20 Things Christians Can Create to Share Truth With Others

20 Things Christians Can Create to Share Truth With Others

By Jeremy Linn

The Apologetics world is filled with truth-infused books and lectures, many of which have made a lasting impact on people. But in a culture that’s dominated by entertainment platforms like YouTube, Netflix, and Disney+, not everyone is drawn to read a 300-page book, or to watch a one-hour lecture on an Apologetics topic.

What can often appeal to people is entertaining, creative content that does not compromise on presenting powerful truth. Just as there is a need for books and lectures, there is a need for Christians to use creative content as a platform to share the truth with others.

With this need in mind, I’ll list out 20 types of creative content Christians can use to share truth about the Christian worldview. For each type, I’ll provide a content idea and an existing resource, with the hope that they will help you develop new content ideas.

  1. An Original Song

This is a nearly untouched area for Apologetics-type content. Music can provide a means to connect people with truth repeatedly in a way that can reach to people’s emotional core.

IDEA: Write a song about the order found in nature and how it points to an intelligent source.

RESOURCE: Christian rap artist Lecrae’s song Truth introduces concepts like the self-defeating nature of relative truth.

  1. A Video or Book Filled with Humor

Humor lightens the tension people can experience in listening to and considering truth about deep topics. It also forms connections and builds relationships between a creator and the audience.

IDEA: Make a video called “A Consistent Jesus Mythicist,” which shows a “mythicist” who makes strange attempts to deny the existence of various historical figures.

RESOURCES: The Muhammad’s Boom Boom Room YouTube series by Acts17Apologetics supplies a bundle of humor wrapped up in truth about the content in the Muslim holy book, the Quran. On the book side, The Atheist Who Didn’t Exist by Andy Bannister comments on objections to Christianity in a humorous way.

  1. An Entertaining Skit

Due to the entertainment value of a skit done well, a skit can draw people in to want to watch and consider content that they wouldn’t through a normal video presentation.

IDEA: Act out examples of what it would actually look like to live out “self-defeating statements.”

RESOURCE: The Apologetics YouTube channel Whaddo You Meme has released several entertaining skit videos.

  1. A New Analogy

Analogies give Christians practical ideas for presenting the truth to others, and they help a truth-seeker to connect a concept with everyday experiences.

IDEA: For people in engineering, compare the relationship between science and theology with the relationship between mechanical and electrical engineering. In the two relationships, both areas reveal the truth about different aspects of reality but integrate in some spots.

RESOURCE: The book Faith is like Skydiving by Apologist Rick Mattson provides analogies for multiple areas in Apologetics.

  1. A Magic Trick Routine

Magic creates an opportunity to talk about a topic while people watch eagerly in anticipation of what will happen next.

IDEA: Use a “disappearing coin” trick to discuss the need to see physical evidence vs. using “unseen” historical testimony as evidence.

RESOURCE: Magician Drew Worsham incorporates magic to introduce people to concepts related to the gospel.

  1. A Letterboard Post

A comment or quote shown on a letterboard will stick out to people on platforms like Instagram right away, causing then to read and consider whatever is written. They’re especially great for location-based organizations.

IDEA: Take a picture of a letterboard with a C.S. Lewis quotation at the C.S. Lewis museum in Illinois.

RESOURCE: The ministry Twin Cities Apologetics has shared letterboard posts on their Instagram page, with the pictures taken in their local area.

  1. A Satire Piece

Satire provides a perfect platform to combine truth, humor, and current events that are relevant to the reader.

IDEA: Write a satire piece called “10-year Challenge Reveals Richard Dawkins’ Chair Still Empty for His Debate With William Lane Craig.”

RESOURCE: The Babylon Bee has released some great satire pieces related to deep topics.

  1. A Relevant Meme

Memes provide an opportunity to work creativity and humor into sharing truth and often require little effort to produce and share. Adding a recent pop-culture reference can especially attract people to view and share the content.

IDEA: At the top of a meme, write “When someone says there’s no good evidence for the existence of Jesus.” On the bottom show the SpongeBob picture that says “Ight imma head out,” and paste on pictures of some of Paul’s letters, the gospels, and the works of historians like Josephus.

RESOURCE: The ministry Standardized Apologetics has done excellent work with creating high-quality, relevant, and impactful memes.

  1. An Interview Featuring Unique Questions

Interviews of well-known Apologists are abundant, which creates potential for questions to be repeated often. Discussion that features unique questions rather than the “same old” questions can help viewers think of a concept in a different way.

IDEA: Interview a Christian Apologist about the most difficult conversations they’ve had with an Atheist, and then a Christian, and ask what they learned from both experiences.

RESOURCE: The ministry Capturing Christianity featured an interview with Apologist William Lane Craig, where a unique question was asked about the arguments Craig is most and least confident in. The question provoked an intriguing response.

  1. An Interactive Game

A game creates an interactive environment where people want to actively think about the game and its contents.

IDEA: Write individual words/phrases on pieces of paper and hold a competition where participants pull together the sheets of paper to make the best (or funniest) philosophical argument they can.

RESOURCE: Perspective cards made by the organization Cru get people talking about worldviews in a fun and interactive way.

  1. A Fictional Story

A fictional story entertains and mentally transports the reader into a “new world,” all while applying real-world truth to the story.

IDEA: Write a story about “The Restart,” a made-up moment in history where everyone suddenly lost the memory of the past, and need to “start over” to determine what is true about the world.

RESOURCE: C.S. Lewis’ The Chronicles of Narnia is probably the most obvious example of a book that transports people to another world while applying Biblical truth throughout the story.

  1. An Artistic Poem 

Poetry appeals to a more abstract and artistic crowd – a crowd that may not be as attracted to a straight lecture. It opens people up to think about ideas in a different, relatable way.

IDEA: Write a descriptive poem about what you observe in nature and how it reveals the glory of a creator.

RESOURCE: T.S. Eliot’s “The Journey of the Magi” takes the Biblical account of the wise men and turns it into an imaginative poem which invites people to think about “death” and “birth” from a Christian standpoint.

  1. An Instagram Story Series

Instagram stories are a new wave of video content that many people are viewing daily. Instagram stories can drive traffic on that platform and can be repurposed for other platforms.

IDEA: Share 15-second clips of your experiences and some content from an Apologetics conference you attend.

RESOURCE: Jorge Gil from CrossExamined does an Instagram Livestream each weekday, where he talks about a deep topic and answers audience questions. He also shares Instagram stories on a regular basis.

  1. A Helpful Diagram

A diagram adds a visual element that allows people to better grasp the truth you are presenting.

IDEA: Lay out some of the arguments for God in a Venn diagram and show how some of the arguments overlap in what they tell us about God.

RESOURCE: It’s not exactly a diagram, but a video by Reasonable Faith provides a visual of the Kalam Cosmological Argument that helps people to see how the premises of the argument flow to the conclusion.

  1. Posts That Explore Unique Topics

Some topics that are addressed often in the Apologetics community (for example, the Moral Argument). Sharing content based on a topic not commonly addressed leads people to think about reality in a new way.

IDEA: Respond to the Atheist claim that Christians are “indoctrinated” by defining and analyzing the concept of indoctrination.

RESOURCE: The YouTube channel InspiringPhilosophy has released some impressive videos that cover topics not often addressed, especially related to the formation of the Universe.

  1. A Visual Presentation

As our culture consumes more video content, people in our culture are learning in a more visual way. Adding visuals to a public speaking opportunity can help people connect with the content presented.

IDEA: Present on the fine-tuning argument and provide visual representations of the precision for various constants needed to make life possible.

RESOURCE: J Warner Wallace creates engaging visual presentations as he guides his audience into an investigation around topics like Jesus’ resurrection.

  1. A Talent-Based Performance

When people see a talent performed in a way that displays excellence, they are generally willing to listen to truth and consider what is being said.

IDEA: If you are skilled at juggling, put together a juggling routine and talk about how God is needed to have order in the universe and to ground scientific laws like gravity.

RESOURCE: This is more of an example than a specific resource, but various Christian ministries use a mime performance to share truth related to the gospel.

  1. A Location-Based Video

Videos based on Apologetics topics are often filmed at a church or in someone’s room. A video filmed in a public place can create a more personal connection with people, especially those who live in the area the video is filmed in.

IDEA: Go to your nearest downtown location and film yourself talking about a topic relevant to the area you live in.

RESOURCE: Apologist David Wood filmed a continuous video through a city subway testimony, all while sharing his testimony and a load of truth throughout the video.

  1. A High-Quality Quote Post

Similar to the letterboard post, if you design a graphic featuring a quote where the words can be clearly read, and the background looks professional, it can draw people in to read the quote and consider the truth presented.

IDEA: Share a quote from Frank Turek about how Atheists need to borrow a foundation for morality from Christianity in order to discuss moral truth, featuring a graphic with a high-quality greyscale image of Frank.

RESOURCES: CrossExamined consistently shares high-quality quote posts. New York Apologetics also does a great job with sharing these types of posts.

  1. A Song Parody Video

Through a parody, you can take something that people can already relate to (like a popular song) and create something humorous that can get people thinking about truth presented in the lyrics.

IDEA: Take the music to Taylor Swift’s song “You Need To Calm Down,” change the title to “Is The Kalam Sound?” and write lyrics that defend the premises of the Kalam Cosmological Argument.

RESOURCE: There aren’t many parodies that feature Apologetics topics, but a band actually called Apolgetix creates song parody videos about topics related to scripture and the gospel.

These are not the only types of creative content that could be shared. But this list provides a look into the areas in which Christians can present truth in an attractive and entertaining way.

Do you want to begin sharing truth with others through creative content? Pick one of the things above, take a concept you have learned, and combine the two together to make something new. God can use your creative efforts to lead people in your local area – and even around the world – one step closer to truth.

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions by Greg Koukl (Book)

Practical Apologetics in Worldview Training by Hank Hanegraaff (Mp3)

The Great Apologetics Adventure by Lee Strobel (Mp3)

Defending the Faith on Campus by Frank Turek (DVD Set, mp4 Download set and Complete Package)

So the Next Generation will Know by J. Warner Wallace (Book and Participant’s Guide)

Reaching Atheists for Christ by Greg Koukl (Mp3)

Living Loud: Defending Your Faith by Norman Geisler (Book)

Fearless Faith by Mike Adams, Frank Turek and J. Warner Wallace (Complete DVD Series)

 

Jeremy is the co-founder of the ministry Twin Cities Apologetics and is an accountant for a law firm in Minneapolis, Minnesota. He’s also going to Bethel Seminary for a graduate degree in a program called Christian Thought (basically Apologetics!). Outside of Apologetics, Jeremy enjoys sports, playing guitar, and making videos.

/by
Bethlehem To Bedlam

Bethlehem To Bedlam

,

By Bob Perry

If Christmas is supposed to be about “Peace on Earth,” why all the chaos and stress at this time of year? It started when we, through an ironic accident of language, warped Bethlehem into bedlam. But the history of that change is incidental to what we’ve done since then. It starts every “Black Friday.” The truth is that God never promised us peace on Earth. But he did send a Savior to Bethlehem to offer peace between God and man. We can begin to reclaim the meaning of Christmas by first learning to turn bedlam back to Bethlehem.

Bethlehem Becomes Bedlam (Literally)

It all started back in 1247 when the Sheriff of London (a man named Simon FitzMary) founded a small monastery just outside the city. He dedicated it to serving the sisters and brothers of the holy order named “The Star of Bethlehem.” The monastery’s sponsoring church used the building to house and entertain the bishop and canons of St. Mary of Bethlehem. Soon, it became known as the Priory of St. Mary of Bethlehem.

By 1330, records show that the priory had become a hospital. And by 1403, some of its patients had begun to remain there permanently. When King Henry VIII later dissolved the Catholic monasteries in Britain, the city of London took over the hospital. In 1547 it was officially designated as an insane asylum. Soon, it became infamous for the brutal ill-treatment of those who lived there. People outside could hear the clamor, commotion, and pandemonium of the mentally disturbed patients inside. It didn’t take long for the locals to begin equating the name of the place with the chaos they heard emanating from within it. And because they spoke in a dialect that didn’t quite live up to the King’s English, their cockney pronunciation of Bethlehem came out as “bedlam.”

So, in a way that only human beings could contrive, the word we now use to describe lunacy and chaos actually has its source in the name of the city of Jesus’ birth.

What We’ve Made Christmas

The linguistic origin of “bedlam” is ironic. But the more modern way we have transformed Christmas from Bethlehem into bedlam is embarrassingly real. Though the madness begins earlier every year, “Black Friday” now marks the beginning of the Christmas season. In the past, that special day has come complete with mall shootings, annual brawls, and the frenzy we have come to expect both online and at our favorite retail locations.

The lunatics are shopping in the asylum.

Even people who aren’t Christians seem to realize that this madness is not “the reason for the season.” Jesus is. But the chaos in which we all participate is the reflection of a deeper flaw in the way we have come to celebrate his birth. We are complicit in turning what was supposed to be about the celebration of the birth of Christ into a consumer marketing extravaganza. And it started with the generous idea that we should give each other gifts.

Gift Giving Gone Haywire

There is some logic to the whole gift-giving idea we now associate with Christmas. God gave us the gift of his Son. The wise men (“Magi“) in the biblical story brought gifts to honor the newborn king. To memorialize those, we began giving gifts to one another. So far, so good.

But then we did something humans always tend to do. We took something good and corrupted it. Once we commercialized the gift-giving, the basement was the limit. Giving gifts became a form of worship. This year, the average American will spend about $920 for Christmas. That means that as a nation we spend over $1 Trillion. As a point of reference, the 2019 U. S. Defense Department budget was $652 Billion.

Maybe it’s just me, but it seems like we might have overdone the gift-giving thing.

A Warped Idea Of Giving

The point of the Christmas story seems to be buried at the bottom of our shopping bags. Christmas is not about roasting chestnuts by an open fire. And it isn’t a time for Santa to reward the nice little boys and girls. It certainly isn’t about eggnog, or even so that we could have a special time to feel good about our families. These are all nice things. There is nothing wrong with any of them.

But they are not the heart of Christmas.

The incarnation — the second person of the Trinity becoming a real, live human being — was a one-way gift. It was a gift meant to offer peace with those of us who’ve turned Bethlehem into bedlam. It is a gift offered by a God who owed us nothing.

Peace Offering

The peace treaty was undeserved and unsolicited:

“An angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone all around them, and they were terrified. But the angel said to them, ‘Do not be afraid. I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people. Today in the town of David [Bethlehem] a Savior has been born to you; he is Christ the Lord. This will be a sign to you: You will find a baby wrapped in cloths and lying in a manger.’

Suddenly a great company of the heavenly host appeared with the angel, praising God and saying, ‘Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to men on whom his favor rests.'”
(Luke 2:9-14)

It was a peace treaty between heaven and Earth.

“Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand.” (Romans 5:1-2)

Despite what we’ve turned it into, these passages are not about our joy, or our giving, or our love, or our families. The focus is on God alone.

Back To Bethlehem

It is human nature to turn things that are supposed to be about God into things that are all about us. It makes us feel good to say that Christmas is our hope for “peace on earth.” But God knows that hasn’t proved true over the 2000 years since the first Christmas. World peace didn’t break out on that cold winter morning in Bethlehem. God came down in a human covering to offer the only possible way of reconciliation between His perfect moral goodness and the rebels who have been creating bedlam since the day they arrived on the scene.

We’ve been waging war with God. And Christmas is His peace treaty.

The joy comes in realizing that to be true. The giving and love come in mimicking the selflessness we witnessed in the gift He gave. That gift cost us nothing. Our families are the means by which we replicate and disseminate a love “for all the people.” The difference is important. Each of these things is impossible to celebrate appropriately unless we first make peace with our Creator and Savior.

“When the angels had left them and gone into heaven, the shepherds said to one another, ‘Let’s go to Bethlehem and see this thing that has happened, which the Lord has told us about.'” (Luke 1:15)

Rethinking Christmas

This is not a naive call to boycott Christmas. It’s nothing more than encouragement to change our mindset and refuse to take part in the bedlam. Shop less. Contemplate more.

I’ve never seen it used as a Christmas card, but I can’t imagine a better representation of what we Bedlamites have made Christmas into than the fresco on the Sistine Chapel that Michelangelo titled, “The Creation of Adam.” In the most gracious act in human history, the Creator himself reached down to touch us in human form. And we appear only vaguely interested.

Look at the way God is stretching to reach out to the man – and at the way, the first Bedlamite halfheartedly reaches back.

May we all celebrate this Christmas by rethinking Michelangelo’s artful depiction of our state. “Peace on Earth” is a worthy goal. But “Peace with God” must come first. Christmas is meant to remind us of the subtle difference.

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Jesus, You and the Essentials of Christianity – Episode 14 Video DOWNLOAD by Frank Turek (DVD)

If God, Why Evil? (DVD Set), (MP3 Set), and (mp4 Download Set) by Frank Turek

If God Why Evil. Why Natural Disasters (PowerPoint download) by Frank Turek

Why Doesn’t God Intervene More? (DVD Set), (MP3 Set), and (mp4 Download Set) by Frank Turek

Why does God allow Bad Things to Happen to Good People? (DVD) and (mp4 Download) by Frank Turek

 

Bob Perry is a Christian apologetics writer, teacher, and speaker who blogs about Christianity and the culture at truehorizon.org. He is a Contributing Writer for the Christian Research Journal and has also been published in Touchstone, and Salvo. Bob is a professional aviator with 37 years of military and commercial flying experience. He has a B.S., Aerospace Engineering from the U. S. Naval Academy, and an M.A., Christian Apologetics from Biola University. He has been married to his high school sweetheart since 1985. They have five grown sons.

/by
Un caso contra el teísmo (Parte 3)

Un caso contra el teísmo (Parte 3)

In a previous post I addressed an objection from Randy, an atheist from Cuba, who presented a case against theism. In this post I will address the second objection. Randy says that

The properties of God, being metaphysical, pose another problem: how do we know that he is omnipotent and not powerful enough to create the universe alone? What justifies the omni part, how can we know that?

Randy, you are right that God’s omnipotence is not inferred from the kalam cosmological argument, just that He is “extremely powerful” enough to bring the universe into existence. But as Dr. Craig himself states: “…the fact that an argument fails to prove that God is omnipotent does not imply that He  is not  omnipotent.” [1]

Then you ask the question:

How do you rule out there being a being more powerful than him?

Well, Randy, if there is a being more powerful than the one concluded by the kalam argument, it would be God! In reality, this objection does little to nothing to refute the existence of God as you can see.

How do you rule out in omniscience that he does not know everything, because he was created by a Supergod who created him making him believe that he knew everything when he does not know everything? Even God revealing to you that he knows everything, we cannot justify that he is omniscient because of the problem previously raised. This happens with all omni properties, they are unjustified.

Well, Randy, it seems you haven’t heard of Alvin Plantinga’s modal ontological argument, since the argument concludes in a Maximally Great Being possessing all the superlative attributes you claim cannot be justified.

Finally, it must be made clear that the arguments of natural theology do not aim to demonstrate all of God’s attributes, but rather to raise the possibility or probability that God exists.

Note:

[1] https://es.reasonablefaith.org/question-answer/P30/should-we-check-gods-superlative-attributes Accessed on October 31, 2019.

 

Jairo Izquierdo is a member of the Social Media team and an author for the Christian organization Cross Examined . He studies philosophy and theology, with his current focus being classical logic, epistemology, Christian doctrines, and philosophy of language. He is co-founder of Filósofo Cristiano . He is a member of the Christian Apologetics Alliance and a worship director at the Christian Baptist church Cristo es la Respuesta in Puebla, Mexico.

/by
A Neglected Proof for the Resurrection - The Sign of Jonah

A Neglected Proof for the Resurrection – The Sign of Jonah

,

By Erik Manning

When arguing for the resurrection of Jesus, Christian apologists often make a historical case for the empty tomb and the appearances of Jesus that occurred after his death. I’d certainly never say that isn’t a legitimate way to argue, but there’s an additional reason to believe in the resurrection that flies under the radar: Jesus’ resurrection was a fulfillment of Scripture. The New Testament writers are pretty emphatic on this point.

Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, and said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead… (Luke 24:45-46)

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures…(1 Corinthians 15:3-4)

Here’s where I’ve always been puzzled — the phrase that the Messiah was to be raised from the dead on the third day according to the Scriptures. What scriptures exactly are Luke and Paul referring to? Many commentators say that the third-day is referencing Hosea 6:2, which reads, “After two days he will revive us; on the third day he will raise us up, that we may live before him.” But from the context, the passage refers to national Israel. It’s a bit of a stretch to turn this into a reference about the Messiah, and none of the NT writers used this verse as a proof text. In fact, it’s not until the early third century do we see this verse applied to Jesus by the church father, Tertullian.

Not your Flannel Graph Version of the Story of Jonah

Some clarity came to me regarding this strange and confusing passage when I read The Case for Jesus by Dr. Brant Pitre. To understand this 3rd-day motif, Pitre says we have to go back to the gospels themselves. What did Jesus say?

Then some of the scribes and Pharisees answered him, saying, “Teacher, we wish to see a sign from you.” But he answered them, “An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. The men of Nineveh will rise up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold, something greater than Jonah is here. (Matthew 12:38-41)

Pitre says that at first blush, this interpretation feels a bit forced, and I have to admit it, I’ve always felt the same way. OK, three days and three nights…there’s a parallel there, but it doesn’t feel all that impressive. No disrespect to Jesus, but Jonah feels like a fictional kid’s story to us; our minds often flash to Veggie Tales movies or children’s books when we think of it. In these kid’s version stories, Jonah is very much alive in the fish’s belly.

And it’s for that reason that even Muslim apologists like Shabir Ally and Zakir Naik will cherry-pick this very text to show that Jesus didn’t really die on the cross, verifying the Qu’ran’s supposed accuracy. (Qu’ran 4:157-158) But here’s where our modern minds and the Muslim apologists get it wrong. If you read the text, Jonah very clearly dies in the belly of the great fish. I completely overlooked this.

Then Jonah prayed to the Lord his God from the stomach of the fish, and he said,

“I called out of my distress to the Lord, And He answered me. I cried for help from the depth of Sheol; You heard my voice. “You had cast me into the deep, Into the heart of the seas, And the current engulfed me. All Your breakers and billows passed over me. “So I said, ‘I have been expelled from Your sight. Nevertheless, I will look again toward Your holy temple.’ “Water encompassed me to the point of death. The great deep engulfed me, Weeds were wrapped around my head. “I descended to the roots of the mountains. The earth with its bars was around me forever, But You have brought up my life from the pit, O Lord my God. “While I was fainting away, I remembered the Lord, And my prayer came to You, Into Your holy temple. “Those who regard vain idols Forsake their faithfulness, But I will sacrifice to You With the voice of thanksgiving. That which I have vowed I will pay. Salvation is from the Lord.”

Then the Lord commanded the fish, and it vomited Jonah up onto the dry land. Now the word of the Lord came to Jonah the second time, saying, “Arise, go to Nineveh…” (Jonah 2:1-3:2)

The Sign of Jonah – Jonah Was Raised from the Dead

Pitre gives three arguments to support the miraculous death and resurrection of Jonah.

First, the phrases belly of Sheol and the Pit are Old Testament terms that refer to the realm of the dead. (See Job 7:9, 33:18, Psalm 40:2, 49:14-15, 89:48)

Secondly, the Hebrew says that his soul or nephesh fainted, meaning he took his last breath like a dying man.

Lastly, when God says to, Jonah “arise” this is the Hebrew word קוּם. This is the same word Jesus used when he raised Jairus’ daughter from the dead. Mark 5:41 reads Taking the child by the hand, He *said to her, “Talitha kum!” (which translated means, “Little girl, I say to you, get up!”)

Woah. So now the Jonah parallel makes a lot more sense! But wait, there’s a whole lot more going on here! In the Jewish reader’s mind, hearing about someone being raised from the dead would be interesting but not mind-blowingly significant. After all, the widow of Zarephath’s son, Shunammite woman’s son, and an Israelite man who came in contact with Elisha’s bones were all raised from the dead. There’s no major religious significance tied with these events, other than they show Elijah and Elisha were powerful prophets.

Pitre argues that there was an even greater miracle that happened with Jonah — Nineveh actually repented! Now, if you know anything about Old Testament history, Nineveh was no friend of Israel. The historical Nineveh was the capital of the Assyrian empire in the late seventh century BC. There was no love lost between the ancient Israelites and Nineveh. The city’s king, Sennacherib, laid siege to Jerusalem in 701 BC (2 Kings 18:13-19:37).  Nahum, the prophet, practically rejoices over Nineveh’s destruction by the Babylonians in 612. He says Nineveh is a “city of bloodshed.” (Nah 3:1)

It’s for these reasons Jonah ran the other direction. Jonah, like many Jews of the time, hated Nineveh.

The Sign of Jonah – The Gentiles Repent and Worship the God of Israel

So when Jesus says to the Pharisees that they only sign they would see is the sign of Jonah, he’s not only saying that he’d rise from the dead, but also that the resurrection would turn the pagan Gentiles to the God of Israel. But instead of just one pagan nation turning, much of the Gentile world would turn to God.

If you know about the history of Christian apologetics, the success of the church was what Christian thinkers from Augustine to Aquinas would point to as proof of the truth of the gospel. Says Pitre:

“Over and over again, whenever the early church fathers wanted to make the case for the messiahship, divinity, and resurrection of Jesus, they did not (as a rule) point to the evidence for the empty tomb, or the reliability of the eyewitnesses. They did not get into arguments about the historical probability and evidence and such. Instead, they simply pointed to the pagan world around them that was crumbling to the ground as Gentile nations that had worshiped idols and gods and goddesses for millennia somehow inexplicably repented, turned, and began worshiping the God of the Jews.”

This tiny band of vagabond fishermen turned the world upside down, and their effect was seen generations later until now. Christianity has spread all over Europe, North Africa, and Western Asia in the first-century and is more recently rapidly spreading all over Africa, South America, and even in Communist China. And of course, Christianity is prevalent in North America and in parts of Europe today. Billions of non-Jews from all nations have repented and worshiped the God of Israel over the past two millennia. The fourth-century church historian Eusebius’ words are still apt today:

“Behold how today, yes in our own times, our eyes see not only Egyptians, but every race of men who used to be idolaters, whom the prophet meant when he said “Egyptians,” released from the errors of polytheism and the daemons, and calling on the God of the prophets!…

Yes, in our own time, the knowledge of the Omnipotent God shines forth and sets a seal of certainty on the forecasts of the prophets. You see this actually going on, you no longer only expect to hear of it, and if you ask the moment when the change began, for all your inquiry, you will receive no other answer but the moment of the appearance of the Saviour.

For He it was, of Whom the prophet spoke, when he said that the Supreme God and Lord would send a man to the Egyptians, to save them, as also the Mosaic oracles taught in these words: “A man shall come forth from his seed, and shall rule over many nations”; among which nations the Egyptians would certainly be numbered. But a great deal could be said on these points, and with sufficient leisure, one could deal with them more exhaustively. Suffice it to say now, that we must hold to the truth, that the prophecies have only been fulfilled after the coming of Jesus our Saviour.

… And who would not be struck by the extraordinary change—that men who for ages have paid divine honour to wood and stone and demons, wild beasts that feed on human flesh, poisonous reptiles, animals of every kind, repulsive monsters, fire and earth, and the lifeless elements of the universe should after our Saviour’s coming pray to the Most High God, Creator of Heaven and earth, the actual Lord of the prophets, and the God of Abraham and his forefathers?” (Proof of the Gospel, 1.6.20-21)

The Old Testament prophets said that one day, the pagan nations would worship the God of Abraham. This was a fulfillment of many passages of Scripture foretold centuries before. Just check out Genesis 12:3, Isaiah 2:1-3, Isaiah 25:6-8, Isaiah 66:18-21, Jeremiah 3:15-18, Micah 4:1-2, Zechariah 8:20-23 and Amos 9:11-12. Only now in hindsight can we see this obvious fulfillment. That this prophesied change perfectly coincides with the life, death, and resurrection appearances of Jesus piles on a powerful additional proof on top of our modern-day historical resurrection argument. We’d do well to not neglect it.

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Early Evidence for the Resurrection by Dr. Gary Habermas (DVD), (Mp3) and (Mp4)

Cold Case Resurrection Set by J. Warner Wallace (books)

Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? By Dr. Gary Habermas (book)

Jesus, You and the Essentials of Christianity – Episode 14 Video DOWNLOAD by Frank Turek (DVD)

 

Erik Manning is a former atheist turned Christian after an experience with the Holy Spirit. He’s a freelance baseball writer and digital marketing specialist who is passionate about the intersection of evangelism and apologetics.

/by

Why did Evangelicals Vote for Trump?

Podcast: Play in new window

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | Android | iHeartRadio | Blubrry | Email | TuneIn | RSS

Frank attended two meetings with candidate Donald Trump in the weeks leading up to the 2016 election. The first meeting in Trump Tower is the subject of the new article in RollingStone Magazine in which Frank is quoted twice. This podcast is Frank’s response to that article, particularly the article’s audacious assertion that Donald Trump is a standard-bearer for American Christians. Frank highlights what the article gets wrong, what the media, in general, gets wrong about evangelical Christianity, and then offers five reasons why most evangelical Christians voted for Donald Trump. Regardless of what you think about Trump, Christianity or politics, this show will help you have better conversations with people as we enter an election year.

Subscribe on iTunes: http://bit.ly/CrossExamined_Podcast rate and review! Thanks!!!

Subscribe on Google Play: http://bit.ly/CE_Podcast_Google

Subscribe on Spotify: http://bit.ly/CrossExaminedOfficial_Podcast

Subscribe on Stitcher: http://bit.ly/CE_Podcast_Stitcher

Transcript

 

/by
One Woman's Quest for Straight Answers from Public Health Organizations

One Woman’s Quest for Straight Answers from Public Health Organizations

By Terrell Clemmons

After three years’ research on traumatic brain injuries he’d seen in prematurely deceased football players, Dr. Bennet Omalu wrote a paper in 2005 detailing his findings on the syndrome he named Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE). He was hopeful that NFL doctors would build on his discovery for the well-being of NFL athletes. But instead of welcoming his data, an NFL medical committee called for it to be retracted. A thoroughgoing medical scientist, Omalu would do no such thing, and it took a full four more years of increasing pressure before the NFL publicly acknowledged the link between concussions sustained on the field and CTE.

A similar kind of David versus Goliath challenge may be developing between investigative journalist Punam Kumar Gill and the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH). A Canadian citizen of Indian descent and a lifelong pro-choice feminist, Gill became troubled after hearing questions raised about potential long-term risks of induced abortion. An honest investigator, she was quick to notice two things: (1) Although the questions did not concern the legality of abortion, because they were associated with abortion, few people seemed willing to listen, let alone talk about them. And (2) she herself might be guilty of allowing bias to blind her to a valid women’s issue where one might lie.

The dual discovery set her mind to thinking: What if there really were critical health risks to abortion? What were women actually being told before having one? And how were they doing afterwards? These were serious health care concerns, in some cases, matters of life and death. Shouldn’t they be discussed openly, rather than being dismissed as pro-life propaganda?

An Unlikely Team & A Balanced Report

She thought they should be, as did pro-life filmmaker Joses Martin of Mighty Motion Pictures. And so, although they came down on opposite sides of the pro-choice/pro-life divide, Gill and Martin teamed up to search out the truth about these questions for the sake of women everywhere. Their investigation is chronicled in the excellently produced documentary Hush: A Liberating Conversation About Abortion and Women’s Health. Here’s an overview.

Abortion & Breast Cancer

Gill interviewed several medical doctors. Is there evidence of a link between abortion and breast cancer? She asked. Yes, said Dr. Ian Gentles, coauthor of Complications: Abortion’s Impact on Women (2013); there have been “many dozens of studies [that] show a real, statistically significant link.” Yes, said Dr. Angela Lanfranchi, a breast cancer surgeon who has seen it in a textbook and in her practice. No, said Dr. David Grimes, an ob-gyn and abortionist for more than four decades, “there are no long-term consequences from abortion.” This issue is settled, he said. Doing continued studies would not only be inappropriate but unethical.

