Mama Bear Apologetics: Empowering Your Kids to Challenge Cultural Lies, With Hillary Ferrer—The Alisa Childers Podcast #51
In today's episode, I talk with Hillary Ferrer of Mama Bear Apologetics about her new book, "Mama Bear Apologetics: Empowering Your Kids to Challenge Cultural Lies." As a contributor to the book, we discuss what the writing process was like, and talk about how we can teach our kids to discern the lies culture is telling them.
6/22/2019 12:04:49 pm
6/22/2019 12:47:48 pm
Hi Sean, first of all, thanks for taking the time to listen to the podcast, and for the kind words. Your question about airing opposing viewpoints from authorities in the field is a valid one so I'll do my best to answer.
6/22/2019 01:53:14 pm
WOW, thank you for publishing my comment! I was half expecting you to just trash it. Yes, that makes sense. I'm not sure what Professor Ehrman's intent is on his blog, but yes it seems the main device is to display his opinions on his findings on the historical Jesus and how that changed over time to evolve into what is today's Christianity.
6/24/2019 10:06:32 am
Sean, the whole point of my website is to provide the counterpoint to Ehrman, Enns, Et. all. You've stated Ehrman's view of the historical Jesus and the evolution of Christianity like its fact. I truly hope you've considered the counter to *his* viewpoints from educated professional sources like Blomberg, Kruger, Keener, Bird, and others. I'm glad you've found my site and pray you examine some of those counterpoints as you follow the evidence.
6/2/2021 03:43:58 am
Interesting that your concern is guarding against harming “the gospel”. Progressive Christians seem to be more concerned with what harms...people.
6/24/2019 10:52:58 am
Sean, Ehrman and Crossan are both excellent scholars, no question about it. They both do an excellent job of pointing out key facts that often refute the silly arguments of both hyper liberals and hyper conservatives on both sides. But both of them, like all scholars, do an IMMENSE amount of interpreting of these facts and these interpretations are often highly questionable.
6/24/2019 11:03:37 am
I should also say Sean, that Ehrman is not a progressive Christian and Crossan is not a part of the mainstream of progressive Christian thinkers. I have tried desperately to try to get a mainstream progressive Christian leader to debate me or someone more well known within the conservative evangelical community so as to present the very scenario you say you crave. I have reached out to them individually and to those who set up their speaking engagements. I have offered extremely generous scenarios where all expenses would be paid, a huge speaking fee would be given, we would work around their schedule. we would allow them to pick the moderators, etc., and they have all said no.
6/24/2019 12:18:51 pm
I snuck my opinion in there, maybe I shouldn't have. I've done great lengths of research on this, and at this point, I'm pretty set on what I think. However, I am willing to listen to everyone that has spent a lot of time in thought on this matter, including fundamentalists who I disagree with, such as yourself Alisa. My point is this: apologetics by design requires a counterpoint. There are a wide range of opinions on this matter, to include some really bright theologians, and if you are only displaying opinions of people who agree with your contentions, then it comes off one sided and isn't really apologetics.
6/24/2019 01:29:04 pm
Sean, Alisa is not a fundamentalist. That term has evolved in our country to mean something that she does not embrace. It is a condescending term used of our community as a way of stopping all debate, the very thing you say you are against. You may have done a great deal of research, but you must not have thought through the issues very carefully because absolutely nothing in Ehrman or Crossan or anyone else comes even close to refuting the case for biblical Christianity. You say we should follow the evidence wherever it leads and you are correct. You should keep seeking as you will see that the case for biblical Christianity far, far outweighs the case for any other worldview.
6/24/2019 02:30:48 pm
For the record.
6/24/2019 02:13:34 pm
Who asked you Dan? I think it would be healthy to entertain an opposing point of view Alisa, that’s all I was saying through all of this. If you’ve reached out to others and they have declined that’s fine, but I don’t think that is what you’re saying. In my view point you are a fundamentalist and that’s nothing to be ashamed of or get defensive about I don’t think.
6/24/2019 03:07:38 pm
Fundamentalism is one of those hot-button words that you definitely need to define if you're going to use it. In the progressive church I came out of, it was definitely a pejorative, even shortened to "fundies." So in that sense, many people hear it as an insult.
6/24/2019 03:13:22 pm
And here's a thought to consider. Do you ask the same of Ehrman that you do of me? Do you write him emails asking him to let conservative Christians give their views on his blog?
6/24/2019 03:30:09 pm
I also hope that I did not come off like I was speaking for Alisa. I would never intentionally do so. If we are talking about the original fundamentalists, especially the Reformed and Presbyterian wing led by Machen, then I am as rabid a fundamentalist as there is. I was only trying to say that the way that word is used today describes a belief system that I know from her writings that Alisa most certainly does not hold to.
6/24/2019 03:20:51 pm
No one asked me, but it is quite common on blogs to respond to the comments of others even when they are not directed towards oneself. If I said anything inappropriate Alisa would not allow my comment to be posted. If you can't handle debate that's on you. But how can you make such a big thing of accusing Alisa of not entertaining opposing viewpoints when you yourself are so dismissive? And don't act so innocent. You accused Alisa of coming off as weak in her points because she doesn't run her podcasts as you see fit. That is a serious accusation. You were not simply making benign suggestions. I'm sure Alisa has very good reasons for not having opponents on her show, she can speak for herself. But until she does so you should give her the benefit of the doubt and not call her points weak until you have dealt directly with her arguments, which it is becoming quite clear you have no intention of doing.
6/24/2019 05:36:41 pm
Fundamentalism - not my definition, it came from the dictionary, take it up with them. Perhaps that can be revised.
6/24/2019 09:41:51 pm
Dictionaries get definitions wrong all the time. Or they are often overly simplistic given all the historical baggage and nuance that goes into any given definition.
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply.