Reasons For Faith: A Couple Of My Interviews

meradioI recently re-listened to a couple of radio/podcast interviews I have done on why I am a Christian. I thought these may be of benefit and interest to readers, so I decided to post the links here.

The following one is mostly about intelligent design and why I think a case can be made from biological evidence for the role of an intelligent causal agent in the development of life on earth. The total duration is 37 minutes.

Biologist Interview: Jonathan McLatchie (Apologetics 315)

In the following interview, I discuss why I am a Christian and address common objections such as “How do you know God exists?” “How do you know the Bible is reliable?” “How can you believe in miracles?” “How do you know Jesus existed?” “What about the problem of evil and suffering in the world?” “How could a loving God send people to Hell?” “Why should a Christian do apologetics?” and “What about homosexuality?” The total duration is 120 minutes.

Theology Matters With The Pellews

The first is a good introductory crash course to the arguments for intelligent design in biology. The second covers broader material, and discusses some of my reasons for being a Christian. I start out fairly quiet in the second interview, and am somewhat hard to make out. You can tell I was nervous, with it being one of my first live interview experiences. After we get going though I speak far more clearly.

I hope readers find these interviews edifying.

Free CrossExamined.org Resource

Get the first chapter of "Stealing From God: Why Atheists Need God to Make Their Case" in PDF.

Powered by ConvertKit
19 replies
    • William says:

      The other extreme: any Just and Holy God who let’s anyone into Heaven is diabolical. A good God wouldn’t send everyone into hell and a good God wouldn’t allow everyone into heaven. Let’s get to the root. What is a good God and why would a good God have morals?

      Reply
      • Martin says:

        Actually, a just and holy god would let anyone into heaven… automatically and from the get go.

        A just and holy god wouldn’t put his beloved creations through a pointless and rigged game of Earthly life. which serves only to as an excuse to send people to hell.

        Reply
          • Toby says:

            Mr. T., you, and other theistic debaters, often shift the topic of objective morality from matters of epistemology to ontology, but I’d like to know how you know that objective morality exists. Is it intuition? The bible? Please explain.

            Another thing I’ve been thinking about lately is the idea of justice in reference to an all-powerful being. If an all-powerful, great being cannot create equally great creatures then by what grounds does it have to hold them to account for their actions? Why is justice such a big deal to god? No payment or punishment can make a past action unhappen. Justice appears illusory. We practice it and have a concept of it to keep us safe and use as a deterrent, but is locking someone in a cell for five years for robbing a post office equivalent? Can’t unrob it. Why is it not enough to simply return the money or stamps or self-sealing envelopes? Is robbing a post office worthy of eternal torment? It seems that justice deals more with vengeance in both the world’s legal systems and your otherworldly system. “You did bad, now you must pay.” Is that a great making quality?

          • moose says:

            frank-we all need to be held accountable for our actions in this lifetime on this earth. the hell (fantasy) kind of says we deserve a 2nd punishment in an afterlife–why?? charles manson has been sitting in prison for over 40 years–and that is where he belongs, but does he deserve another afterlife punishment? those of his ilk are locked up as they are a threat to society. if people are in hell, who are they a threat to? the hell fantasy seems more like god getting revenge on those who don’t spend their lives worshipping him and telling him how great he is (telepathically of course). the hell fantasy is just laughable.

          • Terry L says:

            Toby:

            You’re beginning to understand more than you think!

            >>No payment or punishment can make a past action unhappen.

            Exactly! Our sin makes us incompatible with Heaven for eternity. We are destined to spend eternity separated from God from the start.

            The Bible isn’t the story of God wanting to gleefully dump sinners into hell; it’s the story of God sending his son and doing everything he can to prevent them from going there.

            Someone had to pay the price of eternal separation from God. The price is ours to pay, but Jesus took our place… if we accept his gift of salvation. He, being God himself and therefore an infinite being, could pay the entire infinite debt (a debt he did not owe) and therefore make a way for us to be with God in Heaven.

            >>“You did bad, now you must pay.” Is that a great making quality?

            Think of more like this: You’re a morally imperfect being. Perfection requires an absolute. If there’s any one thing about something that’s not perfect, then the thing itself is imperfect.

            If Heaven is perfection, then to admit you as an imperfect being would make Heaven imperfect. If you’ve got snow white carpet in your home (don’t ask me why you would… just go with it), you don’t want your dog running through the house with muddy feet.

            The only way you can enter Heaven is to be transformed into something perfect. That’s what Paul says happens to believers. And, your past debt (separation from God for eternity) must be paid. Jesus’s sacrifice enables both to happen… but only if you are willing.

            And God doesn’t demand that you do great things to show that you’re willing; you don’t have to write a symphony or serve for 20 years as a missionary in Africa. All you have to do is trust in his son and accept his sacrifice in place of your own.

        • Jon says:

          Martin, I think you won this argument. Whenever apologists don’t have anything to say they go the standard knee-jerk apologist questioning; how do you define X?, where do you get X?, … “objective”…?, how do you know that?, where you there?
          With those they try to pull you in to their two-step dance and that’s when you know you won the argument.