Thus, right off the bat, Gill and Martin encountered the deep divide between medical professionals. But Grimes had underscored his point by adding that his opinion was the same as that of all the major medical organizations. This did seem to add credibility to the “no consequences” side, so that’s where they went next.

One after another, Gill contacted them: The American Cancer Society. The Canadian Cancer Society. The National Cancer Institute. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. The Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada. The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists in London. The Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation. And finally, the World Health Organization. But to her surprise, not only would none of them consent to an interview, they would not even speak to her. Not one. The case was closed, they all said. Anything she needed to know could be found on their website. It was as if they were all working off the same script.

With no other option, and now starting to feel suspicious of those denying any link, Gill went to their websites. Each one referred to a 2003 conference held by the NIH cancer division, the National Cancer Institute (NCI), where it had been concluded once and for all that there was no link between abortion and breast cancer. Upon this discovery, she tried again to speak with someone at the NCI, going so far as to visit in person. But when she arrived, she was swiftly escorted off the grounds by security. What was going on here?

A thoroughgoing journalist, Gill was not one to be intimidated into silence. She continued to dig and question until, eventually, she located a recording of the 2003 conference online and got to the bottom of the “no abortion-breast cancer link” conclusion. She explains her findings in some detail in the film but suffice it here to say that a careful look raises serious questions about who or what dictated the outcome of this seminal conference. Was it honest medical science? Or was it abortion politics?

Abortion & Pre-term Birth

Pre-term birth rates have doubled in the U.S. since Roe. Every year, more than 11,000 newborns die on the day of their birth in America due to prematurity, and those that survive exact untold emotional and financial costs on health care resources and families before ever leaving the hospital. After discharge, they face heightened risks of such lifelong disabilities as cerebral palsy, autism, chronic lung disease, and other vital organ maladies.

“It seems there’s a real clear unwillingness to deal with the science on this,” said Dr. Martin McCaffrey, a neonatologist who has frontline experience in caring for preemies and their families. He was invited in 2008 to serve as an expert panel member at the Surgeon General’s Conference on Preventing Preterm Birth, held by the NIH. He brought up the abortion-prematurity link and presented 122 articles as supportive evidence, but the co-chairs would not allow discussion, even though the link has been demonstrated in more than 80 studies. McCaffrey estimates that abortion accounts for 18 percent of very preterm births (earlier than 32 weeks’ gestation), yet in all the material published to raise awareness of prematurity, there is no mention of prior abortion as a possible risk factor. None. The question is, why not?

Abortion & Adverse Psychological Effects

This has been covered in Salvo before. Gill cites the alarmingly high rates of such maladies as PTSD, eating disorders, depression, substance abuse, and suicide in post-abortive women, but the most moving evidence of post-abortion trauma comes from the post-abortive women she interviews, many of whom suffer heart-wrenching grief and regret decades later.

Shouldn’t women considering abortion be provided with this information? Gill asks. No, insists Dr. Grimes, the abortionist. That would be “a very overt attempt to dissuade or discourage women from exercising their right to have an abortion.” Apparently this is what passes in his world for medical ethics.

The Moral Imperative of Informed Consent

For people of conscience, though, informed consent matters, and women considering abortion deserve factual information. Since neither the abortion industry nor the bureaus of medical apparatchiks will so much as countenance the data, Gill and Martin have brought it to the public themselves. Meanwhile, they continue to press the NIH and NCI to address the questions Hush raises, but so far, they have received no response beyond the same scripted suggestions to visit the NCI website, which in turn still cites the 2003 conference.

Hush is top-notch work. In many ways, you, the viewer, feel like you’re along on their quest. And where appropriate, well-crafted graphics depict the medical explanations, making the breast cancer and pre-term birth connections understandable.

“Over time,” said Dr. Patrick Fagan, who coauthored a 2014 paper on the abortion-breast cancer link, “the 2003 NCI conference is going to become an embarrassment in the history of the NCI itself.” Indeed, it may. It took Dr. Omalu four years to awaken the conscience of the NFL. The consciences of the NIH and NCI have already been slumbering for over thirteen years. One can hope that Hush will, paradoxically, finally wake them up.

Recommended resources related to the topic:

The Apologetics of Abortion mp3 by J. Budziszewski

Reaching Pro-Abortionists for Christ CD by Francis Beckwith

The Case for Christian Activism (MP3 Set), (DVD Set), and (mp4 Download Set) by Frank Turek

Legislating Morality (mp4 download),  (DVD Set), (MP3 Set), (PowerPoint download), and (PowerPoint CD) by Frank Turek

Legislating Morality: Is it Wise? Is it Legal? Is it Possible? by Frank Turek (Book)

Do Ethics Need God? (Mp3) by Francis Beckwith

 

Terrell Clemmons is a freelance writer and blogger on apologetics and matters of faith.

