Humble Servant (@BahnsenProject) header
Humble Servant (@BahnsenProject) profile picture

https://nitter.gq/t.co/BOlNhQXXHR; https://nitter.gq/t.co/iQ6tx5Okwi Deacon. Theology, polemics, apologetics and quotes from Greg Bahnsen and R.J. Rushdoony⚔️

Temporary Home
Joined June 2012
Photo by Humble Servant (@BahnsenProject)Photo by Humble Servant (@BahnsenProject)Photo by Humble Servant (@BahnsenProject)Photo by Humble Servant (@BahnsenProject)Photo by Humble Servant (@BahnsenProject)Photo by Humble Servant (@BahnsenProject)Photo by Humble Servant (@BahnsenProject)
Humble Servant retweeted
When I was Muslim, I thought Christians could never answer this. I would challenge them on this technicality. Bro, I thought I was so slick for this, but then I studied it. For years when I was Muslim, I never asked who actually built the golden calf. I just knew it was a sin in the desert. Then I read both accounts and one detail stopped me cold. In the Bible, the man who builds the golden calf is AARON. Aaron is Moses’ own brother. The first high priest (Exodus 32:4) He gathers the gold, melts it, shapes the idol. And when Moses confronts him, he gives the weakest excuse in scripture: “I threw the gold in the fire and out came this calf.” As if it made itself. Bro. The Bible just put the worst sin in the camp in the hands of the holiest man in the camp. You would NEVER write that if you were protecting your prophets. Now read the Quran. Surah 20. Aaron is cleared and totally innocent. In fact, he tried to stop it. The blame goes to a mystery man called “al-Samiri.” That literally translates to “The Samaritan.” (Surah 20:85) But this is what stopped me cold. The Bible incriminates its own high priest. The Quran writes him an alibi and invents a villain. The Bible reads like an honest record. The Quran reads like damage control. And there’s a second problem with that villain. “The Samaritan.” But Samaritans didn’t exist in Moses’ time. The city of Samaria wasn’t founded until about 500 years later, under King Omri. 1 Kings 16:24. It’s like putting a Texan at the Last Supper. Now, some Muslim scholars push back, saying that “Samiri” means something else. I’ll be fair, that argument exists. But their own classical commentators read it as “the Samaritan” for centuries. The defense only works by re-translating away from how the tradition always understood it. I used to say the Bible was corrupted. But the Bible is honest enough to say the high priest built the idol. That’s not the fingerprint of a cover-up. That’s the fingerprint of the truth! Only a book honest about how bad we are could point me to a Savior real enough to fix it. The Bible never flattered Aaron at all. It didn’t flatter me either. It just told me the truth, and handed me Jesus.
151
703
28
3,649
72,387
Humble Servant retweeted
The Bible explicitly pronounces that all are sinners.
31
33
1
353
4,012
Watched a sermon where the pastor said every person you label is a person God loves. I agree with him that we shouldn’t label a person but it doesn’t necessarily follow that God loves that person
24
The Belgic Confession is so edifying
21
Criticizing Islam Is Not Hating Muslims. Stop Deliberately Confusing the Two. There is a fundamental difference between hating Muslims in general as people and rejecting, or even despising, Islam as an ideology. There is absolutely nothing wrong with rejecting an ideology you consider morally bankrupt, politically dangerous, or fundamentally incompatible with democracy, freedom, justice, and equality. No ideology has a sacred right to be loved, respected, or protected from criticism. Yet some people deliberately erase that distinction. They equate criticism of Islam with hatred of Muslims, not because they cannot understand the difference, but because conflating the two is a convenient weapon against critics. I openly criticize Islam as an ideology. I challenge its teachings, its political ambitions, and its moral foundations. But I have never called for hatred against Muslims as a group. My target is an ideology, not every person who follows it. And that is precisely the distinction they want to destroy. The accusation of “Islamophobia” has become a powerful instrument of intellectual intimidation in the West.
