By Natasha Crain
Having blogged for over six years now, I’ve received hundreds (and hundreds) of comments and emails from skeptics of Christianity. Once in a while, I receive one from a pleasant non-believer who is truly interested in discussing evidence, asking reasonable questions, and engaging in thoughtful discussion.
But that’s the exception.
Those who contact me typically wield the tool of shaming to make their point—something highly ironic given how much skeptics talk about the importance of evidence.
To be clear, none of the non-believers I personally know would use shaming tactics in person. But when people are behind their screens, it brings down the “barrier” of civility, and faith conversations often look very different. You can see it on social media (even with friends who wouldn’t say such things in person), comments on news articles, blog posts—everywhere.
Kids need to understand these emotion-laden shaming attempts they’ll encounter. Like so much else, this is something parents can and should prepare them for. Here are the five most common skeptics who want to shame your kids for being Christian.
- The Science Thumper
Shame Tactic: Making the child believe they don’t have enough scientific expertise to understand that belief in God is unnecessary and silly.
The Science Thumper applies some notion of science to each and every conversation about Christianity, making it the final word on any given topic, and implying that science and Christianity are at irreconcilable odds.
For example, in response to one of my blog posts about the meaning of life in a theistic worldview, a skeptic commented:
You need to study the mechanisms of replication, mutation, natural selection if you want to understand why life exists and is the way it is. If life and existence are too amazing, astounding and astonishing to exist naturally… then how much more complex is god [sic] for having created it? … Did you invent Superman as a panacea answer for everything you don’t understand?
Questions of faith and science are very important, but framing faith and science as a choice—one option for the unsophisticated and one for those in the know—is a cheap and false dichotomy.
Parent Solution: Thoroughly address faith and science topics so kids understand how shallow and unnuanced the Science Thumper’s claims are. See Talking with Your Kids about God for six chapters outlining the conversations parents need to have.
- The Indoctrination Informer
Shame Tactic: Informing the child that the ONLY reason they believe in Jesus is that they’ve been “indoctrinated” by their parents.
Indoctrination is a word that both Christians and skeptics use wrong. Skeptics often think a kid has been indoctrinated any time they’ve been taught a given religion is true. Christians often think indoctrination means teaching kids Christian doctrine. These misunderstandings lead to conversations that unfortunately sound like this:
Skeptic to Christian parent: “You’re indoctrinating your kids [by raising them in a Christian home]! Let them think for themselves.”
Christian parent to skeptic: “You’re right! I’m teaching my kids Christian doctrine, and I’m proud of it!”
Both skeptics and Christians need to understand that indoctrination means teaching someone to fully accept the ideas, opinions, and beliefs of a particular group and to not consider other ideas, opinions, and beliefs. In other words, indoctrination is a problem with how you teach someone something. It is not inherently related to any particular belief system, though religion is one type of belief system where indoctrination is possible.
Parent Solution: Intentionally introduce your kids to skeptics’ challenges, so they never feel the need to question whether you tried to shelter them from other beliefs. For more on the importance of this, see the post “If Your Kids are Someday Shocked by the Claims of Skeptics, You Didn’t Do Your Job.”
- The Miracle Mocker
Shame Tactic: Making the child feel gullible for believing something that doesn’t happen according to natural laws.
Here’s a recent comment a skeptic left on my blog:
Just because some so-called holy book says something is true doesn’t make it true. Why do you believe outlandish claims about a god [sic] speaking things into existence, or about a man being swallowed by a fish for a few days and surviving, a worldwide flood [and ark] that fit all of the animals in it and eight people, or a story about a virgin getting pregnant? None of that makes sense, you don’t have any proof that it happened, but you still think it’s true. Why do you prefer to believe outlandish claims because they’re religious?
The logic here is what’s “outlandish” (no one believes all miraculous claims simply because they’re religious), but my point is not to critique the details of this particular comment. My point is to show how skeptics present miracles in a way that parades them as “obviously” absurd because (and by definition!), they don’t follow the course of nature.
Parent Solution: Teach kids the basic logic that if God exists, miracles are possible, and if God doesn’t exist, miracles are not possible (for more on this, see chapter 24 in Keeping Your Kids on God’s Side). This brings the question of miracles back to the underlying question of the evidence for God’s existence, so kids understand that the person claiming miracles are silly is simply presupposing God doesn’t exist.
- The Self-Sufficient Scoffer
Shame Tactic: Boasting that the skeptic doesn’t “need” God—and implying that anyone who does has an inferior need for an emotional crutch to get through life.
Oftentimes, when ex-Christians recount their deconversion story, they conclude with a glib comment of how they moved on because they no longer “needed” God. The subtly condescending implication, of course, is that those who believe in God do so because they don’t have the emotional resources to make it through life admitting that we live in a universe of pitiless indifference.
This is a strange conclusion that betrays a lack of deeper insight.
If God exists, we need Him. All things were created through and for Him; He is the Source and Sustainer of everything by definition. Therefore, if God exists, it’s not a choice to need Him… it’s simply a fact that we do.
If God doesn’t exist, we don’t need Him. We cannot need Him. We cannot need something that doesn’t exist.
In other words, saying that you don’t need God anymore is a nonsensical conclusion. Of course, you don’t need God if He doesn’t exist. And if He does exist, you can’t choose to not need Him.
What this kind of statement betrays, therefore, is that the skeptic originally believed in God based on felt needs (desires) rather than on the conviction that He truly exists. When they realized they didn’t need to believe in God to satisfy those felt needs, they simply eliminated Him from the picture and met those needs in other ways.
Parent Solution: Be mindful of helping kids build a faith based on the conviction of God’s existence and the truth of Christianity—not on felt needs for things like being happy, being a good person, or finding meaning in life. In other words, if anyone ever asks your child why they’re a Christian, you should want their response to be, “Because Christianity is true!” For more on escaping the felt need pattern, see the post “Do Your Kids Know Why They Need God?”
- The Tolerance Enforcer
Shame Tactic: Making the child feel like they are unloving and hateful for taking a biblical stance that doesn’t approve of all choices as morally acceptable.
In a spectacular display of irony, the Tolerance Enforcer shames kids into believing that they must be horrible people for disagreeing with non-believers on the morality of various issues. By labeling kids hateful and unloving rather than thoughtfully discussing the evidence for the truth of the underlying worldviews that produce divergent moral conclusions, they rely on purely emotional attacks. Kids without an intellectual foundation for the Christian worldview are left feeling that they must be wrong about the truth of their faith.
Parent Solution: Help kids understand the irony of a person championing tolerance who won’t tolerate Christian beliefs without labeling disagreement hateful. Then demonstrate how Christians and non-Christians will necessarily disagree on moral issues because we have a different source of authority—the Bible. Here’s an example.
In all of these cases, remember that shame, by definition, is “a painful emotion caused by a strong sense of guilt, embarrassment, unworthiness or disgrace.” In other words, the root of shame is feeling inadequate.
In order for our kids to feel (more than) adequate when they encounter shaming attempts, they need to have the deep conviction that what they believe is really true. Only then will they be able to fully see these shame tactics for what they are—shallow and baseless emotional attacks—and be able to say confidently with the apostle Paul, “I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes” (Romans 1:16).
Natasha Crain is a blogger, author, and national speaker who is passionate about equipping Christian parents to raise their kids with an understanding of how to make a case for and defend their faith in an increasingly secular world. She is the author of two apologetics books for parents: Talking with Your Kids about God (2017) and Keeping Your Kids on God’s Side (2016). Natasha has an MBA in marketing and statistics from UCLA and a certificate in Christian apologetics from Biola University. A former marketing executive and adjunct professor, she lives in Southern California with her husband and three children.
Original Blog Source: http://bit.ly/2tHfM82
¿Sigue el cristianismo siendo útil? Las generaciones más jóvenes no parecen pensarlo así
EspañolPor Michael Sherrard
De acuerdo con un estudio reciente, las generaciones venideras ya no le ven el sentido al cristianismo. Estoy seguro que has visto lo que estos estudios sociológicos han descubierto: mientras más joven la generación, más post-cristiana es. Los jóvenes americanos están menos inclinados a creer en el cielo o en el infierno, que la escritura es la palabra de Dios, que Satanás es real o que incluso Dios existe. Ellos oran menos, van con menor frecuencia a la iglesia y dan menos ofrendas a la iglesia que las generaciones pasadas.
Muchos están abandonando el cristianismo por completo.
Uno de cada cinco adultos se consideran a sí mismos ser “Ex-cristianos”. Y para poner esto en perspectiva, eso significa que hay cuatro ex-cristianos por cada nuevo convertido al cristianismo. De hecho, los “ex-cristianos” combinados con los ateos y agnósticos ahora componen uno de los grupos religiosos más grandes en América, los religiosos no afiliados. Y un gran porcentaje de ellos son jóvenes adultos. Uno de cada de tres jóvenes adultos afirma no tener alguna afiliación religiosa.
Entonces, ¿por qué las generaciones jóvenes se están marchando de la fe? Y ¿qué podemos hacer al respecto? ¿Es simplemente porque ya no creen que sea verdad o útil?
Creo que podemos encontrar una respuesta en Deuteronomio. El sexto capítulo nos enseña que es la responsabilidad de las generaciones pasadas pasar la palabra de Dios a la nuevas generaciones. Particularmente es el trabajo de los padres. Nuestros niños deben aprender de nosotros qué es lo que significa seguir a Dios.
¿Lo han hecho? ¿Han aprendido de nosotros?
Nuestros niños han aprendido muchas cosas de nosotros, estoy seguro. Les hemos enseñado la importancia de la educación. Hemos pagado para que tengan tutores y clases de piano. Los hemos conectado con los deportes y también hemos pagado por entrenamientos privados. Hemos hecho muchísimo por ellos para prepararlos para la adultez. Pero ¿les hemos transmitido la cosa de más importancia?
En este punto, puedo responder con mucha confianza la pregunta ¿por qué las nuevas generaciones han abandonado el cristianismo? La respuesta es que nosotros lo hemos hecho.
O si nosotros no la hemos abandonado, ciertamente no la hemos pasado a la siguiente generación. Estudio tras estudio nos muestra lo que ya sabemos. Virtualmente ningún joven adulto sabe lo que la Biblia enseña. Los jóvenes adultos simplemente no saben nada acerca del cristianismo. Entonces no estoy seguro si es correcto decir que los jóvenes adultos se están alejando del cristianismo. Parece ser que nunca fueron realmente introducidos al cristianismo.
Entonces, ¿qué hay que hacer? Es simple. Conoce la palabra de Dios por ti mismo y enséñalo a la siguiente generación, pero no solamente tenemos que enseñarlo, debemos vivirlo también. Una de las cosas más impresionantes de las nuevas generaciones es que pueden detectar a alguien falso a un kilómetro de distancia. Las generaciones jóvenes necesitan ver el cristianismo, no solo escuchar acerca de él.
Enseñé en la escuela secundaria por siete años, “fue el mejor de los tiempos; fue el peor de los tiempos”. Estoy bromeando, amo a los estudiantes de secundaria. ¿Sabes qué es lo que preguntan los estudiantes con más frecuencia? Es, “¿cuándo voy a usar esto?”. Y esta es precisamente la pregunta correcta que un estudiante debe hacer.
Me pregunto, ¿han visto nuestros jóvenes adultos una respuesta a “cuando van a utilizar el cristianismo? ¿Han visto que nos fue bien porque hemos obedecido fielmente la palabra de Dios? De nuevo, si queremos que la siguiente generación acepte la bondad de seguir a Jesucristo, ellos deben ver su bondad en nosotros. Por lo tanto, no solo les enseñe la palabra de Dios sino muéstresela. Muestre su poder con la forma en que vives.
Finalmente, junto con el conocimiento de la palabra de Dios y con que nos vean usarla, la siguiente generación debe entender la palabra de Dios. Deuteronomio 6:20 nos dice que tenemos que darles a nuestros niños una respuesta cuando ellos pregunten ¿qué significa la palabra de Dios? Tristemente, muchísimos niños y adolescentes se encontraron con un Shh y un “solo ten fe” en vez de una respuesta cuando ellos tienen una duda acerca del cristianismo.
Pero Dios no espera que tengamos una fe ciega. Además, Él no quiere eso. Él no nos pide seguirlo porque Él simplemente lo dice y fin de la historia. Él espera y nos permite hacer preguntas sinceras y humildes. Porque al hacer preguntas genuinas, uno busca el entendimiento. Dios quiere que lo amemos con nuestra mente también. Él quiere seguidores sinceros y verdaderos, no máquinas programadas.
Entonces los jóvenes adultos, deberían preguntar ¿por qué Dios deja que malas cosas le sucedan a personas buenas?
Deberían preguntar ¿cómo sabes que la Biblia es la palabra de Dios y no es algún fraude?
Deberían preguntar ¿cómo sabes si Jesús en verdad resucitó de entre los muertos?
Deberían preguntar ¿por qué debería seguir la enseñanzas de Dios?
Y adultos, será mejor que se preparen para darles una respuesta. Pero anímate porque hay respuestas. Ahora, no se sientan abrumados por esto. Está bien si no tienes todas las respuestas. Nadie las tiene, bueno, excepto Google. Puedes confiar lo que sea que encuentres en Google.
En serio, “no sé” es una respuesta perfectamente aceptable a una pregunta que no sabes la respuesta. Pero “solo ten fe” no lo es. No le digan a las nuevas generaciones que se queden en silencio, que dejen de hacer preguntas, que solo crean y que mantengan la línea. Si lo haces, eventualmente caerán. Y esto precisamente estamos viendo a diario.
Iglesia, adultos, padres — acepten las preguntas de las nuevas generaciones y encuentren respuestas. ¡Sí las hay! El cristianismo es razonable. Es verdad. Concuerda con la realidad. Es la mejor explicación por la forma en que son las cosas. Es la respuesta por todo lo que está mal.
Entonces, conoce la palabra de Dios. Enseña la palabra de Dios. Vive la palabra de Dios. Y crece en su entendimiento. Y que tú y tu hijo y el hijo de tu hijo cosechen todas las bendiciones que provienen de seguir fielmente a Jesucristo.
Michael C. Sherrard es pastor, director de Ratio Christi college prep, y autor de Relational Apologetics. (Apologética relacional). Información personal y otros se puede encontrar en michaelcsherrard.com
Blog original: http://bit.ly/2L1HXGf
Traducido por Italo Espinoza Gómez
Editado por María Andreina Cerrada
How Ancient Eyewitness Testimony Became the New Testament Gospel Record
4. Is the NT True?, Jesus Christ, Theology and Christian ApologeticsBy J. Warner Wallace
I often wonder precisely when the disciples of Jesus realized their important role in Christian History. As these men sat at the feet of Jesus and listened to everything He had to say, did they realize they would someday testify to everything He said and did? Most eyewitnesses I’ve interviewed in my casework had no idea they would later be called into a jury trial to testify about what they heard or observed. As a result, they sometimes regret not paying better attention when they had the opportunity. But the disciples of Jesus had a distinct advantage over modern eyewitnesses in this regard. They were students of Jesus. Unlike spontaneous, unprepared witnesses of a crime, the disciples were desperately attentive to the words and actions of Jesus, and I imagine their attention to detail became even more focused with each miraculous event. For this reason, the authors of the gospels became excellent eyewitnesses and recognized the importance of their testimony very early.
While Jesus walked here on earth, His followers studied and learned from His actions and words. They were often mesmerized, confused and challenged by what they saw and heard. In spite of this, Jesus taught them and occasionally sent them out on their own. They memorized His teaching and relied on his wisdom when they weren’t with Him. We don’t know how much (if anything) these eyewitnesses wrote down during this time. Did the disciples take notes? Did they keep a journal? While Jesus was alive, the disciples likely felt no need to write down his words. The Word was witnessed in these incredible days, as men and women stood in awe of the Master, watching Him perform miracles and listening carefully to what He taught about God and eternal life.
During the first years following Jesus’s ascension, the apostles still may not have written immediately about Jesus. Why not? A careful reading of the Scripture will reveal a common theme: Many of the early authors of the New Testament expected Jesus to return before there would ever be a need for a multi-generational eyewitness record. They worked urgently to tell the world about Jesus, believing He would return to judge the living and the dead within their lifetime. In the days of the Apostles, the Word was heard, as the apostles preached to the world around them. But as the Apostles began to be martyred (and those who remained realized Jesus might not return in their lifetime), the need for a written account became clear. James, the brother of John, was killed in 44AD (Stephen was killed even earlier), and not long afterward, the gospels began to emerge. The eyewitness gospel authors wrote down what they had seen so the world would have a record.
Following the deaths of the apostles, the early believers and leaders received the apostolic eyewitness accounts and regarded them as sacred. They knew the original eyewitnesses had vanished from the scene and they wanted to retain a faithful record of their testimony. From the earliest of times, these Christians coveted the New Testament writings. In the days of the early Church Fathers, the Word was read, as the sacred Gospels and letters were carefully protected. The earliest believers accepted the gospels and letters of the New Testament as eyewitness accounts because the authors of these texts considered their own writing to be authoritative, eyewitness Scripture:
1 Peter 5:1
Therefore, I exhort the elders among you, as your fellow elder and witness of the sufferings of Christ, and a partaker also of the glory that is to be revealed…
2 Peter 1:16-17
For we did not follow cleverly devised tales when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of His majesty.
1 John 1:1-3
What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life – and the life was manifested, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was manifested to us – what we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also, so that you too may have fellowship with us…
The apostles understood their experiences as eyewitnesses were unique, and they called for these eyewitness accounts to be read by all believers. Paul recognized both the Old Testament writings and the New Testament writings were sacred and God-given. He considered both to be Scripture:
1 Timothy 5:17-18
The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, ‘Do not muzzle the ox while it is treading out the grain,’ and ‘The worker deserves his wages.’
In this passage, Paul quoted both Deuteronomy 25:4 and Luke 10:7 (“The worker deserves his wages”). He referred to both passages as Scripture. It’s clear the New Testament Gospels were already in place at the time of this writing, and it’s also clear that believers were reading these Gospels as Scripture. Peter also attested to Paul’s writings as Scripture when writing his own letters to the early Church:
2 Peter 3:14-16
Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
In addition to this, it is clear the New Testament letters were being read and circulated among the churches as authoritative eyewitness Scripture and revelation from God:
Colossians 4:16
After this letter has been read to you, see that it is also read in the church of the Laodiceans and that you, in turn, read the letter from Laodicea.
1 Thessalonians 5:27
I charge you before the Lord to have this letter read to all the brothers.
The eyewitness authors of the New Testament gospels and letters understood the power of their testimony. They witnessed the Word in the days when a written record was unnecessary, spoke the Word when they thought Jesus would return imminently, and wrote the Word when they realized their eyewitness record would become Scripture for those who followed them. That’s how the ancient eyewitness accounts became the New Testament Scripture we cherish today.
J. Warner Wallace is a Cold-Case Detective, Christian Case Maker, Senior Fellow at the Colson Center for Christian Worldview, and the author of Cold-Case Christianity, Cold-Case Christianity for Kids, God’s Crime Scene, God’s Crime Scene for Kids, and Forensic Faith.
Original Blog Source: http://bit.ly/2lSuplm
Why Do You Believe In God?
2. Does God Exist?, Atheism, Theology and Christian Apologeticsby Justin Steckbauer
If someone asks me, “Why do you believe in God?” I don’t necessarily say “I just have faith.”
Many might say that. But for someone who asks that question, I need to know how to defend my faith. So my response is this:
I think it’s very reasonable to believe in God. Let me tell you why:
Original Blog Source: http://bit.ly/2KrDMHk
Why Is The Supreme Court Important To Christians?
PodcastPodcast: Play in new window
Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | Android | iHeartRadio | Blubrry | Email | TuneIn | RSS
After the big announcement by Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy of his retirement many questions arise. Frank tackles some of the following questions in this podcast: How does the Supreme Court affect you as a Christian? What are the implications if a conservative justice is appointed to the Supreme Court? What about Roe vs. Wade, will it be overturned? Tune in to hear the answers to these questions. Don’t miss this podcast!
Lógica 02: la argumentación
Español¿QUÉ ES LA LÓGICA?
La lógica es la disciplina que estudia los métodos y principios que se usan para distinguir el razonamiento bueno (correcto) del malo (incorrecto).
EL ARGUMENTO
Antes de entrar en el tema de la argumentación, reconozcamos primero algunos términos que son utilizados en la práctica de la lógica:
Inferencia. Proceso por el cual se llega a una proposición y se afirma sobre la base de una o más proposiciones. La relación entre las proposiciones es vital para no incurrir en una mala inferencia.
Enunciado. Entidad lingüística conformada por palabras.
Proposición. Información contenida en un enunciado que es verdadera o falsa, distinguiéndose así de las preguntas, órdenes y exclamaciones.
Argumento. En el sentido filosófico, es un conjunto de proposiciones que sirven de premisas que conducen a una conclusión.
Premisa. Proposición aseverada o supuesta que sirve de apoyo o razón para aceptar la conclusión de un argumento.
Conclusión. Es la proposición aseverada con base en otras proposiciones (premisas) del argumento.
Dicho esto, es importante mencionar cuatro puntos con respecto a las premisas y conclusiones de un argumento.
1. Un argumento puede consistir únicamente en una premisa y una conclusión. Ejemplo:
Premisa: Puesto que el hombre tiene la facultad de pensar, pero está sujeto a sus necesidades animales.
Conclusión: De ahí que, no sea completamente libre.
2. Las premisas y la conclusión no tienen un orden estricto en el discurso. En cualquier discurso, uno puede encontrar que la premisa precede a la conclusión, que la conclusión precede a la premisa, que la conclusión se encuentra entre las premisas o a veces ambas se pueden encontrar en el mismo enunciado. Ejemplo:
Premisa: [Los animales rescatados] tienen en la memoria el que el rescatador los haya sacado de la miseria a cambio de un hogar.
Conclusión: Las mascotas rescatadas de la calle son más apegadas que las que no.
3. Los términos “premisa” y “conclusión” son relativos. A veces la conclusión de un argumento puede servir de premisa para otro. Ejemplo:
Aquí la proposición (3) es la conclusión y las proposiciones (1) y (2) son sus premisas. Pero en el siguiente argumento la conclusión anterior es una premisa:
4. Una proposición considerada de forma aislada, no es una premisa ni una conclusión. La proposición será una premisa cuando sea el supuesto de un argumento, y será una conclusión solo cuando aparezca en un argumento fundamentándose en otras proposiciones.
Discursos que contienen varios argumentos
Está claro que existirán pasajes o discursos que contendrán varios argumentos, por lo que el lector deberá prestar atención al número de conclusiones que contenga el pasaje, ya que, como hemos visto, a veces una sola premisa puede servir de apoyo para dos conclusiones distintas, la conclusión puede encontrarse en medio de las premisas o una conclusión puede servir de premisa para otro argumento. Es recomendable siempre extraer los argumentos del discurso y estructurarlos en su forma lógica utilizando el método que mejor le convenga (enumerar las proposiciones, usar diagramas, restructurar todo el pasaje de forma ordenada, etc.).
¿QUÉ SE HACE PARA TENER UN BUEN ARGUMENTO?
Los argumentos pueden ser deductivos o inductivos:
Argumento deductivo. Aquél cuyas premisas garantizan la veracidad de su conclusión. Ejemplo:
Argumento inductivo. Aquél cuyas premisas solo ofrecen cierto apoyo a la conclusión (hacen que sea más probable que otras). Ejemplo:
Para que un argumento sea bueno, primero dependerá de si es deductivo o inductivo.
El Argumento Deductivo
Existen al menos cinco criterios para que un argumento deductivo sea bueno.
1. Un buen argumento debe ser formalmente válido. Cuando hablamos de la validez formal de un argumento, nos estamos refiriendo a su estructura lógica; es decir, la conclusión debe derivarse de las premisas de acuerdo con las reglas de la lógica (las cuales abordaré en el siguiente blog).
Cuando un argumento no está estructurado correctamente, que la conclusión no se siga por medio de ninguna regla lógica, se dice que es inválido, incluso si la conclusión resulta ser verdadera. Por ejemplo,
Aunque todas las proposiciones de este argumento sean verdaderas, (3) no se sigue lógicamente de (1) y (2), por lo que este es un argumento inválido. A partir del conocimiento de (1) y (2), no se puede saber que (3) también es verdadera.
2. Un buen argumento debe ser informalmente válido. Cuando hablamos de la invalidez informal de un argumento, éste no tiene que ver con la estructura lógica del mismo, sino con aquellos errores del razonamiento (falacias) que, sin romper ninguna regla lógica, provoca que el argumento sea malo. Ejemplo:
Este es un argumento lógicamente válido, pero asume lo que tiene que demostrar y por lo tanto no prueba nada nuevo.
3. Las premisas en un buen argumento deben ser verdaderas. Un argumento puede ser formal e informalmente válido, y, sin embargo, llevar a una conclusión falsa porque una de las premisas es falsa. Por ejemplo,
Este es un argumento lógicamente válido, pero la premisa (1) es falsa. Hay mamíferos que no tienen alas. Por lo tanto, éste no es un buen argumento para la verdad de la conclusión.
4. Un buen argumento tiene premisas que son más plausibles que sus contradictorias o sus negaciones. Pedir certeza absoluta para la verdad de una premisa nos llevaría al escepticismo.
5. La conjunción de las premisas deben ser más plausibles que su negación. La probabilidad de la conjunción de las premisas del argumento solamente establece una probabilidad mínima de la conclusión. La probabilidad de la conclusión del argumento no puede ser más baja que la probabilidad de la conjunción de las premisas del argumento.[1] Así que, si las premisas combinadas de un argumento deductivo válido tienen una probabilidad de >50%, entonces la conclusión tiene una garantía de al menos >50%, por lo que debemos creerla.
Un argumento que cumpla con todas estas condiciones será un argumento sólido.
Bibliografía Recomendada:
Irving M. Copi y Carl Cohen, Introducción a la Lógica.
J. P. Moreland y W. L. Craig, “Logic and Argumentation” en Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview Second Edition.
Nota
[1] Para un mayor desarrollo de este punto, ver “Natural Theology and the Uses of Argument” por Timothy McGrew y John Depoe, en Philosophia Christie 15/2 (2013) 299-309.
Jairo Izquierdo Hernández es el fundador de Filósofo Cristiano. Actualmente trabaja como Director de Social Media para la organización cristiana Cross Examined. Es miembro en la Christian Apologetics Alliance y ministro de alabanza en la iglesia cristiana bautista Cristo es la Respuesta en Puebla, México.
Truth and Tone in Cultural Engagement
Jesus Christ, Theology and Christian ApologeticsBy Darrell L. Bock and Mikel Del Rosario
INTRODUCTION
Over the past few decades, some evangelicals have seen cultural engagement as fighting a culture war for Christ. But the landscape has changed in a way that most people who graduated from seminary forty years ago might never have imagined. Today, we as Christians find ourselves in the position of a cultural minority in the United States. How should we engage with a society that is increasingly hostile to the Christian faith?
This Table briefing explores what the New Testament teaches about honoring God through our message—and our tone—as we minister in a world that often pushes back against the gospel. This ethos of balancing invitation and challenge has been a key emphasis since the beginning of the Table Podcasts.
First, we consider how the example of the early church should inform our cultural engagement as a church today. Then we examine how the Apostle Paul’s example should inform our interpersonal interactions with unbelieving friends and neighbors. [Download the full-length article]
Original Blog Source: http://bit.ly/2tvEkl5
The Wounded Healer: Finding Ultimate Purpose in Your Suffering
Theology and Christian ApologeticsBy Luke Nix
Introduction
The other day, I heard a podcast that I want to highlight for anyone who is a victim of the evil and suffering of life and questions God’s purposes, His love, or even His existence. Whether our experiences are singular traumatic events, day-in and day-out pain, or a combination of the two, suffering often feels completely unbearable. These experiences can be so painful that many people are compelled to honestly question and seek legitimate answers to how an all-loving and all-powerful God could and would permit the suffering that we experience in our lives and see others experience in our world. This is called the logical problem of evil and has been long recognized as having been resolved, even by atheists (click or tap the link to see how).
Some, though, have wondered if that given the amount of evil and suffering, it is likely that an all-powerful and all-loving does not God exist. Simply stated: “There is too much gratuitous suffering in the world for an all-loving and all-powerful God to exist.” While this is a more modest concern that seems reasonable, if it is to be granted, such a denial of God’s existence based upon gratuitous suffering is necessarily reliant upon the idea that God does not have reasons to allow the amount of suffering that He does. Further, that depends upon knowing God’s purposes (or lack thereof) and how those purposes could (not) be accomplished. However, both the purposes of God and the methods of their fulfillment would have to be extremely limited for one to reasonably conclude that the amount of evil and suffering in the world is gratuitous. God’s purposes and methods are not so limited, so evil and suffering cannot be used to reasonably conclude that God does not exist. Yet, even though this answer is reasonable, it does not really answer the question of what the purpose of evil and suffering actually is. That is where I believe that Dr. Emerson Eggerichs picks up from the logical answer to the problem of evil and suffering and makes a deeply personal connection to their purpose.
Evil, Suffering, and the Great Commission
Our experiences of evil and suffering are deeply personal, so it makes sense that their purpose is personal as well. What are the purposes for which we are placed in different situations of suffering? We need to look not much further than Matthew 28:19a- “Go and make disciples of all nations.” Suffering is no respecter of one’s status, deeds, or even worldview, so all people experience it. Suffering reveals weakness; thus it is an experience that forges bonds of trust-trust of one another that is grounded in the knowledge that the other person has an intimate understanding of the anguish of their suffering.
Two Perspectives and the Cross
From the perspective of the moment, suffering is painful; yet from the perspective of eternity, suffering is trivial. The perspective of the moment instills in us a strong desire for relief for not only ourselves but for those who suffer like us. The perspective of eternity instills in us a strong sense of purpose and encouragement to know that the relief we desire for ourselves and others in the moment will be realized.
These two perspectives converged nearly two thousand years ago at the Cross. Jesus saw his suffering the torcher of crucifixion in the light of the rest of eternity for those who would choose to accept Him. He understood that that time of suffering was finite and could not be compared to the infinite time of bliss that it would provide to those He would reconcile to the Father. Three days later, this convergence was verified as Jesus overcame His suffering and conquered death in His Resurrection. It is this historical event that demonstrates the ultimate purpose of our suffering.
Suffering Is Only Gratuitous If We Allow It To Be
While suffering can strengthen the trust of the Christian in Christ, Christians can turn those same experiences into many opportunities to bring unbelievers into a loving, trusting, and healing relationship with Christ and share the relief with us. The Apostle Paul wrote, “I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us” (Romans 8:18). It is through our own suffering of tragedies and evil in this world that the Great Commission can be accomplished- that unbelievers, who we love and comfort through our own personal experiences of the same suffering, can live pain-free and for want of nothing for eternity with their Creator, Savior, and Healer.
As the Body of Christ, we are His representatives in the physical world; it is through us that those who suffer can see, hear, and feel the heart of our suffering Savior- the One who lives so that they may live also (John 14:19). Every bit of suffering in our lives can have an ultimate purpose. It is our choice, though, if our suffering will be more than gratuitous and have an ultimate purpose. That purpose is to allow us to come alongside someone else who is also in that suffering and be trusted and permitted to speak the truth, hope, love, and healing of Christ into that life. We are wounded by suffering so that we have the opportunity to heal others wounded by suffering by pointing them to the ultimate Healer who was wounded for us.
Conclusion
Dr. Eggerichs describes in this podcast how he was wounded but uses those wounds to heal others and point them to the ultimate Healer. Please listen to the podcast and be encouraged that the evil and suffering that you experience in your life can be used to guide someone else to an eternity free from those experiences and full of unspeakable joy. Our suffering is only gratuitous if we allow it to be, and why would we want to allow that? Click or tap this link: Love and Respect Podcast: The Wounded Healer, then choose to speak life to the broken hearted.
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/2MZW3cf
How to Get Men to Church
Theology and Christian ApologeticsBy Timothy Fox
There’s a critical gender gap problem in America: Christianity’s gender gap. Men attend church far less than women. Why? There are many reasons, from weak, whiny worship to emotions-based sermons. Church isn’t masculine, so men don’t go.
So what’s the solution? Churches create “manly” ministries and boot camps, involving sports and YELLING and other macho stuff. Now, as great as these can be to help form relationships with other Christian men, many men’s ministries are only indirect bridges to the church. How do we get men fully engaged and active within the body of Christ? I think the answer is apologetics, the rational defense of the Christian worldview. Here are three reasons why:
I’m a pastor’s kid. I grew up in church. I always believed in Christianity, but I also always had a major disconnect. Church was completely feelings-based: sensing God’s presence through emotional worship and charismatic preaching. That wasn’t for me at all. I’m a logic guy. I have a B. S. in Computer Science, worked for many years as a software engineer, and now teach mathematics. Like I said, a logic guy. It wasn’t until I discovered apologetics that Christianity clicked for me. I found my place within the church. I finally belonged.
I’m sure many men have the same problem with church that I did. Fortunately, apologetics can show them the rational side of Christianity. We have a deep intellectual tradition that should not be forgotten. Our worldview is not based solely on blind faith and religious experience. There are good, logical reasons to think that Christianity is true. Of course, the affective side of man is important as well, that worship services can – and should – reach the entire person, both mind, and heart. But there is an imbalance in our churches. Apologetics can help fix that and draw in men.
Do you know any men who always find something to fix, even if it isn’t broken? They’re constantly tinkering here or making a home improvement there. Some guys just need to do something at all times (which is better than being idle!). They want to feel needed and important, to help solve problems. But men see nothing to do at church. It’s mostly passive.
Apologetics can give men a purpose in their church. Teaching a class or helping the pastor research for a sermon. Being a resource, on-call when needed. Apologetics make men a vital part of a church instead of being a passive attendee.
I found it interesting how many of my male classmates in Biola’s Christian Apologetics program had either military or martial arts background. These men had an instinctive need to protect their country, community, and family, and now sought to protect their church. And that’s exactly what apologetics is: providing a defense for the Christian faith (1 Peter 3:15).
More and more young people are leaving the church. Statistics show that once your children leave for college, they’re probably going to abandon their faith. Men, what are you going to do about that? Are you going to sit back and watch that happen, or are you going to fight for your children’s faith? Studying apologetics will give you the tools to inoculate your children against the false worldviews and beliefs they will certainly encounter in school and on social media.
Conclusion
My argument isn’t that apologetics needs men, although we can always use more (and women too, of course!). No, my argument is that men need apologetics. It meets specific masculine needs that the church is unfortunately lacking. So if you want to get the man in your life to become passionate about spiritual things, introduce him to apologetics.
Original Blog Source: http://bit.ly/2Mqpcwn
A Parent’s Guide to the 5 Skeptics Who Want to Shame Your Kids for Being Christian
Apologetics for Parents, Atheism, Theology and Christian ApologeticsBy Natasha Crain
Having blogged for over six years now, I’ve received hundreds (and hundreds) of comments and emails from skeptics of Christianity. Once in a while, I receive one from a pleasant non-believer who is truly interested in discussing evidence, asking reasonable questions, and engaging in thoughtful discussion.
But that’s the exception.
Those who contact me typically wield the tool of shaming to make their point—something highly ironic given how much skeptics talk about the importance of evidence.
To be clear, none of the non-believers I personally know would use shaming tactics in person. But when people are behind their screens, it brings down the “barrier” of civility, and faith conversations often look very different. You can see it on social media (even with friends who wouldn’t say such things in person), comments on news articles, blog posts—everywhere.
Kids need to understand these emotion-laden shaming attempts they’ll encounter. Like so much else, this is something parents can and should prepare them for. Here are the five most common skeptics who want to shame your kids for being Christian.
Shame Tactic: Making the child believe they don’t have enough scientific expertise to understand that belief in God is unnecessary and silly.
The Science Thumper applies some notion of science to each and every conversation about Christianity, making it the final word on any given topic, and implying that science and Christianity are at irreconcilable odds.
For example, in response to one of my blog posts about the meaning of life in a theistic worldview, a skeptic commented:
You need to study the mechanisms of replication, mutation, natural selection if you want to understand why life exists and is the way it is. If life and existence are too amazing, astounding and astonishing to exist naturally… then how much more complex is god [sic] for having created it? … Did you invent Superman as a panacea answer for everything you don’t understand?
Questions of faith and science are very important, but framing faith and science as a choice—one option for the unsophisticated and one for those in the know—is a cheap and false dichotomy.
Parent Solution: Thoroughly address faith and science topics so kids understand how shallow and unnuanced the Science Thumper’s claims are. See Talking with Your Kids about God for six chapters outlining the conversations parents need to have.
Shame Tactic: Informing the child that the ONLY reason they believe in Jesus is that they’ve been “indoctrinated” by their parents.
Indoctrination is a word that both Christians and skeptics use wrong. Skeptics often think a kid has been indoctrinated any time they’ve been taught a given religion is true. Christians often think indoctrination means teaching kids Christian doctrine. These misunderstandings lead to conversations that unfortunately sound like this:
Skeptic to Christian parent: “You’re indoctrinating your kids [by raising them in a Christian home]! Let them think for themselves.”
Christian parent to skeptic: “You’re right! I’m teaching my kids Christian doctrine, and I’m proud of it!”
Both skeptics and Christians need to understand that indoctrination means teaching someone to fully accept the ideas, opinions, and beliefs of a particular group and to not consider other ideas, opinions, and beliefs. In other words, indoctrination is a problem with how you teach someone something. It is not inherently related to any particular belief system, though religion is one type of belief system where indoctrination is possible.
Parent Solution: Intentionally introduce your kids to skeptics’ challenges, so they never feel the need to question whether you tried to shelter them from other beliefs. For more on the importance of this, see the post “If Your Kids are Someday Shocked by the Claims of Skeptics, You Didn’t Do Your Job.”
Shame Tactic: Making the child feel gullible for believing something that doesn’t happen according to natural laws.
Here’s a recent comment a skeptic left on my blog:
Just because some so-called holy book says something is true doesn’t make it true. Why do you believe outlandish claims about a god [sic] speaking things into existence, or about a man being swallowed by a fish for a few days and surviving, a worldwide flood [and ark] that fit all of the animals in it and eight people, or a story about a virgin getting pregnant? None of that makes sense, you don’t have any proof that it happened, but you still think it’s true. Why do you prefer to believe outlandish claims because they’re religious?
The logic here is what’s “outlandish” (no one believes all miraculous claims simply because they’re religious), but my point is not to critique the details of this particular comment. My point is to show how skeptics present miracles in a way that parades them as “obviously” absurd because (and by definition!), they don’t follow the course of nature.
Parent Solution: Teach kids the basic logic that if God exists, miracles are possible, and if God doesn’t exist, miracles are not possible (for more on this, see chapter 24 in Keeping Your Kids on God’s Side). This brings the question of miracles back to the underlying question of the evidence for God’s existence, so kids understand that the person claiming miracles are silly is simply presupposing God doesn’t exist.
Shame Tactic: Boasting that the skeptic doesn’t “need” God—and implying that anyone who does has an inferior need for an emotional crutch to get through life.
Oftentimes, when ex-Christians recount their deconversion story, they conclude with a glib comment of how they moved on because they no longer “needed” God. The subtly condescending implication, of course, is that those who believe in God do so because they don’t have the emotional resources to make it through life admitting that we live in a universe of pitiless indifference.
This is a strange conclusion that betrays a lack of deeper insight.
If God exists, we need Him. All things were created through and for Him; He is the Source and Sustainer of everything by definition. Therefore, if God exists, it’s not a choice to need Him… it’s simply a fact that we do.
If God doesn’t exist, we don’t need Him. We cannot need Him. We cannot need something that doesn’t exist.
In other words, saying that you don’t need God anymore is a nonsensical conclusion. Of course, you don’t need God if He doesn’t exist. And if He does exist, you can’t choose to not need Him.
What this kind of statement betrays, therefore, is that the skeptic originally believed in God based on felt needs (desires) rather than on the conviction that He truly exists. When they realized they didn’t need to believe in God to satisfy those felt needs, they simply eliminated Him from the picture and met those needs in other ways.
Parent Solution: Be mindful of helping kids build a faith based on the conviction of God’s existence and the truth of Christianity—not on felt needs for things like being happy, being a good person, or finding meaning in life. In other words, if anyone ever asks your child why they’re a Christian, you should want their response to be, “Because Christianity is true!” For more on escaping the felt need pattern, see the post “Do Your Kids Know Why They Need God?”
Shame Tactic: Making the child feel like they are unloving and hateful for taking a biblical stance that doesn’t approve of all choices as morally acceptable.
In a spectacular display of irony, the Tolerance Enforcer shames kids into believing that they must be horrible people for disagreeing with non-believers on the morality of various issues. By labeling kids hateful and unloving rather than thoughtfully discussing the evidence for the truth of the underlying worldviews that produce divergent moral conclusions, they rely on purely emotional attacks. Kids without an intellectual foundation for the Christian worldview are left feeling that they must be wrong about the truth of their faith.
Parent Solution: Help kids understand the irony of a person championing tolerance who won’t tolerate Christian beliefs without labeling disagreement hateful. Then demonstrate how Christians and non-Christians will necessarily disagree on moral issues because we have a different source of authority—the Bible. Here’s an example.
In all of these cases, remember that shame, by definition, is “a painful emotion caused by a strong sense of guilt, embarrassment, unworthiness or disgrace.” In other words, the root of shame is feeling inadequate.
In order for our kids to feel (more than) adequate when they encounter shaming attempts, they need to have the deep conviction that what they believe is really true. Only then will they be able to fully see these shame tactics for what they are—shallow and baseless emotional attacks—and be able to say confidently with the apostle Paul, “I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes” (Romans 1:16).
Natasha Crain is a blogger, author, and national speaker who is passionate about equipping Christian parents to raise their kids with an understanding of how to make a case for and defend their faith in an increasingly secular world. She is the author of two apologetics books for parents: Talking with Your Kids about God (2017) and Keeping Your Kids on God’s Side (2016). Natasha has an MBA in marketing and statistics from UCLA and a certificate in Christian apologetics from Biola University. A former marketing executive and adjunct professor, she lives in Southern California with her husband and three children.
Original Blog Source: http://bit.ly/2tHfM82
Don’t Be Overcome by Statistics, Overcome Statistics with the Gospel
CrossExamined, Theology and Christian ApologeticsBy Brian Chilton
Let’s be honest. We in the Christian world are inundated with bad news. We are bombarded with news about how the Millennial Generation is far more unbelieving than Generation X. In full disclosure, I was born at the end of what would make me a Gen-Xer. Nevertheless, pastors especially are concerned with lower numbers of people in their pews, statistics that show that giving is much lower than in times past, and denominational numbers that are dismal. I am identified as a Southern Baptist. I have heard reports that the SBC baptismal rates are the lowest they have been for quite some time.
Hearing these numbers cause great concern. As one who loves peace and security, I find myself asking some questions that are noble, like—”Will the next generation know about Christ? Will there be an evangelical presence in a future generation?”, And some questions that are admittedly more selfish, like—“Do I have job security as a pastor? Will I have enough time in ministry to retire? What will I do if I lose my position?”. Be honest. If you are in ministry, you have probably asked similar questions.
However, I have had a statement that the apostle Paul gave the Romans on my mind a lot here lately. Paul wrote, perhaps his magnum opus, to the church in Rome. Roman Christians were facing uncertain days as they were often met with persecution. In AD 49, Emperor Claudius had ordered all Jews to leave Rome. The Christian Jews were met with strife over their trust in Christ by fellow Jews. For the Christians left in Rome, they were Gentiles who were bombarded by various other competing worldviews. In the midst of this turmoil, Paul encourages them by saying, “Do not be conquered by evil, but conquer evil with good” (Rom. 12:21).[1] How can these words apply to our situation? First, let’s look at the reactions that people often have when met with opposition.
As an observer of people, I have noticed three negative reactions and one positive to the problems facing the church. We’ll call the three negative reactions the denying mule, the withdrawn ostrich, and the whipped pup, while the positive reaction is noted as the conquering lion.
The Denying Mule. A mule can be a stubborn animal. If it is content to not do something, it is difficult, if not downright impossible, to get the animal to that thing. In like manner, some Christians will hear the negative statistics that are given and will deny that things are as bad as the statistics portray. Why? It is because the person is content to keep things as they are and is unwilling to change ministerial practices regardless of what may come. This is an unhealthy practice.
The Withdrawn Ostrich. Ostriches are classically portrayed as sticking their heads in the sand when concerned. I have been told that ostriches do not actually do such a thing. However, for our analogy, we will use the famous scene. For some Christians, they are overly concerned with the bleak news, but they are unwilling are perhaps too afraid to meet the challenges that lie ahead. Therefore, instead of facing the challenges, they withdraw themselves to people like themselves and ignore the outside world. Again, this is an unhealthy practice for the evangelical Christian.
The Whipped Pup. The third practice is that of a whipped pup. This is likened to an unfortunate puppy who has been met with horrid treatment by even worse people. We have taken in pets before that attach themselves to us, because we treat them well, but are afraid of anyone or anything else. Some Christians are like this whipped pup. They feel defeated and think that there is no hope. They feel anxious and concerned, but do not know how to improve the situation at hand. This too is an unhealthy practice.
The Conquering Lion. The healthy response is likened to a conquering lion. This animal has confidence and faces any circumstance with the attitude and trust that he can make a difference and can see positive things take place. The conquering lion is the attitude the modern Christian needs to have. It may surprise you to know that even the United States has met times where Christianity wasn’t as strong as it was at other times. God would raise up individuals to bring change. Examples include John Wesley, George Whitefield, D. L. Moody, and more recently Billy Graham.
2. Ways to Overcome Negative Statistics.
So, how do we overcome the statistics? Rather than placing an unhealthy focus on the statistics, I suggest that we take four attitudes moving forward.
Power of Prayer. First, we need to remember that there is great power in prayer. Do you think that the power of prayer has ceased? Has God changed? Remember, God does not change, he is the same God that he has always been (Heb. 13:8; Rom. 11:29; and Num. 23:19). God hears our prayers (1 Jn. 5:14). So, if God has not changed and he still hears our prayers, why are we not praying more, asking that God does something great in our lives and in the church to change the direction that we’re going?
Gospel Focus. We cannot ignore the statistics. However, I do not think we should make statistics our primary focus. Our primary focus should be on Christ and on fulfilling his Great Commission. We cannot control what other people do. However, we can control where we place our focus. What if every Christian and every church took the gospel seriously and tried to share their faith by both their actions and words? Why we might see another Great Awakening sooner than we thought.
Divine Trust. Also, we must not be consumed by the negativity all around us. We must trust God in all things and understand that he does have a great plan for us and for all of history. It’s also in Romans that Paul notes that “all things work together for the good of those who love God, who are called according to his purpose” (Rom. 8:28). Trust in God and in his direction.
Genuine Love. Finally, we must not lose the focus we should all have on love. Do we really love the lost? That is a serious question we must ask ourselves. Jesus said, “By this everyone will know that you are my disciples if you love one another” (Jn. 13:35). Can people see Christ in us by the love we have? If not, we need to first have a revival within ourselves.
Conclusion
Statistics are important. They serve as a gauge to illustrate the spiritual condition of our time. However, we cannot be consumed by the negative statistics we read and hear. For us to have a revival, no amount of human tactics will do any good. Rather, to have a true revival, God must move. He must move within us as we are the hands and feet of Jesus. So, to borrow Paul’s statement in Romans 12:21: Don’t be overcome by statistics, but overcome statistics with the gospel of Jesus Christ!
Notes
[1] Unless otherwise noted, all quoted Scripture comes from the Christian Standard Bible (Nashville: Holman, 2017).
Brian G. Chilton is the founder of BellatorChristi.com and is the host of The Bellator Christi Podcast. He received his Master of Divinity in Theology from Liberty University (with high distinction); his Bachelor of Science in Religious Studies and Philosophy from Gardner-Webb University (with honors); and received certification in Christian Apologetics from Biola University. Brian is currently in the Ph.D. program in Theology and Apologetics at Liberty University. Brian has been in the ministry for over 15 years and serves as the pastor of Huntsville Baptist Church in Yadkinville, North Carolina.
Original Blog Source: http://bit.ly/2tirl5l