Theology and Christian Apologetics Archives | CrossExamined.org

Trying to Make Sense of Evil and Suffering

By: Justin Angelos

Have you ever been in the situation where you are trying to make sense of evil and suffering? At some point in a person’s life, there will be some sort of pain, or suffering, and some form of evil, either natural or moral evil. And then the question naturally arises, why? Why me? Why does God allow me to go through this? The question of evil and suffering can be a big stumbling block for people, in fact, this is why some people become atheists. In fact, atheists use evil and suffering as a weapon to discredit Christianity and say, there is no God. “How can an all-powerful all-loving God allow innocent people to suffer?” This is the type of question atheists will throw at theists.

Trying to Make Sense of the Origin of Moral and Natural Evil

Genesis chapter 3 gives us the origin of evil and suffering, 1. “Now the serpent said to the woman, did God really, you must not eat from any tree in the garden”? 2.” The woman said to the serpent, we may eat from the trees in the garden but, God did say, you must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch, or you will die.” (Gen 3:2 NIV).

The serpent, casts doubt in eve’s mind, the serpent twists God’s word by saying, “you will certainly not die, for God knows that when you eat from it, your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, know good and evil.” (V4) Genesis 3:16 God said to the woman I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing, and your desire shall be for your husband. In Genesis 3:17, God tells Adam, “Cursed is the ground because of you.” As a result of Adam’s sin, God cursed the ground and removed His blessing upon the earth.

The problem of evil and suffering is not only a question for Christians but also a problem for every other worldview. I once heard someone say, “Atheism does not remove the pain, it just removes the hope.” Philosophers have been unable to prove that an all-powerful, all-loving God and the existence of evil are logically contradictory, as they are not mutually exclusive like a married bachelor or a squared circle, the purpose of this article is not to solve the logical or philosophical problem of evil but, hopefully, shed some light on why God might allow evil and suffering.

Trying to Make Sense of the Definition of Evil

First, evil is not a thing, evil is a privation of good, in other words, good and evil are not relational properties, and good does not depend on evil for its existence. We can have good without evil, but we cannot have evil without good. Think of evil like this, imagine a shiny new BMW convertible car with a V6 engine, now imagine that same car with rust all over it. you can have a BMW without the rust, but rust would not be possible without the existence of the BWM. So, evil is a corruption of what is good. Therefore, the existence of evil does not disprove God’s existence, therefore there must be some morally sufficient reasons why God would allow evil and suffering.[i]

Is All Suffering Bad?

I have concluded that not all suffering is a bad thing, there is a little girl who was born with a rare disease called CIPA, which is a disease in which the little girl cannot feel any pain at all. She can step on a thick rusty nail, and she would not feel a thing, this little girl is literally incapable of feeling any physical pain. At first one would think, “what a blessing” but, it is not a blessing at all. It is a life-threatening disease.

The morning prayer of this little girl’s mother is, “Dear God, please let my little girl feel pain.”[ii] Her mother pleads with God to let her daughter feel pain, the very thing we wish God would remove from our lives, is the very thing her mother is asking God for. I remember being in agony laying in the emergency room with my gallbladder in 2020 asking God, “please remove this pain” and here is a little girl’s mother, who is asking God for pain.

Leibniz and Lennox on Evil and Suffering

Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz asked, what the best possible world is, and out of all the possible worlds, which one is the best world God could have created? God could have created nothing at all, but the best possible world God could have created is a world in which free will exists, and the possibility to freely choose and to freely reject.[iii] In any possible world in which there is no free will, love can never truly exist because love, requires freedom, a man cannot force a woman to fall in love with him, she must freely decide to love him. When people choose to love and worship God, it is freely done out of genuine love for God. This is not possible if, we were to live in a world where all of humanity is determined.

Dr. John Lennox explains it this way, “could God have created a world without suffering? Yes, He could have, but you and I would not live in it because, it would empty the world of something most precious to our humanity, and that is the capacity to love, and our capacity to love, hinges on our capacity to choose.” [iv]

Trying to Make Sense of Evil and Suffering through the Cross

The unique thing about Christianity is—at the heart of the gospel message—is a Cross. And on that cross, God himself suffers incomprehensible evil and suffering. Which says that God has not remained distant from our human suffering.[v] Christianity offers you a Savior, a personal God, who has bled and suffered in our world.

This also says, that God does truly care about our suffering, and the Lord who suffered, rose from the dead conquering sin and death and offering us eternal life, and the beauty, and the joy that awaits, our suffering becomes irrelevant when standing in the presence of God himself, we may never have a comprehensive understanding of why, God allows suffering, but, There is a Savior, who has suffered in our world, and a Savior who truly does cares about our suffering, and we have a Savior who truly does understand our pain.

“But he was pierced for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his wounds we are healed.” (Isaiah 53:5 ESV)

Recommended reading on Evil and suffering: Clay Jones, Why Does God Allow Evil?

Footnotes

[i] Sean McDowell, Clay Jones, why does God allow suffering? (Biola apologetics MA lecture week 4 biola.edu, 2023)

[ii] Lance Cashion. “Why Pain Is Good.” Lance Cashion, May 1, 2013. https://revolutionofman.org/why-pain-is-good/.

[iii] Britannica, T. Editors of Encyclopedia. “Best of all possible worlds.” Encyclopedia Britannica, June 6, 2017. https://www.britannica.com/topic/best-of-all-possible-worlds.

[iv] VeritasForum. “The Loud Absence: Where Is God in Suffering? | John Lennox at Harvard Medical School.” YouTube. YouTube, December 19, 2014. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPm6Y-pANYI.

[v] John Lennox, Where is God in Suffering?

Are you having a hard time dealing with your doubts?

Theology and Christian Apologetics

By Jason Jimenez

Have you ever doubted what you believe as a Christian?

The truth is, we all have. Every Christian (including your pastor) has had doubts. Even legends like John the Baptist, John Calvin, C. S. Lewis, Charles Spurgeon, and Martin Luther all struggled with their own set of doubts.

Perhaps you doubt because you have a misconstrued understanding of God. Or maybe you doubt because you underwent a traumatic experience and have never recovered from it. Whatever the reason, you will constantly battle with doubt until you genuinely give it over to God.

However, many Christians don’t know what to do with their doubts. Some feel embarrassed to be questioning God’s love. At the same time, other Christians are confused by the number of challenges brought against Christianity.

Remember the disciple, Thomas? You know, the guy we refer to as “Doubting Thomas”? In John 20, we read that the disciples told Thomas that they had seen the resurrected Christ. Thomas responds by saying, “Unless I see in his hands the mark of the nails, and place my finger into the mark of the nails, and place my hand into his side, I will never believe” (20:25). However, Thomas has gotten a bad rap. Thomas wasn’t being defiant and rejecting the fact that Jesus rose from the dead. He was merely expressing his doubt on the fact that he personally hadn’t seen Jesus physically in his resurrected body.

So what did Thomas do?

He put forward some reasonable criteria if he was to believe. Thomas took the gruesome facts about the crucifixion and specified what sort of evidence he would need that lined up to the facts to convince him to believe. Thomas conveyed reasonable doubts in search of reasonable answers. And that’s precisely what Jesus gave to Thomas.

I’m reminded of what one young man told me after I spoke at an event in California. He said he decided to register for the event at the last minute because he felt God wanted him to go. The young man shared that his doubts consumed him so much that he didn’t know what to believe anymore. At this point in his life, the man stopped praying, reading the Bible and recently stopped attending church. But after hearing the case for Christianity and being around passionate Christians who listened to him and answered his questions, he told me he felt his doubts disappear.

So, if you have doubts, don’t think for a second that God won’t lead you to the answers you seek in your life. No matter how strong your doubts might be, God is faithful. He has given you the Spirit of truth to help you work out your doubts, just like He helped Thomas and the young man who came to the apologetic conference. Both men were struggling, questioning, and searching for answers. God didn’t leave them in a state of confusion but sent them the answers they needed to overcome their doubts and strengthen their faith in Jesus.

God will do the same for you. All you need to do is ask God for help and allow Him to guide you to the right mentors, Christian resources, and credible explanations that will sharpen your faith. Peter writes these inspirational words, “Make every effort to supplement your faith with virtue, and virtue with knowledge, and knowledge with self-control, and self-control with steadfastness, and steadfastness with godliness, and godliness with brotherly affection, and brotherly affection with love. For if these qualities are yours and are increasing, they keep you from being ineffective or unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

When Science Becomes a Religion

2. Does God Exist?, Theology and Christian Apologetics

By Bob Perry

Science, and the technology it breeds, is a dominating force in our culture. Understandably so. Science has extended our lives and made them more comfortable. It promises to do more of the same in the future. But the successes of science also tempt us to place more value in it than it deserves. As a society, we do more than accept the idea that science provides a way to know how to improve the human condition. We’ve actually been led to believe that science gives us the only way to know anything. This way of thinking about science is called scientism. And scientism is more than a misplaced belief system. When science becomes a religion it also becomes a dangerous ideology. Sadly, all of us have accepted this idea to some extent. But it pays to be clear in our thinking about science.

What Is Scientism?

Philosopher of Science Tom Sorell defines scientism as:

“… the belief that science, especially natural science, is … the most valuable part of human learning … because it is the most authoritative, or serious, or beneficial … or that it is always good for subjects that do not belong to science to be placed on a scientific footing.”

There is a lot of history that has led us to think this way but I want to focus on how scientism affects the world we live in today.

A Reflection Of Our Scientism

Recently, a university near my home launched a citywide marketing campaign. Its purpose was to highlight the unparalleled success of the university hospital’s medical research and treatment programs. No doubt, they are phenomenal. But the slogan we see in local TV, radio, and billboard ads around our city says this:

“In Science Lives Hope.”

I don’t want to make to much of a local city advertising campaign, but do you see the reflection of scientism in this billboard? It’s not just that science is a valuable pursuit. We live in a culture that thinks science is the pathway to hope.

This is the ultimate promise of scientism. And the first thing you should notice is that it’s not a scientific claim. You can’t do a science experiment to prove that “in science lives hope.” And you can’t use science to show that science is the only way to know things. That’s because those kinds of claims aren’t scientific. At best, they are philosophical. And in the end, they’re really religious.

Here’s why I say that.

What Is Science?

The dictionary defines science as, “a branch study … that gives systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.” It comes from the Latin word scientia, which means “knowledge.” And that may be where the corruption of our thought about it began.

The problem with scientism is that it tells us that science is our only source of knowledge. But it’s not. Science is just one way to understand the world in which we live. And it’s not even the most reliable one.

Things You Know Without Using Science

There are plenty of things you know about the world that you didn’t discover by doing science. For instance, you know that:

Statements about the world cannot be both true and false at the same time and in the same way. This is just one of several laws of logic that you use all the time without even thinking about it.
You don’t need to conduct a science experiment to know mathematical truths (like 2+2=4). These are things that are necessarily true. They couldn’t be any other way.
You know more about what is going on in your own mental life than any other person (or scientist) ever could. In fact, the only way someone else could know what you’re thinking or feeling is if you tell them.
You have moral knowledge about the world and that it has no basis in science. There is no science project could convince you that torturing little babies for fun is a good thing to do.

The Prerequisites Of Science

Don’t miss the significance of these things. Each of them is a form of knowledge that you have without ever doing science. In fact, you have to use each of them before you can do science at all.

Science depends on using logical thinking to determine how to conduct an experiment or evaluate the data you get from one.

Mathematics is the language of science. You have to use math to describe the methodology and findings of any scientific experiment.

Every scientist has to be aware of his/her own mental states to determine how to plan and conduct their scientific research.

In order to rely on the conclusions of scientists, you have to trust that the scientists themselves are telling you the truth.

Science Doesn’t Say Anything

The important thing to understand about science is that it is nothing but a tool we use to understand the way our world works. Science doesn’t really tell us anything on its own. Or, as the infamous Frank Turek puts it:

“Science doesn’t say anything; scientists do.”

And therein lies the problem with scientism. What it teaches us depends on the philosophy of scientists who practice it. What they believe about the world can’t help but be reflected in the conclusions they draw. It’s human nature.

When we accept the notion that science is our only source of knowledge about the world, we fall prey to the presuppositions of scientists. That’s why I say scientism is a religion. It’s a belief system. It’s a way of thinking about the ultimate questions in life.

Where Science Can Lead

The sciences of astronomy, astrophysics, and cosmology brought us direct knowledge that the universe had a beginning. Some scientists view that as evidence for a Creator. Others deny that it infers any such thing.

From the biological sciences, we have learned incredible facts about the inner workings of the cell. Some scientists see a Designer in their microscopes. Others see the complex outcome of an undirected, natural process.

Nuclear physics created radiation oncology to kill cancer. But it also created the atom bomb.

Science and technology showed us ultrasound images that confirmed the reality of human life in the womb. And it is science that allows some parents to destroy that life if it doesn’t measure up to the genetic test results they expected.

It was scientists who developed vaccines, and who continue to find ways to cure genetically-based diseases. But it was also scientists who pursued eugenics, practiced forced sterilization, and conducted experiments on living human beings in the Nazi Death Camps.

Science has the potential to increase human flourishing. But it is no less likely to bring on an inconceivable level of human suffering. It all depends on the purpose you think it promises.

The Danger Of Scientism

Recently, I was “listening in” on a Facebook discussion about the nature and value of human life. I cut-and-pasted the following exchange from the comment thread:

Q: Do you believe that you have an intrinsic right to life, liberty, etc?

A: No, I do not. But I would believe in them if you could produce these intrinsic rights such that I could put them on my workbench and run reliability tests on them.

This is what you get in a culture convinced that anything worth knowing comes from science. It is the fruit of scientism — a person who believes that life, and love, and justice are illusions unless you can test them on a workbench.

Make no mistake, scientism is a religion. But it is not a religion that offers hope. It may be able to cure your disease, or extend your life, or make that life more comfortable. These are all good things. But they are temporal.

Real hope is eternal. And you’ll never find it in a test tube or a telescope.

Thoughts on Musician Plumb’s Deconstruction

4. Is the NT True?, Theology and Christian Apologetics

[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ admin_label=”section” _builder_version=”4.16″ global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_row admin_label=”row” _builder_version=”4.16″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”4.16″ custom_padding=”|||” global_colors_info=”{}” custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_text admin_label=”Text” _builder_version=”4.19.5″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” global_colors_info=”{}”]

How many times have you heard me cry out

“God please take this”?

How many times have you given me strength to

Just keep breathing?

Oh I need you,

God I need you now.

Though I walk through the shadows,

And I, I am so afraid.

Please stay… please stay right beside me,

With every single step I take.

These beautiful lyrics are from a 2013 song named “Need You Now by Tiffany Arbuckle Lee. But you probably know her by the name “Plumb.” In case you don’t know of Plumb, she was active until about 2018, and her songs regularly played on Christian radio. I remember listening to this song when I had a two year old, tears in my eyes knowing the feeling of this type of desperation.

I think anyone with a two year old gets this type of desperation, am I right?

She was inspired to write the song due to her suffering from debilitating anxiety when she was younger and the difficulties in her marriage. I remember hearing on the radio about the tough times that she was going through in her marriage. I recall thinking at the time how hard that must be for her to share something so personal. She shared how she and her husband had overcome so many obstacles. They were reconciled, were stronger than ever, and everything was made beautiful out of the ashes.

Until it wasn’t.

She and her husband are no longer together, and Plumb has been very quiet on the music scene. It’s now 2023, and she hasn’t released a single since 2018. It seems a lot has been going on for the singer in the last five years. I follow her on social media and didn’t really notice a lot from her until June 2022, when she made a controversial post about Roe Vs. Wade being overturned. She stunned her followers by implying that this isn’t something we need to be happy about and that the Church sometimes talks more about what we’re against than what we’re for. Granted, I have to agree to a point. But I would draw a hard line here and say that it would be exceedingly strange not to speak against killing innocent children, as this is exactly what many Christians believe abortion is!

It would be like a Christian speaking against child abuse, but then someone throws a rebuke at us, saying that because we’re Christians, we need to speak about what we’re for, not against. Is there actually a way to speak about the realities of abortion outside of speaking against it? Isn’t this precisely why it’s called “pro-life,” not “anti– Abortion”? But I digress.

She posted later in the year how she and her husband were officially done. I could tell it was a tough few years for her. She probably feels like she was in a toxic relationship that has left a wake of pain and confusion. No doubt this changed a lot for her. But it was the post from Wednesday, January 04, 2023 that stopped me in my tracks. It says:

Thx @walkingpastor for sharing this #richardrohr post…it’s a new year…begin again. I am. Asking questions I’ve been intimidated to ask. Being more open minded. Wanting to learn things I’ve been lazy to learn. Making space to love God and others well. That’s it. 3 years ago my life fell completely apart. In the process, deconstruction happened w/o me even realizing it at first. It’s been a long road. This year…I am starting a journey to piecing back together a new me. It’s not all gonna just magically happen in 2023…but it’s the year I am starting to begin again. And again. And…again. #GraceForSelf.

Richard Rohr. Deconstruction. I Am.

“Not Plumb!” I thought to myself! Another Christian singer has fallen for the Progressive Christian serpent speak. I thought about this post and prayed for days afterward for her and for those who have no idea of the consequences of these words. Though she hasn’t given many details in this regard, it would seem that Plumb is reading and aligning with the teachings of Progressive teacher Richard Rohr. This is an alignment with beliefs in a social justice gospel, inner divinity, a denial of many essential Christian doctrines such as the beautiful Atonement, that the Bible isn’t the Word of God, and much more. This made me sad.

“Two things happens when we hit rock bottom as Christians: We run from God, or we run to God.”

It seems it all started when her life fell apart, and I find that one of two things happens when we hit rock bottom as Christians: We run from God, or we run to God. They give up instead of look up. They look inward instead of upward.

I can’t sit here and say I understand her position or pain. But it seems that this was the turning point for her. How can someone who’s sung such beautiful lamented lyrics suddenly deny the God she claims to have sung for? Did she have someone to help guide and disciple her through this time? What questions has she been intimidated to ask? How well did she know her Bible? I naturally want more answers for clarification. The cultural climate is extremely aggressive toward Biblical Christianity. I think some are tired of running the race. I think some don’t want to be seen as being “against” the LGBTQ+ community. They want to seem loving, tolerant, open-minded, and non-judgmental. They are fatigued from fighting the good fight. So they stop fighting.

Christian, keep up the good fight. Cross that finish line, even if you have to crawl to it. Anchor yourself in God’s Truth.

There’s a God-shaped hole in all of us,

And the restless soul is searching.

There’s a God-shaped hole in all of us,

And it’s a void only He can fill.

I pray these words from her own song to remind her that deconstruction and Progressive Gospel will leave her empty and hopeless. Only Jesus can fill her void. He is the Living Water, the Bread of Life. I have been praying for her, and I hope you will join me.

Can A Perfect Being Create the Imperfect?

2. Does God Exist?, Theology and Christian Apologetics

By Al Serrato

A common challenge raised by atheists is to point out the brokenness of the world and to use it as evidence that there cannot be a God. Your God is perfect, they reason, so why did he create such an imperfect place as this? They point to the natural suffering in the world, the harm that hurricanes and earthquakes can wreak on mortal and fragile human beings. They highlight too the evil that people, driven by their basest emotions, inflict upon their fellow human beings, from theft to murder and everything in between. How could a perfect God have ended up with this as his creation?

This is how one skeptic framed the argument:

“If something is perfect, nothing imperfect can come from it. Someone once said that bad fruit cannot come from a good tree, and yet this “perfect” God created a “perfect” universe which was rendered imperfect by the “perfect” humans. The ultimate source of imperfection is God. What is perfect cannot become imperfect, so humans must have been created imperfect. What is perfect cannot create anything imperfect, so God must be imperfect to have created these imperfect humans. A perfect God who creates imperfect humans is impossible.”

The logic being employed by this challenger appears valid. If something that is perfect can only create perfection, then the Christian God is disqualified, as we believe God to embody complete perfection but concede that this world, and its human inhabitants, are clearly not perfect. But the problem with this argument is not the logic; it is instead the assumptions that underly the stated premises. The challenger’s first sentence – that nothing imperfect can come from a perfect creator – is not proven. It is simply an assertion. For the argument to actually hold, there must be some support for the premise that a perfect being is “limited” in what it can do, namely, that such a being can only create perfection. But the very articulation of this notion betrays the problem embedded in the assertion: it purports to limit the power of a perfect being. In other words, immediately after acknowledging God’s infinite power – his perfection – the skeptic, himself an imperfect being, attempts to limit the types of things God can do.

But how could the skeptic possibly know what God can or cannot do? On what basis can he conclude that a limitless, all-powerful being is constrained in the options available to him? Certainly, the possibility that a perfect being could create something less than himself is not contradictory. The opposite, of course, would be true; an imperfect being would be unable to impart perfection to his creation, something that he himself does not possess. So, it would be contradictory to claim that an imperfect being could create God. But why would a greater being be unable create something that is lesser than himself?

But there is an even greater flaw embedded in the challenge. That is, the skeptic assumes that God set out to create a “perfect” universe and somehow failed. Let’s take a moment to examine this conclusion? What evidence does the skeptic rely upon relating to God’s purpose or to conclude that God failed to achieve this purpose? To arrive at such a conclusion, one would first have to know the intent of the creator. Is not “perfection,” or at the very least success, dependent upon what the actor had as his goal? After all, perfection denotes a quality or performance or attribute that cannot be surpassed. For example, perfect vision would mean vision that cannot be improved upon. But to know what perfect vision is, one would first have to know what is to be accomplished with vision. Is it simply seeing in daylight, or also in complete darkness or underwater? A perfect robot would be one that completed its assigned tasks flawlessly, on time and without any failures or breakdowns. But to measure such performance, the reviewer would first need to know what tasks have been assigned, what the time limit is and what constitutes a breakdown or failure. It is only when one first has in mind a clear understanding of the designer’s purpose that one can decide whether the creation in question has achieved the ends or purposes set for it.

To this, the challenger would no doubt respond that this universe is imperfect under any definition. But by this he would simply mean that things break, that health suffers, that people do evil, or other things of this nature. But of course this only follows if one first assumes that God set out to create “perfectly” functioning humans in a flawless universe. Was this God’s goal? Could it have been, to the contrary, that God had in mind a much different purpose, specifically, to allow for the development of beings who possess free will and who can experience true love, freely given? In other words, did he instead set out to create conscious, intelligent and self-aware beings who were actually capable of exercising free will, and by so doing, necessarily capable of rejecting him and doing evil? Could the struggles we face in this broken world be part of a process by which we are developed, and refined?

This is certainly possible. If free will is to have any meaning, then people must of course be free to do wrong and to harm others. They must be free to reject love and embrace hate. They must be free to reject the God who created them.

Christians believe that God is, ultimately, love, which we understand to be the commitment of the will directed toward the good of the other. Love must be freely given if it is to have meaning. A spouse who remains in a marriage out of fear, or desire for material benefit, does not love the other spouse. We all desire to be the object of another’s true love, and by that we certainly do not mean someone who “cares” because they are afraid to be caught not caring or whose “love” is purchased. There is no reason to believe that God views love any differently. Despite our imperfections and limitations, we remain free to seek God and to ask him to do the refining work in us that is necessary to make us ready, and able, to reunite with him. In other words, as we make our way through this broken and imperfect world, we have the ability, and the freedom, to learn to love and begin to reciprocate the love of the God who gave us life, and intelligence and self-awareness. And, by contrast, we also remain free to reject him.

With sufficiently clear vision, it is possible to see that creating a universe filled with robots and other perfectly functioning things would not have accomplished God’s actual purpose. Yes, life on Earth is messy and often filled with great pain and suffering, much of which we struggle in vain to understand. As we make our way through this vale of tears, we may not understand God’s purpose; indeed, it may seem to us limited beings that such suffering has no purpose. Understanding that God’s plan requires imperfection in the here and now, and the suffering that may come from that, may not bring us comfort in the short run. But contemplating what God has in store for us, what reuniting with a perfect being will entail, may help us begin to make sense of our lives…and better plan our future. For what God has in mind is so much more ambitious – and wonderful – than creating something that fits our definition of perfection.

The Case for an Eternal Cosmic Observer

2. Does God Exist?, Theology and Christian Apologetics

By Brian Chilton

Modern understanding of quantum mechanics suggests that an eternal Cosmic Observer may in fact exist. If true, this holds numerous positive ramifications for arguments concerning the existence of God. Before we investigate the data, we must first ask what is meant by an eternal Cosmic Observer. A conscious observer is a living being that observes another entity. For instance, I am currently staring at the words being typed onto my computer screen. I am a living, conscious being that is observing the documentation of this piece. Spectators watching a sporting event are conscious observers of the events taking place in the stadium.

Physicists have observed that conscious beings can have an impact on physical objects and events simply by observing them. This impact precedes the dawning of conscious human beings, and really the existence of anything. Thus, this new body of research argues that all of reality is based upon the prior existence of an eternal cosmic observer. That Cosmic Observer must be God. While this article pushes a conclusion in a direction that is not necessarily implied by the biocentric physicists, it certainly appears that this would be the logical direction that the research leads.