          Reply
          • Stephen B says:

            Yeah, in any other argument you don’t get one person saying “But how do you KNOW that ordering genocide is wrong? How do you KNOW that ordering someone to kill their own son is wrong?”.

          • Frank Turek says:

            Gentlemen, I was giving no argument, just asking a question. I and others have written at length in books and articles about the fact that objectivity in truth and morality requires God (not necessarily the God of the Bible, but an unchangeable standard derived from a theistic God consistent with the God of the Bible) . Forgive me for not wanting to rehash everything on this blog again. My only reason for asking the question is to see if the one making the claim has considered that such a standard must exist for the claim to succeed. Absent such a standard, everything is a matter of opinion. Therefore, no one could “win an argument” because objective arguments don’t really exist, just subjective feelings.

            Thanks again for participating here.

            Blessings,

            Frank

          • Jon says:

            Frank Turek, we all know the standard approach apologist use. Rather than addressing or defending the subject in hand, apologist want to argue definitions, foundations, epistemology, ontology etc. by “just asking a question”. This nicely stalls any discussion and obfuscates any problem allowing apologist to defend their position without saying anything. You know that many philosophers don’t think there is “objective” standard and see God Objective X as circular argument. And even if that would be true people don’t see how David Koresh’s or Hitchens’ writings would offer correct standard even if it is objective. If it depends on one person (God?) it is subjective, not re-defined “objective”.

            Anyways you managed to derail this fork of discussion and achieved your goal to move from the difficult subject of hell to more comfortable topic of standards. Straight from the first chapter of basic apologist books!

            BTW, Props for letting people with opposite views to comment on your blog. So many religious blogs and site (which claim to invite discussion) block comments and commenters who have opposite views.

        • Louie says:

          Hold up a minute, Mr. Hitchens told Frank that “heaven would be hell” to him. Any you want to send him there automatically? Interesting.

          Reply
        • Terry L says:

          >>Actually, a just and holy god would let anyone into heaven… automatically and from the get go.

          So I assume you have an open door policy at your house? Anyone can come and go as they please?

          You would let people in that hate you? Grant them all of the blessings of the house, everything that you’ve acquired for your children… they can walk in and take it no strings attached?

          Reply
          • Jon says:

            Terry L, I have open door policy at my house to everyone who I’ve created. I have created space and resources in the house to have open door policy for them. And even if I would not let everyone in I would not sent the others to a torture chamber in my basement.

          • Martin says:

            Terry-

            Letting everyone into heaven automatically and from the get go would completely avoid the possibility that there could be God haters in heaven. Why would anyone hate God if they were in essence born in Heaven? They wouldn’t. Unless God and heaven aren’t all they’re cracked up to be.

            Why should there be any strings attached at all?

            As I said earlier, Earthly life if pointless if God exists. Earthly life doesn’t serve a good or noble purpose. It only causes the majority of humanity to fail. It’s a huge and unnecessary stumbling block. But it’s God’s way of insuring that hell gets populated with as many people as he’d like. That’s the only possible reason for its existence.

            All still-born babies get a free ticket into heaven. No strings attached. Did they earn their entry? No. Does God love them any less? No. Is there any valid reason for anyone to be born and go through the gauntlet of Earthly life when they can be born directly into heaven? There is none, but that the god of the Bible is capricious and vengeful.

  1. Toby says:

    Frank, could you point me to your specific book or someone’s explanation of this:

    “Mr. T., you, and other theistic debaters, often shift the topic of objective morality from matters of epistemology to ontology, but I’d like to know how you know that objective morality exists. Is it intuition? The bible? Please explain.”

    Reply
  2. Toby says:

    “Exactly! Our sin makes us incompatible with Heaven for eternity. We are destined to spend eternity separated from God from the start.

    Someone had to pay the price of eternal separation from God. The price is ours to pay, but Jesus took our place… if we accept his gift of salvation. He, being God himself and therefore an infinite being, could pay the entire infinite debt (a debt he did not owe) and therefore make a way for us to be with God in Heaven.”

    Terry, how does that not sound like a bunch of convoluted muck to you? God, an infinite being incapable of being anything but what he is, creates imperfect beings who aren’t worthy to hang out with him, so he turns himself into a perfect imperfect being, so that he can spill his blood and for some reason this makes himself happy because the curse of imperfection is lifted but only under conditions that the imperfect being acknowledges this bloody sacrifice and knows it’s their fault. You’re a smart guy. Why all the rigmarole? And please don’t answer that you can’t know his ways because that’s so dishonest when his followers tell us so much about him all the time.

    And how can a perfect being make something that isn’t perfect? You’ll say it’s our choice, but that’s a load of smelly stuff. You didn’t eat a piece of fruit off of a tree you were told not to eat from. Did you choose to be born? Tell us logically how a perfect being can create things that are imperfect. Do you really believe that your god is incapable of creating free beings that are perfect?

    Reply
    • moose says:

      amen to everything toby said. terry——if all the stuff you all proclaim is true–what kind of a weird, twisted game is your god playing???????????,

      “christianity-the belief that a cosmic jewish zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbollically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master so he can remove an evil force from you soul that is present in humanity because a rib woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree”

      anonymous

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *