Home > Apologetics-Notes Blog
Blog Archive
Followers
Come Reason's Apologetics Notes blog will highlight various news stories or current events and seek to explore them from a thoughtful Christian perspective. Less formal and shorter than the www.comereason.org Web site articles, we hope to give readers points to reflect on concerning topics of the day.
Powered by Blogger.
Saturday, September 06, 2014
Top Five Blog Posts for August
Below are the top five apologetics blog posts for the month of August. Articles on atheism were the most popular, but we saw a significant amount of traffic when I responded to Ann Coulter's criticism of Kent Brantly, the American missionary doc who contracted Ebola. Rounding out the top five is an article with theological impact and an observation that skeptics seem to not be skeptical of their own viewpoints. Here are the links:
1. Atheist insults believers and is stunned at the response
2. Atheists contradict themselves by seeking invocations
3. Ann Coulter is Wrong: People are More than Numbers
4. Why didn't God create a world where everyone would go to heaven?
5. Why isn't the skeptic skeptical about his morality?
Labels:
apologetics,
atheism,
blog posts,
top five
Friday, September 05, 2014
The Strength of a Cumulative Case
Modern movie-making has come a long way
in terms of special effects. Audiences gasp in awe during scenes in adventure
stories such as Journey to the Center of the Earth, where the heroes stumble
upon extraordinary locations during their quest, seeing things few humans have
ever beheld. Our exploration of the Christian faith can give us a similar sense
of awe as we travel through its unique tenets, finding new ways of thinking
about things we believe and the way God works in each of us. Some of its
grandeurs and vistas are as breath-taking as climbing to the rim of the Grand
Canyon, looking out and trying to take in its vastness. Of course, the Canyon is
so massive that we only get a glimpse of one small portion. We can never see it
all and see it intimately at the same time, but still understanding there is a
greatness there that we can at least begin to appreciate. This really is how it
feels to seek out knowledge of the one True God.
Seeking to find out if there's a God is a basic part of being human; it's one of those "big questions" that I talked about before. As human beings, we want to know where we came from, why the world works the way it does, and how things will eventually turn out. Belief in God begins to answer these questions. It becomes the very first step in defending our faith, since it entails ideas that we will use in the rest of our journey.
So as we start to scale the tall cliffs that show us the existence of God, it makes sense to take the advice of our wise friend Pooh, above, and understand exactly what it is we're looking for. The basic notion that there is a God is nothing new; all societies have held it in some form since the beginning of recorded history. But what does the notion of God really mean? We assume that when we say "God," everyone understands what we are talking about, but this may not be true. Therefore, if we're going to look for evidence that God exists, it becomes necessary for us to define just what qualities we should be looking for at a minimum. What are the things that make God, God and everything else not a god? We're not looking at all of God's attributes right now, just something that differentiates God from everything else.
In rock climbing, there are different techniques used to help aid the climber and ensure his safety. Some will use a system of ropes and anchors to climb up a tall face —the climber will be attached to a safety rope by his belt, and as he makes his way up the face, he will nail an anchor to the rock that holds a clip. He then clips his rope to that anchor and continues up. This way if the climber slips, he may fall a ways, but the anchor will catch the rope and he won't fall all the way to the bottom. If that anchor pulls out, then the next anchor will hopefully catch him, and so on.
This is an example of building a case with "leaky buckets." The idea is if one argument is found to be weak or has a hole in it (like a bucket that has a leak), there's another bucket underneath to catch the water. Each argument doesn't really strengthen the case, is simply helps catch any mistakes. If our climber has a series of bad anchors when he slips, then he'll never reach the top of his climb and it will be pretty scary coming back down!
Another way to climb is to tie off the rope at the top of the cliff before the climber starts his ascent. The rope can help support the climber as he climbs and it's safer, since the rope is anchored to a solid object before the climb even begins. The climber can also know the rope reaches all the way to the top, so he knows he can get there even if he's pulled up. Now imagine that our climber doesn't have just one rope that will hold his weight, but four ropes attached to him instead, all anchored from the top of the rim. Each rope can stand on its own and support the rock climber's weight, but weaving four different ropes together makes a support system so strong, it's nearly impossible to fail.
This is the type of evidence for God I offer. Each of these four arguments goes "all the way to the top" in supporting the existence of God. Each can hold its own weight. But taken together, they point very strongly to God's existence. You may hold some doubt concerning any one of these arguments, but once you put them together, their total becomes amazingly strong. And remember, any other theory for how and why we're here should 1) offer an explanation of each of these points that is stronger than what I'm offering, and 2) offer accounts that are all consistent with one another in explaining the evidence we see to give us good reason to choose to that argument over a belief in God.
Seeking to find out if there's a God is a basic part of being human; it's one of those "big questions" that I talked about before. As human beings, we want to know where we came from, why the world works the way it does, and how things will eventually turn out. Belief in God begins to answer these questions. It becomes the very first step in defending our faith, since it entails ideas that we will use in the rest of our journey.
So as we start to scale the tall cliffs that show us the existence of God, it makes sense to take the advice of our wise friend Pooh, above, and understand exactly what it is we're looking for. The basic notion that there is a God is nothing new; all societies have held it in some form since the beginning of recorded history. But what does the notion of God really mean? We assume that when we say "God," everyone understands what we are talking about, but this may not be true. Therefore, if we're going to look for evidence that God exists, it becomes necessary for us to define just what qualities we should be looking for at a minimum. What are the things that make God, God and everything else not a god? We're not looking at all of God's attributes right now, just something that differentiates God from everything else.
A fourfold cord: presenting a cumulative case
In beginning our climb to discover the reasons for believing in God's existence, we want to make sure we're on the firmest footing possible. I am going to be building what is known as a cumulative case argument for God's existence. A cumulative case argument is one where we have several different arguments all pointing to the same conclusion. What a cumulative case argument is not is a series of arguments meant to be safety nets for each other. Let me try to clarify this a bit more.In rock climbing, there are different techniques used to help aid the climber and ensure his safety. Some will use a system of ropes and anchors to climb up a tall face —the climber will be attached to a safety rope by his belt, and as he makes his way up the face, he will nail an anchor to the rock that holds a clip. He then clips his rope to that anchor and continues up. This way if the climber slips, he may fall a ways, but the anchor will catch the rope and he won't fall all the way to the bottom. If that anchor pulls out, then the next anchor will hopefully catch him, and so on.
If an explanation rejects God and suggests another reason for the evidence of
existence, design, morality, and history, that explanation should:
- Offer an account for each of these points that is stronger than God as an explanation, and
- Offer accounts that are all consistent with one another in explaining the evidence we see.
This is an example of building a case with "leaky buckets." The idea is if one argument is found to be weak or has a hole in it (like a bucket that has a leak), there's another bucket underneath to catch the water. Each argument doesn't really strengthen the case, is simply helps catch any mistakes. If our climber has a series of bad anchors when he slips, then he'll never reach the top of his climb and it will be pretty scary coming back down!
Another way to climb is to tie off the rope at the top of the cliff before the climber starts his ascent. The rope can help support the climber as he climbs and it's safer, since the rope is anchored to a solid object before the climb even begins. The climber can also know the rope reaches all the way to the top, so he knows he can get there even if he's pulled up. Now imagine that our climber doesn't have just one rope that will hold his weight, but four ropes attached to him instead, all anchored from the top of the rim. Each rope can stand on its own and support the rock climber's weight, but weaving four different ropes together makes a support system so strong, it's nearly impossible to fail.
This is the type of evidence for God I offer. Each of these four arguments goes "all the way to the top" in supporting the existence of God. Each can hold its own weight. But taken together, they point very strongly to God's existence. You may hold some doubt concerning any one of these arguments, but once you put them together, their total becomes amazingly strong. And remember, any other theory for how and why we're here should 1) offer an explanation of each of these points that is stronger than what I'm offering, and 2) offer accounts that are all consistent with one another in explaining the evidence we see to give us good reason to choose to that argument over a belief in God.
References
Image courtesy MakKuyper and licensed by the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.
Labels:
apologetics,
argumentation,
existence of God,
witnessing
Thursday, September 04, 2014
If You Ignore the Trinity, You Ignore the Gospel
Over at Patheos' Progressive Christian Channel, Presbyterian Church USA
pastor Mark Sandlin posted an article entitled "No
Trinity For Me, Please." Given Sandlin had previously written in the same
space that he
denies the deity of Jesus, this shouldn't come as a huge surprise. However,
in this article Sandlin argues in a way that may sound convincing even to
evangelicals. He writes:
If you believe something like this, may I tell you in the kindest way possible that you are completely wrong? Because you are. As Dr. Fred Sanders wrote in his compelling book The Deep Things of God: How the Trinity Changes Everything, "the doctrine of the Trinity inherently belongs to the gospel itself."2 Let's look at some aspects of the work of Christ's atonement on the cross to see just how dependent it is on the concept of the Trinity.
The Trinity is necessary for the gospel. One cannot be separated from the other. Sanders sums it up nicely in his book:
2.Sanders, Fred. The Deep Things of God: How the Trinity Changes Everything. Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway, Kindle Edition, 2010. 9.
3. Romans 5:7-10,ESV Study Bible: English Standard Version. Wheaton, Ill: Crossway Bibles, 2007. Print.
4. 1 Cor. 15:17.
5. John 2:21, John 10:18
6. Romans 8:11
7. Sanders, Ibid.
Admittedly, the Trinity is an interesting theory and it certainly quelled some of the early Church's division on the nature of God, but it is just that – a theory.Many conservative Christians believe perhaps some of what Sandlin says above. They think that while the Trinity is a concept that helps theologians overcome certain obstacles in reconciling some snippets of scripture, it is more esoteric and "head knowledge" than the central message of the gospel, which is the message we should truly be sharing.
…I'm not saying the theory of Trinity is wrong. I'm just not saying it's definitively right, which is exactly what many of its adherents do when they say that if you don't believe in the Trinity, you can't be Christian.
Here's the thing, if the Trinity is that important, doesn't it seem like Jesus or the book of Acts or Paul or James or Peter or John would have talked more directly about it?
The lack of biblical witness leaves me to believe that either there simply was no understanding of a Trinitarian God at the time books of the Bible were written, or that the concept was so unimportant to their faith that it mostly wasn't mentioned.
So, why do we make it so important?1
If you believe something like this, may I tell you in the kindest way possible that you are completely wrong? Because you are. As Dr. Fred Sanders wrote in his compelling book The Deep Things of God: How the Trinity Changes Everything, "the doctrine of the Trinity inherently belongs to the gospel itself."2 Let's look at some aspects of the work of Christ's atonement on the cross to see just how dependent it is on the concept of the Trinity.
The Trinity Demonstrates God's Sacrifice is the Greatest
The Trinity is necessary for understanding the total sacrifice of Christ for our sins. Paul in Romans 5 puts it this way:For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die—but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life.3Notice how Paul makes a distinction in the passage above with the words God and Christ. He argues that a person giving up his own life for a righteous man would be a great sacrifice; it would mean more that a person gave up his life for an unrighteous man. However, we have been "reconciled to God by the death of His Son." It's one thing to lay down one's own life, which Jesus did in following the will of the Father. It's a completely different level of sacrifice to lay down the life of your beloved son for the sake of an enemy! Without the concept of the Trinity, this level of sacrifice is missed.
The Trinity Allows Jesus to Atone for All Humanity
Jesus' offering of Himself to the Father reconciles us to God. But only the blood of the second person of the Trinity could possibly atone for the sins of all humanity. Anything less wouldn't have a universal effect. Romans 8:3-4 is very clear here: "For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit." The writer to the Hebrews completes the thought:But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God.Jesus needed to appear in the heavenly realms, in the true Holy of Holies to atone for sinful humanity. He couldn't be just a man, as a righteous man might be able to pay for the sins of an unrighteous man, but Jesus paid for the sins of all flesh.
…So Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.
The Trinity Makes Resurrection Possible
The atonement is not the full Gospel. Any presentation of the Gospel message must not stop at Christ's death, but also include His resurrection. We know that without the resurrection of the dead, "you are still in your sins."4 Jesus said that his resurrection was his own to do,5 and Paul tells us that our future resurrection from the dead depends on God's Holy Spirit, who also raised Jesus: "If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you."6 Thus, without the Trinity, there would be no resurrection and no hope for us. We would be "of all people the most pitied."The Trinity is necessary for the gospel. One cannot be separated from the other. Sanders sums it up nicely in his book:
Nothing we do as evangelicals makes sense if it is divorced from a strong experiential and doctrinal grasp of the coordinated work of Jesus and the Spirit, worked out against the horizon of the Father's love. Personal evangelism, conversational prayer, devotional Bible study, authoritative preaching, world missions, and assurance of salvation all presuppose that life in the gospel is life in communion with the Trinity. Forget the Trinity and you forget why we do what we do; you forget who we are as gospel Christians; you forget how we got to be like we are.7
References
1.Sandlin, Mark. "No Trinity For Me, Please." Patheos. Patheos, 20 Aug. 2014. Web. 04 Sept. 2014. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/thegodarticle/2014/08/no-trinity-for-me-please.2.Sanders, Fred. The Deep Things of God: How the Trinity Changes Everything. Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway, Kindle Edition, 2010. 9.
3. Romans 5:7-10,ESV Study Bible: English Standard Version. Wheaton, Ill: Crossway Bibles, 2007. Print.
4. 1 Cor. 15:17.
5. John 2:21, John 10:18
6. Romans 8:11
7. Sanders, Ibid.
Labels:
gospel,
salvation,
theology,
Trinity,
witnessing
Wednesday, September 03, 2014
Ten Books That Have Influenced Me in Unique Ways
I've been challenged to list ten books that have stayed with me in some way.
This is a hard list to write, because there are so many books that have
influenced both my thinking and my approach to the world. Of course the Bible
has had the biggest impact on my life and that from second grade on. But anyone's
scripture should influence their beliefs if they take them seriously.
In order to give a more well-rounded feel to my list, I've decided to list ten books that became symbolic of certain points in my life. These books did impact me but they are more than that. Like a song a couple hears on their first date, these books capture certain eras in my life and point to a change in direction in some way. There were contenders like My Antonia or reference works like Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview and Haley's Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible, but I think the ten I've chosen cover some of that kind of ground pretty well.
Other pieces of literature also evokes strong memories of the past. Short stories such as Jack London's "To Build a Fire" or J.D. Salinger's "A Perfect Day for Bannanafish." Poetry played a part in my life as well, with Robert Frost's "Birches" or "Stopping By the Woods on a Snowy Evening" or Shakespearean sonnets and the challenge of a good villanelle.
Lately I tend to mostly read non-fiction, which helps me in my profession, but may be to my detriment. Be that as it may, here are ten books that influenced me in unique ways from elementary school through today, in order of their appearance:
In order to give a more well-rounded feel to my list, I've decided to list ten books that became symbolic of certain points in my life. These books did impact me but they are more than that. Like a song a couple hears on their first date, these books capture certain eras in my life and point to a change in direction in some way. There were contenders like My Antonia or reference works like Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview and Haley's Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible, but I think the ten I've chosen cover some of that kind of ground pretty well.
Other pieces of literature also evokes strong memories of the past. Short stories such as Jack London's "To Build a Fire" or J.D. Salinger's "A Perfect Day for Bannanafish." Poetry played a part in my life as well, with Robert Frost's "Birches" or "Stopping By the Woods on a Snowy Evening" or Shakespearean sonnets and the challenge of a good villanelle.
Lately I tend to mostly read non-fiction, which helps me in my profession, but may be to my detriment. Be that as it may, here are ten books that influenced me in unique ways from elementary school through today, in order of their appearance:
-
Encyclopedia Brown: Boy Detective – Donald J. Sobol
This was the first series I read from second to fourth grade where I absolutely had to have them all. I remember George the Shy Stegosaurus or The Borrowers which I also loved, but this series set me off to challenge my mind and solve problems. I wanted to be Encyclopedia Brown!
-
The Lord of the Rings – J.R.R. Tolkien
I got to read The Hobbit in eight grade, just before a trip to the Renaissance Faire, and that was all it took. I devoured The Lord of the Rings, and came back to them several times, once even conquering all three books in six days. Tolkien's attention to detail was genius and his ability to capture true moral struggle while showing why being good for the sake of goodness is a message that is crucial for today.
-
Heart of Darkness – Joseph Conrad
Ah, AP English class. We read all kinds of things, like Othello and other works, but Heart of Darkness encapsulated the peak of high school. I was simply amazed at Conrad, who was a native Polish speaker, command of English. He seems to capture the antithesis of Tolkien: an unchecked drive to conquer and lift one's self above others leads to self-cannibalism.
- Brave
New World – Aldous Huxley
I could say so much about this book, but I actually have done so in a more extended post here.
-
The Screwtape Letters – C.S. Lewis
One cannot approach a list like this without listing C.S. Lewis in some way. While Mere Christianity, The Great Divorce, and other titles are all huge in their impact, it was really The Screwtape Letters that got me thinking about my own spiritual walk and the reality of capitulating to the enemy when I give into sin. Good self-check here.
- Questions That Matter: An Invitation to Philosophy – Ed L. Miller
This is a text book (!) that is very popular across the country in college Intro to Philosophy courses and one of my Top Ten Neglected Books for Apologists. Miller captures the main concepts across the discipline of philosophy and includes significant portions of key texts. He doesn't resolve the problem for the student, but allows the reader to explore the ideas presented. This book cemented my love of philosophy and helped me being to think more clearly about those questions that really do matter.
- Love Your God with all Your Mind - J.P. Moreland
This was the book that really resonated with me as a young apologist; it said everything I wanted to say to the Christian church collectively, and so much better. Simply put, all believers need to read this book. J.P. has since become a friend and a mentor, and I still look to him today to help me with clearing the cobwebs out of my mental attic.
- God, Freedom, and Evil – Alvin Plantinga
How could an all-good, all-powerful God exist and still allow evil in the world. Alvin Plantinga here lays out the case to why evil and God are not contradictory. It also pointed me towards a more robust idea of God's middle knowledge, which balances the tension between freedom of choice and God's predestination.
-
Playing with Fire: How the Bible Ignites Change in Your Soul – Walt
Russell
When I first came in contact with Dr. Walt Russell, he literally changed the way I read the Bible. This book is the culmination of his teaching. It helped me take the proper context of scripture, lose the idea that verses can be applied outside of the larger work, and help refine how I understood biblical inerrancy.
-
How Christianity Changed the World – Alvin J. Schmidt
Another in my Top Ten Neglected Books list (really, you should just read them all), it is still my go-to book of choice for the real-world implications of Christianity. The value of every human being, the birth of hospitals, orphanages, and educational institutions as we know them today all have their roots in the Christian worldview. Schmidt doesn't simply give you dry facts and figures. Rather, he tells of how Christianity uniquely civilized our civilization in a very readable way. It's where the rubber meets the road in comparing worldviews.
Tuesday, September 02, 2014
10 Conflicting Beliefs of Modern Atheism
Recently, I saw an article by Ben Johnson on Life Site News listing "15
contradictions you have to believe to fit in with pop culture." The article
was clever enough and it dealt mostly with the tension of conflicting beliefs of
those who would hold up abortion as acceptable. I decided to take a stab at a
similar list, looking at beliefs of the pop atheist community and how some of
their views sit in conflict with one another. Below are ten beliefs that I've
found most atheists to hold, and how they sit in conflict with other
affirmations. I've provided links to articles I've written that explore each of
these statements a bit more. For item #5, though, you'll have to grab a copy of
True Reason and read my chapter on the argument from reason to get a
fully developed argument.
- Apparent design in creation can usually be explained, even if the explanation appeals to transitions and development even when science has absolutely no clue as to how such development occurred. However, appealing to a designer should be immediately dismissed as a "God of the Gaps" argument.
- Good and evil are not objective, but simply the shared preferences of individual cultures and they can change from culture to culture – unless one is talking about the God of the Bible. He's objectively evil.
- Since miracles are much more rare than our everyday experiences, it would be more reasonable to ascribe a seemingly inexplicable event to possible sources we know could account for the event. However, assuming something like the cell that shows fantastic complexity and apparent design is actually the product of design is completely unreasonable.
- The fact that divergent religious claims try to explain the existence of the cosmos prove that all religions are false while the fact that there are divergent scientific theories seeking to explain the existence of the cosmos is how knowledge is acquired and is necessary to eventually arrive at the right conclusion.
- Reason is the only reliable way to establish what is true, and we reason with brains that evolved only for survival value with no regard for the truth of a belief.
- Science is a field of study centered in experimentation and observation and science dictates that life came from nonliving material, even though in the entire history of mankind, no one has ever once observed life coming from non-life.
- It is only through planning, intelligence, and hard work that scientist have been able to extend the lives of human beings while the very life they extend is ultimately the product of no planning, no intelligence, and mere accident.
- The Universe came into existence from nothing – and that nothing is made up of at least two things: quantum fluctuations and time.
- All human beings are the product of evolutionary forces including survival of the fittest, which means that only those who hold the best attributes will advance the species, but all human beings are completely equal and no one is more valuable than another.
- Belief in God is a delusion, religion is a virus and it is morally wrong to push religious beliefs on other by expressing them in invocations or other community-centered meetings, which is why atheists seek to push their belief of the nonexistence of God upon all aspects of society.
Labels:
atheism,
beliefs,
logic,
New atheists,
worldview
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
© 1999 – 2014 Come Reason Ministries. All rights reserved.