36
193
11
675
11,244
“He [Dr. Cornelius Van Til] really revolutionized Christian apologetics” Dr. Greg Bahnsen
1
4
74
Humble Servant retweeted
Fossilized vomit confirms the truth of Scripture. Researchers working in the North Sea area discovered “more than 20 fossilized masses” that contain “shells and other hard remains from marine prey.” Based on the composition of the vomit and what other fossils are found in the region, the researchers believe the vomit came from plesiosaurs—extinct marine reptiles. They believe this new find shows that plesiosaurs found their prey in deep water and then the reptiles returned to a river delta near the shore to rest and rid themselves of the indigestible parts. But how could vomit be preserved in the fossil record? The researchers note that’s not normal: “Most pellets would have been destroyed by waves and tides. Some survived because they were rapidly buried by sediment or swept into crustacean burrows on the seafloor. “[The paleontologist] said: “This vomit survived partly because it was so compacted and covered in mucus. Even so, most pellets would have been completely broken up by the waves and tides. Some clusters were, however, quickly covered by sediment arriving from the rivers, and some ended up in burrows left by crustaceans on the seafloor, where they were partially preserved and fossilized.” In other words, the vomit had to be rapidly preserved—very rapidly preserved—before the waves could break them apart or scavengers could pick them apart or decomposers could break them down. In today’s world, we don’t observe river deltas turning vomit into a regurgitalite (a fossil)! It takes unique conditions to make a fossil. In fact, forming a fossil really requires a catastrophic event. What’s also fascinating is what was discovered right beside the regurgitated material—an ichthyosaur bone and fossilized feces (coprolites). Also discovered nearby were fossil fragments of dinosaur footprints! What could preserve bone, vomit, feces, and footprints all together? Well, you need a catastrophe! You need something that could bury a large area very, very quickly, before erosion and decomposition can take place. And the Bible gives us the history we need to understand what we observe! There really was a global Flood, as described in Genesis. The evidence is overwhelming, but because secular scientists have the wrong starting point (man’s word), they come to the wrong interpretations of the evidence. Fossilized vomit is just another reminder that there really was a global Flood!
14
46
398
23,461
Humble Servant retweeted
The text of Genesis 1 clearly states that God supernaturally created all that is in six actual days.
99
70
6
826
12,776
Humble Servant retweeted
I found infallible proof of Noah's ark
285
452
38
12,050
107,391
Humble Servant retweeted
Genesis 1–11 is straightforward literal history.
54
67
9
800
11,769
“I hardly know a case where the atheist wasn’t begging the question over and over and over again. That is to say assuming what he’s supposed to be proving, and he says you can’t have miracles because they violate the laws of science and you say that’s exactly what makes them miraculous, now tell me why that can’t happen. How much would the atheist have to know to rule out miracles? He’d have to know everything, exactly. He’d have to be omniscient, but if the atheist were omniscient so that he could rule out miracles the atheist would then be God wouldn’t he. And so you couldn’t rule out God on the basis that there are no miracles because you have to be God to rule out the miracles” Dr. Greg Bahnsen
1
47
“If you say you’ve never seen the laws of physics broken and therefore there are no miracles basically you’re saying since I’ve never seen one there can’t be any… I mean that’s a terrible argument.. you’re supposed to be proving they cannot happen not just assume they cannot happen” Dr. Greg Bahnsen sermonaudio.com/sermons/2172…
1
38
“Atheists have a number of misconceptions, and one of them is that evil doesn’t fit in with the existence of God. As a matter of fact any judgement of evil proves the existence of God indirectly or eventually because without such a God you can’t make such a judgement” Dr. Greg Bahnsen sermonaudio.com/sermons/2172…
1
33
“All of their thinking can be reduced to absurdity if you’re just patient enough to let the atheist do the work for you. Ask the right questions, challenge the underlying assumptions, and point out the foolishness of that position” Dr. Greg Bahnsen sermonaudio.com/sermons/2172…
2
36
“You cannot condemn child molestation if you’re an atheist, or if you do the condemnation amounts only to this, it’s translated as that’s not my preference” Dr. Greg Bahnsen sermonaudio.com/sermons/2172…
1
23
“If you don’t believe in God then what defines right and wrong, what is the standard of right and wrong… there are no universal absolutes of morality if you don’t believe in God” Dr. Greg Bahnsen [the alleged problem of evil] sermonaudio.com/sermons/2172…
15