This article was originally published at salvomag.com: http://bit.ly/2Y4WN69

/by
45 Quotes About Relativism vs. Truth

45 Quotes About Relativism vs. Truth

,

By Luke Nix

  1. “When it comes to truth, the outcome affects not only individuals but nations and even civilizations. What starts looking like a small abstract issue ends with titanic, public consequences for all who love freedom and justice.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  2. “Although someone’s beliefs and assumptions may not be true and do not describe reality, they will still drive their behavior. So if someone doesn’t believe in truth, count on him to lie. If someone says there are no objective facts, expect her to be careless with facts to further her own interests. If someone explains everything by referring to evolution and the ‘selfish gene,’ be sure that at some point, he will be extremely selfish on behalf of the fitness of his own survival.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  3. “Our challenge today is not to lament, protest, or simply talk about the crisis of truth in one of a hundred ways. Rather, it is to do something about it by becoming people of truth and learning to live free.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  4. “Far from being a naive and reactionary notion, truth is one of the simplest, most precious gifts without which we would not be able to handle reality or negotiate life.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  5. “When nothing can be judged except judgment itself– ‘judgmentalism’–the barriers between the unthinkable, acceptable, and doable collapse entirely. And then, since life goes on and the sky doesn’t fall, people draw the conclusion that the original concern was unfounded. Lighten up, the newly amoral say as they skip forward blithely, complicit in their own corruption.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  6. “If truth is truth, then differences make a difference — not just between truth and lies but between intimacy and alienation in relationships, between harmony and conflict in neighborhoods, between efficiency and incompetence in business, between reliability and fraud in science and journalism, between trust and suspicion in leadership, between freedom and tyranny in government, and even between life and death.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  7. “While we all may have a sense of what is evil and what is good under the philosophy of cultural tolerance, evil and good can only be relative ideals. Without an objective truth—a set of universal moral values—good and evil are defined by the individual, community, or society. Therefore we have no moral basis by which to judge another person, community, or nation for what they do or don’t do.” Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, The Beauty of Intolerance
  8. “Right up to the end of the nineteenth century, the most important course in an American student’s college career was moral philosophy, or what we today call ethics.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  9. “Much of today’s focus is on ‘prevention ethics’ rather than on principled ethics. It is more concerned with ‘not being caught’ (or sued or exposed in the press) than with doing right.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  10. “What is seen as important are issues related to corporations, schools, courts, governments, and the treatment of the environment– not the individual’s virtue and responsibility that underlie these secondary issues.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  11. “The current ethics is often taught with a shallow view of human nature and an even more superficial view of evil in human society.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  12. “The emphasis now is on surface, not depth; on possibilities, not equalities; on glamour, not convictions; on what can be altered endlessly; not achieved for good; and on what can be bought and won, not gained by education and formation.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  13. “The present preoccupation with ethics in elite intellectual centers has an element of absurdity because they have no moral content left to teach. The fruit of the Western universities in the last two hundred years has been to destroy the possibility of any moral knowledge on which to pursue moral formation.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  14. “If truth is contingent upon the society in which we live…there is nothing intuitive or universally or absolutely true about freedom from torture or freedom from slavery; our society just happens to have come up with these values over time.” Stephen McAndrew, Why It Doesn’t Matter What YOU Believe If It’s Not True
  1. “If moral truths do not exist as a foundation for law, then the law itself becomes merely a system of raw political power accountable to no one.” Scott Klusendorf, The Case for Life
  1. “Just as iron filings are drawn to the strongest magnet, so minds weakened by a loss of truth are drawn to the most powerful positions.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  1. “What happens when we succeed in cutting away truth-claims to expose the web of power games only to find we have less power than the players we face? If truth is dead, right and wrong are neither, and all that remains is the will to power, then the conclusion is simple: Might makes right. Logic is only a power conspiracy. Victory goes to the strong, and the weak go to the wall.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  1. “Just as the Greeks entered Troy concealed in the hollow wooden statue of a horse, so post-modernism is providing the cover for all sorts of ideas and practices to enter American life–ideas that on their own would have difficulty gaining entrance.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  2. “Short of total isolation, the American society you live in today is going to influence how your children make moral choices in one way or another. Stop and think about it. What are the voices of society telling your children about the choices they are about to make? What is the central theme that today’s culture emphasizes over and over again? If you were to reduce it to a single sentence, it might look like this: You have the right to choose for yourself what is right for you and what is wrong for you–and no one should judge that choice.” Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, The Beauty of Intolerance
  1. “When nothing can be judged except judgment itself— ‘judgmentalism’—the barriers between the unthinkable, acceptable, and doable collapse entirely.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  1. “If everything is endlessly open to question and change, then everything is permitted, nothing is forbidden, and literally nothing is unthinkable.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  1. “Applying to the skeptics the skepticism they apply to others [pushes] them out toward the negative consequences of their own beliefs.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  1. “While all beliefs appear consistent to those who believe them, they always have one of two problems. They are either constricting or contradictory. In the first case, the beliefs are more consistent but are incomplete in the sense that they are too small for the fullness of life…And in the second case, the beliefs are more comprehensive but are inconsistent—which in the worst cases makes them self-refuting- a problem Chesterton calls ‘the suicide of thought.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  1. “Inevitably, moral choices based on our own moral compass will often be wrong choices. And wrong moral choices can result in consequences ranging from minor disappointments to major disasters emotionally, relationally, physically, and spiritually.” Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, The Beauty of Intolerance
  1. “Truth is true even if nobody believes it, and falsehood is false even if everybody believes it.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  2. “It is that truth, like meaning as a whole, is not for to us to create but for us to discover. Each of us may be small, our lives short, and our influence puny. But if truth is there—objective, absolute, independent of minds that know it— then we may count on it.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  3. “In order to discover truth it is necessary to coldly dissect and examine all of our prejudices and inherent biases to ensure we receive unbiased answers. This takes effort. It is always easier to simply accept the ideas presented to us than to question the status quo.” Stephen McAndrew, Why It Doesn’t Matter What YOU Believe If It’s Not True
  1. “While we all may have a sense of what is evil and what is good under the philosophy of cultural tolerance, evil and good can only be relative ideals. Without an objective truth—a set of universal moral values—good and evil are defined by the individual, community, or society. Therefore we have no moral basis by which to judge another person, community, or nation for what they do or don’t do.” Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, The Beauty of Intolerance
  2. “We are all entitled to our own beliefs, but this doesn’t mean each of us has our own truths. Our beliefs describe the way we think the world is. Truth describes the objective state of the world, regardless of how we take it to be. Beliefs can be relative, but truth cannot. So when we consider the nature of truth—that it is an objective description of reality—it makes no sense to say that something is true for you and not for me.” Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, The Beauty of Intolerance
  1. “Without truth, a belief may be only speculation plus sincerity.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  1. “While we all may have a sense of what is evil and what is good under the philosophy of cultural tolerance, evil and good can only be relative ideals. Without an objective truth—a set of universal moral values—good and evil are defined by the individual, community, or society. Therefore we have no moral basis by which to judge another person, community, or nation for what they do or don’t do.” Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, The Beauty of Intolerance
  1. “It is often said that to have a fulfilling life, three essentials are required: a clear sense of personal identity, a deep sense of faith and meaning, and a strong sense of purpose and mission.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  2. “For those who find themselves without faith in God and who conclude that the world they desire does not fit with the world they discover, life is fundamentally deaf to their aspirations.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  1. “For all the fragile precariousness of our human existence on our tiny earth in the vastness of space, we may throw the whole weight of our existence on God, including our truth-seeking desires, because he is wholly true.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  1. “Those who put their faith in God do so for all sorts of good reasons, but the very best reason is that they are finally, utterly, and incontrovertibly convinced that the faith which they put their confidence in is true.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  1. “All truth is God’s truth and is true everywhere, for everyone, under all conditions. Truth is true in the sense that it is objective and independent of the mind of any human knower. Being true, it cannot contradict itself.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  1. “The beauty of intolerance is its opposition to wrong and evil in the world—in alignment with God’s righteous and perfect standard of justice, equality, human rights, and caring for others. Intolerance of evil is not mean-spirited and condemnatory; it is actually the only way to be loving and caring.” Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, The Beauty of Intolerance
  1. “What is more beautiful than God’s intolerance expressed in his moral outrage toward the tragedies of poverty, racism, sexual abuse, slavery, AIDS, bigotry, and other such evils?” Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, The Beauty of Intolerance
  1. “Human beings are truth-seekers by nature, and truth persuades by the forces of its own reality.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  2. “It is impossible to experience love without being truthful, and it is impossible to discover truth without loving it.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  1. “Truth is our best friend, and it is an inseparable part of what real love is. While cultural tolerance may disguise itself as caring, understanding, and loving, it lacks the moral authority of an authentic love that looks out for the best interest of others. That is another quality of authentic, real love—it is always other-focused.” Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, The Beauty of Intolerance
  1. “As human beings, we are by nature truth-seekers; as fallen human beings, we are also by nature truth-twisters. And a proper account of truth in the human project must do justice to both.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  2. “Conforming our desires to the truth is harder in the short term but easier in the long. We give up our need for control and submit to truth outside us, which, if we were wrong about truth before, requires repentance rather than rationalization. We have to face up to reality rather than trying to fit reality into our schemes. But the long-term outcome is freedom because…truth is freedom and we are engaging with reality at it truly is.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin
  1. “What distinguishes God’s unconditional acceptance from that of our culture is authentic love. His love is intended to make the security, happiness, and welfare of another as important as his own. It is other-focused, not performance-focused. God knows the real truth about us—that we were created in his image—and that truth allows him to separate the person from performance. God unconditionally values us for who we are without always approving of what we do because he separates the value of the person from the acts of the person.” Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, The Beauty of Intolerance
  1. “The Christian faith is not true because it works; it works because it is true. It is not true because we experience it; we experience it—deeply and gloriously—because it is true. It is not simply ‘true for us’; it is true for any who seek in order to find.” Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Is Morality Absolute or Relative? by Dr. Frank Turek DVD, Mp3 and Mp4

Right From Wrong by Josh McDowell Mp3

Counter Culture Christian: Is There Truth in Religion? (DVD) by Frank Turek

Deconstructing Liberal Tolerance: Relativism as Orthodoxy (Mp3) by Francis Beckwith

Defending Absolutes in a Relativistic World (Mp3) by Frank Turek

Is Morality Absolute or Relative? (Mp3), (Mp4), and (DVD) by Frank Turek

 

Luke Nix holds a bachelor’s degree in Computer Science and works as a Desktop Support Manager for a local precious metal exchange company in Oklahoma.

Original Blog Source: http://bit.ly/2L19IR3

/by

New Tactics with Greg Koukl

Podcast: Play in new window

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | Android | iHeartRadio | Blubrry | Email | TuneIn | RSS

There are many places you can learn evidence for Christianity.  There are very few places you can learn easy ways to share that evidence.   Greg Koukl’s classic book Tactics is simply the best place to go to learn how to share the hope you have within you.  Now, ten years after the first edition, Greg has rewritten, updated and expanded Tactics, and it just became available this week. Join Frank as he interviews Greg and they reveal some of the new Tactics that will help you move people closer to Christ in a way that takes all the pressure off of you.

Subscribe on iTunes: http://bit.ly/CrossExamined_Podcast rate and review! Thanks!!!

Subscribe on Google Play: http://bit.ly/CE_Podcast_Google

Subscribe on Spotify: http://bit.ly/CrossExaminedOfficial_Podcast

Subscribe on Stitcher: http://bit.ly/CE_Podcast_Stitcher

/by
Un caso contra el teísmo (Parte 2)

Un caso contra el teísmo (Parte 2)

In this article I will address the second of four objections that were presented to us a few months ago. You can find the first part here .

Randy claims that

Any empirical argument ( kalam , fine-tuning, design) is not evidence for God, since it would also apply as evidence for a property we have not discovered yet (naturalistic pantheism, magic, Goblin-Creates-Universes, etc.). If something is evidence for God, but is also evidence for naturalistic pantheism or magic, it cannot be evidence for either, here’s the reason: imagine a box and you say there is a rabbit in the box, and the reason for concluding that there is a rabbit in the box is that the box weighs 2 pounds, but that cannot be evidence for a rabbit because it could also be a snake or any 2-pound animal or object. By this analogy, we see that the evidence that applies to the things I mentioned above works the same as it does for God, [therefore,] they are not evidence for God. For example, the kalam , accepting it completely (which I don’t usually do because it’s wrong, but oh well) concludes that the universe has a cause, this can be a law that we have not discovered yet, magic, naturalistic pantheism or God, any of those explains it perfectly. If you argue that you use Occam’s Razor to stay with the simplest of all, the simplest would be a law that we have not discovered yet followed by naturalistic pantheism and then God.

Let us first look at a formulation of the kalam :

      1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause of its existence.

1.1 Confirmed by experience.

1.2 It is a metaphysical principle that nothing can come from nothing.

1.3 If something can really come into existence without a cause, why don’t we see this happening in reality?

      2. The universe began to exist.

2.1 Argument based on the impossibility of a current infinity:

2.1.1 An actual infinity cannot exist.

2.1.2 An infinite time regression of events is a current infinity.

2.1.3 Therefore, an infinite temporal regression of events cannot exist.

2.2 Argument based on the impossibility of forming an actual infinite by successive addition:

2.2.1 A collection formed by successive additions cannot actually be infinite.

2.2.2 The time series of past events is a collection formed by successive additions.

2.2.3 Therefore, the time series of past events cannot currently be infinite.

2.3 Confirmation based on the expansion of the universe.

2.4 Confirmation based on the thermodynamic properties of the universe.

      3. Therefore, the universe has a cause for its beginning into existence.

      4. If the universe has a cause of its existence, then there exists an uncaused personal Creator of the universe who, without creation, is unprincipled, immutable, immaterial, timeless, spaceless, and enormously powerful.

4.1 Argument that the cause of the universe is a personal Creator:

4.1.1 The universe was created by a set of necessary and sufficient conditions of mechanical functioning or by a personal free agent.

4.1.2 The universe could not have been created by a mechanical set of necessary and sufficient conditions.

4.1.3 Therefore, the universe was created by a personal free agent.

4.2 Argument that the Creator without creation is uncaused, unbeginning, immutable, immaterial, timeless, spaceless, and enormously powerful.

4.2.1 The Creator is uncaused.

4.2.1.1 There cannot be an infinite temporal regression of causes (2.1.3, 2.2.3).

4.2.2 The Creator is unprincipled.

4.2.2.1 Anything that is not caused does not begin to exist. (1)

4.2.3 The Creator is immutable.

4.2.3.1 There cannot be an infinite temporal regression of changes. (2.1.3, 2.2.3)

4.2.4 The Creator is immaterial.

4.2.4.1 Whatever is material implies a change at the atomic and molecular levels, but the Creator does not change. (4.2.3)

4.2.5 The Creator is timeless.

4.2.5.1 In the total absence of change, time does not exist, and the Creator does not change. (4.2.3)

4.2.6 The Creator is spaceless.

4.2.6.1 Whatever is immaterial and timeless cannot be spatial, and the Creator is immaterial and timeless (4.2.4, 4.2.5)

4.2.7 The Creator is enormously powerful.

4.2.7.1 He created the universe out of nothing. (3)

    5. Therefore, there is a personal, uncaused Creator of the universe, who without creation is unprincipled, immutable, immaterial, timeless, spaceless, and enormously powerful.

With this argument in hand, we can now respond to each of the objections presented.

(1) Any empirical argument ( kalam , fine-tuning, design) is not evidence for God, since it would also apply as evidence for a property that we have not yet discovered […] the kalam , accepting it completely […] it is concluded that the universe has a cause, this can be a law that we have not yet discovered, magic, naturalistic pantheism, [Goblins-Create-universes] or God, any of those explains it perfectly.

As can be seen from premise (4) of kalam, the cause of the universe must have, at a minimum, the following characteristics:

a. Immateriality

b. Incausality

c. Spatiality

d. Timelessness

e. Imprincipiality

f. Eternity

g. Immutability

h. Will

i. Enormous power

Randy mentions that kalam points to an unknown property, but there is at least one problem with this proposal: a property could only satisfy characteristics a – g , but not h or i , because its very nature as an abstract object makes it causally impotent, as Craig always puts it: “The number 7 causes nothing.”

What about naturalistic pantheism? Roughly defined, it is the position that God is the sum of all natural phenomena unified, but if this is true, then by definition natural phenomena cannot meet any of the characteristics (maybe i , if we are being kind).

What about magic? The problem with this is that we have good references to the fantastic origins of magic, not to mention that contemporary magic is nothing but tricks and skills to deceive the spectator. But even if we concede that the existence of magic is possible (in the broad logical sense), the problem with this “cause” is that it has different definitions depending on the place of origin (there are both natural and non-natural magics), but in most of them, a magician is always required to use it. Probably Randy, taking advantage of how difficult it is to define magic, would be tempted to say that there could be a magic that not only meets the characteristics a–g , but also h and i , but this would be the same case that occurred in the Craig–Woolper debate, in which the atheist begins to say a string of incoherencies, such as that the cause of the universe is a Supercomputer that meets a–i , to which Craig simply points out that, by definition, that would no longer be a computer, but God himself. [1]

Let’s go with Universe-Creating Goblins. By definition, a goblin is humanoid in shape, but about the size of a small child. A description of a material being, so goblins don’t fit the a–g criteria , but they do fit the h and i criteria . Of course, Randy, you can pull the Woolper tactic and say, “Oh, but these are Super Goblins!” But we’ve already seen what the problem with that is, and it honestly has no seriousness whatsoever.

Finally, that the cause of the universe is a law that has not yet been discovered. Dr. John Lennox has a perfect answer to the claim that mathematics or natural laws are causes:

What is the nature of a law? Do laws create things? No, of course not. […] I’m a mathematician and it’s honestly the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard [that mathematics created the universe]. […] I mean, 1 + 1 = 2, right? Has that ever put two euros in your pocket? […] But mathematics doesn’t create anything. It’s just descriptions.

Newton’s laws of motion will describe the motion of billiard balls, at least in part, but they do not make the balls move – for that you need someone with a billiard stick. And here we have another big confusion: that the laws of nature are causes, but they are not! They are just descriptions of what there is. So the law of gravity is meaningless if gravity is not present. [2]

So it is clear that appealing to some unknown law does not solve the problem. Now let’s move on to the next thing:

(2) Imagine a box and you say that there is a rabbit in the box, and that the reason for concluding that there is a rabbit in the box is that the box weighs 2 pounds, but that cannot be evidence of a rabbit because it could also be a snake or any 2-pound animal or object.

But Randy, this analogy is too weak. A stronger analogy of God as the cause of the origin of the universe from premise (4) would be something like this: Imagine someone shows you a box about 12 inches long x 12 inches wide and tells you to guess what’s inside it. You take the box, weigh it, and find that it weighs 2 pounds; then you notice something moving around inside the box, the movements are random, so you rule out a toy, at which point you know it’s an animal. Then you hear the animal inside start meowing. Bingo! At this point you know that at least the animal inside is a feline, and it can’t be a snake or any other 2-pound animal. Can you tell the difference? So when you get to the cause of the universe, it, just as in the box analogy, must have certain properties given the nature of the case, such as having all the properties ai . The theist here is not making gratuitous claims about the characteristics of the cause of the universe.

(3) By this analogy, we see that the evidences that can be applied to the things I mentioned above function the same as for God, [therefore,] they are not evidence of God.

The problem is that it is a weak analogy fallacy.

(4) If you argue that you use Occam’s Razor to stay with the simplest of all, the simplest would be a law that we have not yet discovered followed by naturalistic pantheism and then God.

There is no need to appeal to Occam’s Razor to choose the best explanation for the cause of the origin of the universe because it has already been shown that all the other possible causes that Randy has postulated do not meet the necessary characteristics.

Grades:

[1] Link: https://youtu.be/LgdkFOg7utY (accessed Nov. 12, 2019).

[2] Link: https://youtu.be/rSlGMXIYKD8 (accessed November 12, 2019).

 

Jairo Izquierdo is a member of the Social Media team and an author for the Christian organization Cross Examined . He studies philosophy and theology, with his current focus being classical logic, epistemology, Christian doctrines, and philosophy of language. He is co-founder of Filósofo Cristiano . He is a member of the Christian Apologetics Alliance and a worship director at the Christian Baptist church Cristo es la Respuesta in Puebla, Mexico.

/by
What a Non-Christian Taught Me about the Gospel

What a Non-Christian Taught Me about the Gospel

By Dr. Dave Oldham

A number of years ago, a young woman came to our church for counseling and talked to me. She poured out her story of disappointment with her husband’s unfaithfulness, his unwillingness to change, and the mess her life had become, not only because of him but also because of her own unwise choices. She felt she was in a hole and wanted to know how to get out and begin afresh. While she was sharing and I looked into her searching eyes, I was asking myself and God how he and the healing he alone could bring might fit into her life. I knew she needed Jesus and the forgiveness and hope he would give, but I struggled with how to tell her she needed him. How did “accepting Jesus as her Savior” fit into the prospects that her past life would not continue to make her its slave? In short, how did the Gospel offer a new light to her path?

As I continued to think about what to say to her—though this was only a brief few minutes in the counseling session—it seemed that immediately inviting her to ask God for his forgiveness wasn’t the solution to her problems. Indeed, as I thought and prayed about what counsel to give her, it didn’t seem like the typical “altar call” invitation to accept Christ would be understood by her because of her lack of background in the Christian faith. She had not come for “religion” but for a solution to her life that she considered a mess.

Yet, I was a pastor and a Christian counselor. The struggle in my mind as I listened to her difficult story forced me to ask some of the hardest questions about my understanding of the gospel and Christianity. I think in those moments, God was doing something in me, something that would radically change my thinking from that time on. It is easy to say, “Jesus is the answer!” but the question that was pulsating in my mind was “How does God—especially, the message of salvation—fit into this young lady’s mess (damage, brokenness) and offer a future and a hope?”

I had been reading a book by Scott McKnight (The Gospel of the Kingdom)[1] in which he was debating where a person ought to begin in explaining the Gospel, the good news about God’s transformation in the lives of his people. He noted that far too often, Christians begin with the account of Jesus’ death as our substitute and the forgiveness that he made possible. But as I sat there with this young lady in my office, my mind said that was not the place to begin to guide her and help her find a new direction, new hope, a new chapter in her life. Then, I remembered McKnight’s words: The Gospel must begin with Adam and Eve’s fall in the garden. The perfect—sinless couple, undamaged, “innocent” as they came from the creative hand of God—became, like all of us, rebels. They freely chose to spurn God’s recipe for living in the paradise in which God had placed them. But from eternity past, God had a plan. He knew that his creatures (then and ever since then) would need a way of restoration, a restoration that was a path of healing for disobedience and the consequent damages. His plan begins with their (and our) acknowledgement that they had gone their own way, that they had chosen a way to live “better” than God’s. This rejection of the Creator’s design was and is a personal affront to God. This the Bible calls “sin.” And such choices have consequences; sometimes as the shipwreck, it makes in our lives, but—beyond that—our rebellion has put us in serious jeopardy with God. Though he loves us, his creatures as no one else does or ever will—he is a God of justice and must punish our sins. Punishment doesn’t sound like love, but here is where the good news begins.[2] He will be our judge, but he also wants to be our benefactor, offering us forgiveness because his beloved Son took on himself our punishment, the consequences of our sin. His forgiveness is a gift he offers for all.

Thus, the beginning of our restoration is seeking, asking for the forgiveness Jesus died to make possible, resting in God’s punishment of his Son for a restored standing with him. But God does something beyond forgiveness. He makes us his children; he adopts into his family, and though we (sadly) will and do disobey again, he has committed himself by his Spirit to take our brokenness and lead us to restoration and healing, a healing that follows the path Jesus taught. Jesus said his teachings were not “new,” but were in the Old Testament Scriptures. What in particular? A scribe asked that very question:

“What is the Greatest Commandment?” His response: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. 38 This is the great and first commandment. 39 And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Matthew 22).

Our mission statement as new children of God is to do these two: to love God with our whole being (to love what he loves; to think how he thinks—which is discovered by reading and reflecting on the Scriptures; to be what he is: “holy,” set apart for God’s use; and to do what Jesus did.), and to love our neighbor as ourselves.

Restoration for this young lady—and for us—(1) begins with a brokenness because she/we have rejected God’s way (even if we did not do it knowingly); (2) progresses with asking God for his forgiveness; and (3) continues by depending on God’s power (the Holy Spirit) to restore her/our life to God’s ideal. The following illustration pictorially summarizes McKnight’s concept:

freethinking 201119

This is the new way, and it can be best lived in a “new community” with other children of God who are committed to the same mission: God’s mission. Dieter Zander put it well when describing his mission, he said:

This…work…[is] to form communities of people that produce apprentices of Jesus who live in the gospel and communicate and draw others in a matter of course to the way they live…. [Far too often, echoing Dallas Willard] the gospel is informing how we die. Instead, the gospel ought to be about how we live! A lot of church people don’t know the relationship between the gospel of Jesus and how we are to live…. Their belief is that they try to believe in Jesus so that when they die, they get to go to heaven. Populating heaven is the main part of the gospel. Instead, the gospel is about being increasingly alive to God in the world. It is concerned with bringing heaven to earth.

God’s plan, then, is not only for people to find forgiveness (the beginning) but for wholeness and restoration to God’s image. This gives broken people hope. Because of Jesus, they can be forgiven. Because of the Spirit, there can be transformation. And because of the relationship with other children of God, she/they can be inspired to live out their commitment to God before a watching world.

Notes

[1] Two other seminal resources are Dallas Willard’s, The Divine Conspiracy and N. T. Wright’s, Jesus and the Victory of God and The Challenge of Jesus: Discovering Who Jesus Was and Is.

[2] Eddie Gibbs and Ryan K. Bolger, Emerging Churches, 44: “Clearly, the gospel is not restricted to a message giving an individual assurance about eternal destiny. It is minimally that, but it is much more, being concerned as much with life before death as with life after death. When people are reconciled to God through Christ, they become a ‘new creation’ (2 Cor. 5:17). They first experience God’s reconciliation, often in community, which results in a life of radical transformation. The primary reference point is no longer their former alienation but their present and future identification as part of God’s new order, which was inaugurated with the first coming of Christ.”

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions by Greg Koukl (Book)

Practical Apologetics in Worldview Training by Hank Hanegraaff (Mp3)

The Great Apologetics Adventure by Lee Strobel (Mp3)

Defending the Faith on Campus by Frank Turek (DVD Set, mp4 Download set and Complete Package)

So the Next Generation will Know by J. Warner Wallace (Book and Participant’s Guide)

Reaching Atheists for Christ by Greg Koukl (Mp3)

Living Loud: Defending Your Faith by Norman Geisler (Book)

Fearless Faith by Mike Adams, Frank Turek and J. Warner Wallace (Complete DVD Series)

 

David Oldham graduated from the University of Illinois (BA), received an M.Div. from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, and D.Min. from Fuller Seminary (2000). He has done post-doctoral with Dallas Willard (Course: “Spiritual Formation”). For 42 years, Oldham was a pastor in the Evangelical Free Church of America and then spent 3 years as a missionary in Honduras.

Original Blog Source: http://bit.ly/2pyYknW

/by