So, what exactly does the data from the quantum world reveal about the Cosmic Observer? This article will note a few areas of considerable interest—biocentrism, consciousness, and time.

Biocentrism and the Case for an Eternal Cosmic Observer

Robert Lanza, MD, and Matej Pavsic, PhD spoke of biocentrism in their book The Grand Biocentric Design. Biocentrism holds that nothing can exist unless a conscious observer observes it. Lanza and Pavsic lay out seven key principles for biocentrism:

“What we perceive as reality is a process that involves our consciousness … Space and time are not independent realities but rather tools of the … mind.”[i]
“Our external and internal perceptions are inextricably intertwined.”[ii]
“The behavior of subatomic particles—indeed, all particles and objects—is inextricably linked to the presence of an observer.”[iii]
“Without consciousness, ‘matter’ dwells in an undetermined state of probability. Any universe that could have preceded consciousness only existed in a probability state.”[iv]
“The structure of the universe is explainable only through biocentrism because the universe is fine-tuned for life—which makes perfect sense as life creates the universe, not the other way around.”[v]
“Time does not have a real existence outside of animal sense perception. It is the process by which we perceive changes in the universe.”[vi]
“Space, like time, is not an object or a thing … Thus, there is no self-existing matrix in which physical events occur independent of life.”[vii]

While Lanza and Pavsic make connections to conscious human observers, the reality is that the universe existed prior to our conscious observations. If reality depends on life, then it stands to reason that a Conscious Observer must have lived before the creation of the universe. If the findings of biocentrism hold, then we could then say that reality depends on the existence of an eternal living Being. That Being we know as God.[viii]

Consciousness and the Case for an Eternal Cosmic Observer

According to experimentation, photons and electrons could appear, disappear, and rematerialize. The question was, what caused the wave function to “collapse and give birth to the object as an actual enduring entity.”[ix] According to the double-slit experiment, it was observations by conscious entities that made the difference. This finding is not something that is only made by Lanza and Pavsic. Max Planck, John Bell, and Niels Bohr also confirm the change evoked by consciousness.

But what exactly is consciousness? That is the million-dollar question. However, the best understanding of consciousness is that it is an awareness accompanied by volition, emotion, thought, and mind. Some claim that consciousness emerges from the brain.[x] Yet how could it be that the human consciousness is dependent on the brain when reality is dependent on the conscious mind? Rather than consciousness stemming from the physical world, it must be independent of the body while certainly connected to it.

If reality is dependent on consciousness and consciousness is dependent on physical reality, one eventually reaches an impasse. Because if one goes back far enough into the past, then one reaches Ground Zero, a time before physical entities existed. If reality is dependent on consciousness and there is a time when consciousness did not exist, then reality could not have come about. Thus, if reality is dependent on consciousness, then an eternal consciousness must exist independently of the space-time continuum that is our creation. As such, there must be an eternal Cosmic Observer. That Being we know as God.

Time and the Case for an Eternal Cosmic Observer

Lanza and Pavsic later contend that time also depends on a cosmic observer. They aver that “space and time are relative to the individual observer—we carry them around as turtles do their shells.”[xi] This led Lanza to believe that death is merely an illusion for conscious, living beings. While Lanza does not necessarily take a Christian perspective on the passage of death, he does note the everlasting aspect of living consciousness. With the volumes of objective evidence for near-death experiences (NDEs), we have a strong case to believe that death does not bring an end to the conscious, everlasting soul.

Conclusion: What Can We Deduce about the Eternal Cosmic Observer

Biocentrism is a fascinating field of study in quantum mechanics. Though it is relatively new, its findings have tremendous value in how we view the universe. According to the data presented in biocentrism—and if its deductions hold true—all material reality is dependent on consciousness. This is a revolutionary concept! Like NDEs, biocentrism completely shakes the concept of materialism—the idea that all reality is materialistic with no spiritual entities—to the core. Not only does biocentrism show that materialism is dependent on consciousness, but it also logically implies that a form of consciousness existed prior to the creation of the universe.

Furthermore, consciousness created reality. Or, one might say that reality is contingent upon the continued observance of the ultimate Cosmic Observer. These implications align perfectly with what one finds in the pages of Genesis and throughout the biblical text. For it was God who brought creation into existence (Gen. 1:1) and sustains it by his power. For God is “before all things, and in him all things hold together” (Col. 1:17).

Footnotes:

[i] Robert Lanza and Matel Pavsic, The Grand Biocentric Design: How Life Creates Reality (Dallas, TX: BenBella, 2020), 19.

[ii] Ibid., 20.

[iii] Ibid.

[iv] Ibid.

[v] Ibid., 21.

[vi] Ibid.

[vii] Ibid.

[viii] For a scholarly scientific article describing the impact of an observer on reality, see Dmitriy Podolskiy, Andrei O. Barvinsky, and Robert Lanza, “Parisi-Sourlas-like dimensional reduction of quantum gravity in the presence of observers,” Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics (2021).

[ix] Lanza and Pavsic, The Grand Biocentric Design, 76.

[x] Such is the case implied by Boris Kotchoubey, “Human Consciousness: What It Is and Where It Is From,” Psychology 23, 9 (April 2018), https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00567/full

[xi] Lanza and Pavsic, The Grand Biometric Design, 150.

Part 2 “When Your Opponent Cheats, What Should You do?”

Theology and Christian Apologetics

By John D. Ferrer

In part one[i] we raised a question from one of our viewers in Nigeria at the contentious Islamic/Christian border there. He asked what should Christians do when the other guy is cheating? In this case, Muslims from the north are rigging elections to win political influence over the Christian south. Our answer is don’t sink to their level, but honor God above all. Unless you’re literally forced to lie or cheat, then don’t lie or cheat.

The next logical question is, “Okay, don’t ‘sink to their level.’ But how do we do that?” Here are seven principles for when our opponent isn’t fighting fair.

First, “live not by lies.”

In 1974, just before his exile from the U.S.S.R., Alexander Solzhenitsyn wrote an essay that became his farewell address to Soviet Russia. Titled, “Live not by lies,” this essay answered how to stay spiritually grounded in the face of government oppression. Solzhenitsyn distilled his wisdom down to one clear warning: “live not by lies.” Oppressors will press you. They’ll hurt your body, restrict your freedom, and test your faith. But they can’t touch your soul unless you let them. When you let them make you a liar, you’ve volunteered for that corruption.

To be clear, “live not by lies” doesn’t mean be foolhardy. You don’t have to draw a target on your back or invite persecution. But neither should you let them make you a liar. You can be discrete. Measure your words. Be quiet where your words will be misconstrued. Just don’t let them make you a liar. Or a cheat, for that matter. Otherwise, you get pulled into their game. Why would you want to play their game? They’re masters at it. You’re not. And you’ll lose. Plus you’d betray your own conscience and faith just by playing it. Soon you’re no better than they are.

Second, get creative with the influence you do have.

You have more influence than you may realize. Get creative. Be savvy. You’ll be surprised at the ways you can affect positive change. Besides voting and public office, there’s also citizen journalism, signing petitions, starting “go-fund-me” campaigns, peaceful protests, concerts, graphic arts, social media, boycotts, rearing children, and more.

This is Biblical too. Scripture instructs people not just in the law but also in wisdom. There’s a whole genre of biblical books called “wisdom literature” (Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Solomon). Scripture guides us with law and wisdom as complementary traditions running parallel like train tracks so we can get where we need to go. We need more than just law-abiding moral behavior. We also need wisdom to find the best way to obey God’s laws. Jesus implies as much when he says to his disciples,

“Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves” (Mt 10:16)

Third, reframe the game

We should also remember the bigger battle happening here. Stolen elections aren’t just about politics. They’re not just earthly warfare or even just battles between church and mosque. This is ultimately spiritual warfare. When we understand that fact, we can reframe our earthly struggle in terms of the bigger picture.

We could dwell on this point, but for now, just remember that spiritual warfare isn’t a metaphor. It’s literal. It forces everyone to take sides. It engulfs every other battlefield. And it rewrites the rules of engagement. As Paul says, “our struggle is . . . against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. Therefore put on the full armor of God” (Eph 6:12-13).

Fourth, remember the real enemy

Our ultimate enemy isn’t other people but rather Satan and his forces. Before Paul describes this spiritual warfare in Ephesians 6 he points out that “our struggle is not against flesh and blood” (vs. 12). You may be tempted to treat your earthly opponent as the real enemy. But that person might not even be a rebel. He or she could just be a confused and deluded captive who doesn’t know any better. We fight differently against captives than against a rebel army. So don’t forget who the real enemy is.

Fifth, we don’t fight as the world fights

Since our battle is ultimately spiritual warfare, and Satan is the real enemy, it should be no surprise that we need to fight differently. I can’t explain this point any better than St. Paul does.

“For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.” (2 Corinthians 10:3-5)

Sixth, you can’t force divine justice

This world is fallen, it remains fallen, and will keep falling… until Christ returns. In the meantime, we have only hints and bits of justice. They’re like glimpses into the eternal perfection of heaven. God carved out lots of room for us to practice redemptive influence here and now. But be assured that justice isn’t guaranteed till Judgment Day.

If you try to “force” God’s hand, seeking divine justice now, you’re probably using questionable methods. Plus, you might make the same mistake Judas did. Some scholars believe that Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus in hopes of triggering an uprising where Jesus would have to lead a revolt against Rome to claim his Messianic crown. We can’t be certain of Judas’s motives, but we can say that in betraying Jesus, even Judas’s best intentions couldn’t redeem those actions. You may be tempted to “force” justice on this side of eternity by taking “creative license” with the law. But this is quicksand. There’s no clear biblical case for vigilante justice in the New Testament.

Seventh, draw courage from believers who’ve gone before you.

We’re not alone in this struggle. Persecution and hardship are normal Christian living (John 16:33). Yet believers across church history have pressed on. And so can you. Whether it was from Roman laws, Jewish zealots, Muslim invaders, state authorities, or rude neighbors, persecution is part of normal Christian living. Countless believers have gone before us setting an example to follow. Some faced persecution. Some died as martyrs. But all of them ran their race and passed the baton to future generations. That’s us. As we “run the race” marked out for us, they are a “great cloud of witnesses” now cheering us on from the stands (Heb 12:1). For their sake, and for God’s, we cannot afford to take shortcuts, bending the rules for some “greater good.”

Final Warnings

So how do we answer whether “turnabout is fair play”? In We need to honor God above all – even when our opponent breaks the law. We talked at length about how to do that. But a few more warnings are in order.

If we cheat because our opponent cheats, then we invite God’s judgment all the same. Plus, we risk losing our integrity. Our character is hard to earn and easy to lose especially if we forget that the ends don’t really justify the means. Also, remember that we represent our family, our church, and our God. So, if we ever lie and cheat for political gains it’s like spraying graffiti on the walls of our home or church: “LIAR!” “CHEAT!” Winning an election is not worth defacing our family name, our church, or the name of Jesus.

Are there any exceptions?

Earlier I mentioned some possible exceptions that don’t apply here. Stay tuned for part 3 in this series where we talk about dilemmas!

Footnotes:

[i] https://crossexamined.org/when-your-opponent-cheats-what-should-you-do

When Your Opponent Cheats, What Should You do?

Theology and Christian Apologetics

By John D. Ferrer

You may have heard the phrase, “turnabout is fair play.” If your opponent on the soccer pitch, football field, or basketball court is illegally pushing, shoving, and elbowing you, then it’s only fair that you can push back, right? Turnabout, as they say, is fair play. And as long as it’s not against the law, immoral, or physically harming anyone, then that principle might work fine at least for ball games and boardgames. But what about the game of politics?

Frank and I had a podcast on this topic too. Check it out at:
When Your Opponent Cheats, What Should You Do? | with Dr. John Ferrer

How far should we take this idea of, “turnabout is fair play?” A gentleman from Nigeria by the name of Austin sent us a question about this last week.

“Imagine that you’re in the ring of boxing with an opponent who is breaking all the rules and nobody is calling him to order, would you keep following the rules? To be more specific, this analogy is to capture the imbalance of political power between the muslim north and the christian south of Nigeria. As I’m sure you already know, the survival of Islam is hinged on political power and domination. Our muslim brothers are extremely political, while the christians are, for the most part, passive. But besides the political docility of the christians, our muslims don’t really play fair. For example, muslims go as far as registering underaged voters. This is one of the major reasons northern votes beat southern votes in federal elections, not that the number of muslims is above that of christians. There’s a lot more of their shenanigans that I’d rather not name here. The situation is far uglier than I’ve decided to capture at this present time… So, how do you see this? How do you play fair with an opponent who doesn’t play fair?”

Austin is clearly concerned for more than just apologetics. He yearns for justice. Beneath the looming weight of political corruption and injustice, he is staring down one of the largest militant fronts of modern day Islam. He’s rightfully concerned that religious and political opponents have rigged the system. Of course, he wants to do something about it!

If his opponents in the Muslim north are cheating and abusing the system to stay in power, then perhaps Christians in the South can use the same tactics to stand against the spreading Islamic caliphate. The Christians would have good motives. The other guys cheated first. So, is it okay to lie and cheat if the other guy is doing it?

In short, no.

While I sympathize with Austin in Nigeria, I can’t condone that behavior. He’s asking a practical question, of whether the “ends justify the means.” That axiom is the centerpiece of Utilitarianism[i], a non-Christian ethical theory coined by Jeremy Bentham. Sure, lying and cheating might help you win elections. And you might be cheating the same way your opponents are. But the ends don’t justify the means. The means need to be justified themselves.

Moreover, lying and cheating won’t preserve the integrity of the church or showcase the light of Christ to the world. Now, we’ll get into some exceptional cases later. But at this point, if you aren’t literally being forced lie and cheat, then you shouldn’t lie or cheat.

Heart check

Perhaps the best starting point for unpacking that answer is to do a heart-check. Ask yourself: Do you fear and love God more than anyone else?

“Do you fear and love God more than anyone else?”

By that I mean, do you fear God as the sovereign judge and King more than you fear anyone else? And do you love God as your heavenly Father, more than you love anyone else? When we can answer this heart-check with a resounding “Yes!” then we’re in a good position to face hardship and do the gritty work of apologetics.

This heart-check was Peter’s advice to first century believers. Apologists love to quote him in 1 Peter 3:15b, “always be prepared to give an answer.” But just before that classic call to defend the faith, Peter sets it inside a persecution context. In verse 14 he says, “But even if you should suffer for what is right, you are blessed. Do not fear their threats; do not be frightened.” Answering how to do that, Peter says to put Jesus first. “But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord” (vs15a). The surrounding passage, 1 Peter 3:9-17[ii] reinforces this point saying, “do not repay evil with evil,” “or insult with insult,” “repay evil with blessing,” “keep [your] tongue from evil and lips from deceitful speech,” and “suffer for doing good” rather “than for doing evil.”

That’s easy for you to say

Of course, it’s easy for me to say all this. My job, my family, my way of life, are all safe. There are no political enemies or religious invaders beating down our door. My home church faces no real danger of conquest, at the hands of radical Muslims, militant Hindus, or even snarky atheists. It’s easy for me to tell folks to endure persecution heroically when it’s their persecution and not mine. That’s why I’m not speaking on my own authority. Apostle Peter said it first. I’m just agreeing with him. If I ever face persecution like my brothers and sisters in Nigeria are facing, I pray I’d have the courage to take my own advice, I pray I would follow St. Peter in honoring Christ as Lord and suffering well.

“Love and honor Christ as Lord, then suffer well.”

How do we do that?

At this point, you may be saying to yourself, “Okay, be righteous and don’t ‘sink to their level.’ I get it. But how do we do that?” That’s a great question. I’m glad you asked! Stay tuned for part 2 where I explain seven principles we should all follow when our opponent isn’t fighting fairly.

Footnotes:

[i] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/utilitarianism-history/

[ii] https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Peter+3%3A9-17&version=ESV

Who Made God?

2. Does God Exist?, Atheism, Theology and Christian Apologetics

By Bobby Conway

Have you ever found yourself in a conversation with a skeptic only to be asked in gotcha fashion, “Well, who made God?” Asking the question, “Who made God?” is like asking, “How did Beethoven’s Moonlight Sonata taste?” It just doesn’t fit. The question is a classic category mistake. God wasn’t made and Beethoven’s Moonlight Sonata can’t be tasted. Adding to this blunder, the famed atheist Bertrand Russell notoriously said, “If everything must have a cause, then God must have a cause.” Yet, it’s not true that everything must have a cause. Only that which begins to exist must have a cause. And herein God is perched up in a category all His own.

God is the uncreated Creator.

He is the beginning-less Beginner.

He is the uncaused Cause of all that began to exist.

Think about it. Everything that had a beginning had a cause. And every beginning had a Beginner. And every product has a Producer. And every initiative must have an Initiator. If there is an origin, there must be an Originator. And since there is a genesis, there is a Generator.

That generator my friend is, well, you guessed it.

God.

The Scriptures exclaim from the very first verse, “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1). Far from being made, God is the maker of all things made.

Again, note the distinction. The difference between God and everything else that exists is everything else began to exist whereas God just exists. Do you remember what God said to Moses when He appeared to him in the burning bush? Moses said,

“If I come to the people of Israel and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what shall I say to them?” God said to Moses, “I am who I am.” And he said, “Say this to the people of Israel, ‘I am has sent me to you’” (Exodus 3:13-14).

What was God saying to Moses? He was revealing Himself to Moses as the self-existent one. As the one who wasn’t made. God was saying, “Moses, go tell them that the One who never began to exist sent you. The unmade One.”

Unlike us, God is what philosophers refers to as a necessary being, an independent being. And each of us, unlike God, are contingent beings and, therefore, dependent. The universe is also contingent because God spoke it into existence. This means that all things that began to exist are dependent on God for existence.

It turns out there is a problem with the question, “Who made God?” The word made can’t be said of God. For God is the unmade Maker. As expected, he’s in a league of his own.

Don’t Panic: A Step by Step Approach to Teaching Kids About God

Apologetics for Parents, Theology and Christian Apologetics

By Shanda Fulbright

It never fails. When churched kids hit a certain age, I get panicked messages from parents. They usually start with, “We’re a Christian family, but my son doesn’t want to go to church anymore. He doesn’t believe in God.” Or, “I assumed my daughter was pro-life but she just told me women have the right to choose. How can this be when we are a pro-life family?”

These messages never come when the child is 8 or 9. I never hear about an 11 year old struggling to believe whether or not the Bible is true. I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, I’m just saying this isn’t the age where parents start to panic.

It’s usually around the time our kids are well into their teenage years that parents begin to notice our kids aren’t on board with the whole God, Jesus, and the Bible stuff. Why does it take so long to realize this? There are two main factors. First, we assume that because our kids go to church, they are adopting the beliefs of Christianity. Second, most parents aren’t being discipled, so it’s impossible to catch the discrepancies in the worldview our child actually has compared to a biblical worldview until something big happens – like the approval of abortion or a blatant disbelief in God.

This is where parents hit the panic button.

Is there hope for parents whose teenagers are about to walk away from Christianity? The good news: as long as we have Christ there is always hope. The reality: it’s not going to be as easy in the teen years as it would have been to teach them when they were younger. It will take diligence, and if diligence is what’s been missing all along, be diligent now.

The question is, what does diligent teaching look like in the 21st century?

Learning is a layered process.That means we must transfer knowledge strategically, layer by layer. There has to be a foundation laid and basic knowledge taught before anyone can understand larger concepts. This goes for students of any age. If we skip the foundation, there will be a gap in knowledge. In Christianity, the gap in knowledge is evident when Christians lack a biblical worldview. By the time parents hear their kids expressing a disbelief in God, the gap is already there and it’s likely because they skipped the foundational stage.

So, let’s discuss the three basic stages in the layered process of learning, no matter how old your kids are. Keep in mind that there are recommended age groups to begin each stage, but if you are just beginning to disciple your kids, this is the process from beginning to end.

The good news is that you can always begin at any stage, depending on where you left off. And if you have been doing this all along, keep plugging away knowing that in due time you will reap a harvest (Gal 6:9).

Foundational stage: God’s Word (suggested age – birth to primary)

The path to a biblical worldview begins with biblical literacy. The Bible talks about the word of God as the foundation on which to build (Matt 7:24-27). It also refers to the word of God as spiritual food. It is a necessity of life that all who follow the Lord must implement into their daily walk. But we can’t expect our kids to do this without help.

The approach we take to teaching our children is important because how we present the word of God will determine how they view the word of God. Is it important to you? Then it will be important to them. Do you believe it is the infallible word of God? Then they will too. If you present it as stories instead of historical narratives, then they will view it as a fictional story thrown into their bedtime routine. The language we use when we talk to our kids about God and His word matters. So present the word as a necessity, not as an option.

Connection Stage: God’s World (suggested age – adolescent to preteen)

When we teach apologetics to Christians, we must take a different approach than when we use apologetics to defend our faith with a secular audience. Middle schoolers must begin to make the connection that God’s word and God’s world are not in conflict. We will only be successful at adding this layer to our children’s learning if we laid the foundation of biblical literacy during the first stage.

What happens if we didn’t? The good news is that we can start now. Weave biblical truths into your instruction so that the apologetics concepts are tethered to Scripture. For example, kids need to know God’s nature of goodness in order to understand why He is the moral law-giver. Do a study on God’s attributes before you study the apologetics arguments. This will help fill-in the biblical literacy gaps missed in stage one. Just remember – saturate them with the word of God in every stage, not just the first stage. The word of God is at the core of Christian education.

It’s imperative that we ensure our middle schoolers see how God’s word and God’s world connect. Scientific evidence that points to God’s existence supported by biblical truths accomplishes this. This is where the Cosmological and Design Arguments come in handy. If we don’t help middle schoolers connect the word with the world, it’s likely they’re already questioning the validity of one and where they fit into the other.

Action Stage: Live God’s word in God’s world (suggested age – teens to adult)

How we view the world affects how we live. At this stage, it is important to help your teens make the connection between the word of God and how it applies to the issues of life. In other words, get comfortable with having uncomfortable conversations.

It is the goal to get them to this stage with a biblical worldview so that they draw from biblical truths when looking for the answers to life’s questions. Students who have been discipled and understand why there are good reasons to believe Christianity is true will begin to connect knowledge of God and His word to the understanding of God and His word, and live for God by His word. In fact, this is where the evidence of a biblical worldview is seen in the life of our kids. When the knowledge of all they’ve learned leads them to an understanding of it, they are able to live it. And that’s how we know what someone truly believes.

All too often, Christians compartmentalize the Bible and separate it from the real world. We must be willing to bring real world issues into our conversations with our teens. But I caution you not to wait for your teen to come to you. Open the door to hard conversations about gender and sexuality, abortion, co-habitation, and all of the hot-button topics that make parents cringe. Trust me. Once you get used to having hard conversations they won’t be so hard anymore and you will help your teen live the word in the world.

Successful parents have this in common

If you find your kids are older and they’re beyond the first and second stages suggested here, don’t panic. As I said before, as long as Jesus is in the equation there is always hope. However, the stages of teaching a biblical worldview don’t change:

First, lay the foundation of biblical literacy: God’s word.

Next, add the building block of apologetics: God’s world.

Finally, teach them to apply it: live the word in God’s world.

For those parents who are wondering if the opportunity to teach your kids has passed you by, I want to offer some encouragement. You are the most influential person in your child’s life and that will never change. Use that influence to go back and make up the ground you think you’ve lost. Because as I’ve said before, with Christ it is never too late.

It is our job as parents to make sure we do all we can to raise godly men and women. Our culture looks different today than the cultures before us, but the biblical mandate to parents has always been the same. God calls us to be diligent, and parents must answer the call.

Trying to Make Sense of the Origin of Moral and Natural Evil

Trying to Make Sense of the Definition of Evil

Is All Suffering Bad?

Leibniz and Lennox on Evil and Suffering

Trying to Make Sense of Evil and Suffering through the Cross

Footnotes

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Recommended resources related to the topic:

What Is Scientism?

A Reflection Of Our Scientism

What Is Science?

Things You Know Without Using Science

The Prerequisites Of Science

Science Doesn’t Say Anything

Where Science Can Lead

The Danger Of Scientism

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Biocentrism and the Case for an Eternal Cosmic Observer

Consciousness and the Case for an Eternal Cosmic Observer

Time and the Case for an Eternal Cosmic Observer

Conclusion: What Can We Deduce about the Eternal Cosmic Observer

Footnotes:

Recommended resources related to the topic:

First, “live not by lies.”

Second, get creative with the influence you do have.

Third, reframe the game

Fourth, remember the real enemy

Fifth, we don’t fight as the world fights

Sixth, you can’t force divine justice ­

Seventh, draw courage from believers who’ve gone before you.

Final Warnings

Are there any exceptions?

Footnotes:

Recommended resources related to the topic:

In short, no.

Heart check

That’s easy for you to say

How do we do that?

Footnotes:

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Recommended resources related to the topic:

This is where parents hit the panic button.

Foundational stage: God’s Word (suggested age – birth to primary)

Connection Stage: God’s World (suggested age – adolescent to preteen)

Action Stage: Live God’s word in God’s world (suggested age – teens to adult)

Successful parents have this in common

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Sixth, you can’t force divine justice