the Son does not now nor has He ever had two natures."
- White: "God the Son does not have two natures. I did not 'admit' that He did/does/will etc."
These men are currently denying this central doctrine of Christianity (hopefully only temporarily, and hopefully, they will simply retract their shocking comments) because they are trying to defend the claim from Plato that God is utterly timeless (thus without sequence) and that He is utterly immutable (incapable of any change whatsoever). Please pray for these men who clearly love the Lord but who are subordinating the biblical Incarnate Son of God to an extreme Platonic utter immutability. See also:
kgov.com/holland for our interview with Liberty University assoc. prof. of apologetics and theology Dr. Richard Holland on his research demonstrating, including with stunning examples, that for 1500 years, leading Christian theologians arguing for atemporality and utter immutability have NEVER ONCE defended those doctrines in light of the Incarnation. (Thus it is not surprising that James White and R.C. Sproul Jr. would have such a difficult time here, because they are attempting to wade into uncharted theological territory.)
- the full Enyart/White debate just below and at youtu.be/isRksh30ZUI,
- kgov.com/james-white for analysis and the complete aftermath.


To summarize James White's heretical position, while he very readily admits that Jesus has a divine and a human nature, he refuses to acknowledge the same of God the Son, that He has a divine and a human nature. God the Son and Jesus Christ are the same Person. White's refusal to acknowledge that God the Son has a human nature is a form of the Nestorian heresy, which even Sproul's own father has warned Christians about. It is almost as though, to defend the unbiblical teachings of utter immutability and atemporality, these men feel themselves pushed into a direction of broaching the horrifically false idea of Jesus as a fourth person of the Trinity. As made manifestly evident by Scripture, by Liberty University's Dr. Richard Holland in his book, God, Time, and the Incarnation, there are not two persons of Jesus and God the Son, but rather, the one Person of the Son who became Incarnate as Jesus Christ. Another way of spotting this error is to realize that James White is claiming that Jesus the Man became Man, but that God the Son did not become Man. And to paraphrase John Lennox, So it turns out that heresy is heresy .  

 * Is the Future Settled or Open? See the full debate between James White and Bob Enyart...


* Other RSR Interviews and Informal Debates: If you love Frank Turek (as we do here at Real Science Radio), you may also want to see some of our informal debates including with:
- Stand to Reason's Greg Koukl on Greg's Moral Relativism
Ann Coulter's Guilty on BEL
Neal Boortz vs. Enyart on a National Sales Tax
Pro-Choice Ilana Goldman on BEL