Tag Archive for: apologetics

16 Bad Atheist Arguments and How to Respond to Them

16 Bad Atheist Arguments and How to Respond to Them

,

By Jeremy Linn

With the NCAA Final Four coming to the Twin Cities this weekend, it seems appropriate to have our own little March Madness Tournament. Instead of college teams, we built a bracket with some of the “top” bad Atheist arguments.

Below we list 16 of these bad arguments and list at least one problem with the argument for each. Much more could be said for each of these arguments, so we present this post with the risk of coming across shallow.  The point of the post, however, is not to give you a thorough response to each argument – It’s to give you ideas for an initial response to them.

For each of the arguments, we give an example question you can ask to better understand where the person who gave the argument is coming from. The goal is to listen and understand, rather than to dominate and tear down.

Now that we have those precursors set, here are the 16 bad Atheist arguments and how to respond to them.

Argument #1: Who created God?

This question is asked under the assumption that God needs a creator. This assumption misrepresents the Christian understanding of God, where God is the necessary cause of all creation.

Question: Why do you think a Christian would say that no one created God?

Argument #2: Jesus never existed

This objection flies against the conclusions of almost all scholars invested into Biblical and Roman history, along with evidence from both the New Testament books and extrabiblical sources.

Question: How did you come to the conclusion that Jesus never existed?

Argument #3: Atheists believe in just one less god than Christians

Some Atheists try to use this argument to show that there is not much of a difference between them and Christians. After all, Christians are “Atheists” for thousands of gods from other religions since they lack belief in those gods!

The problem is, there is a huge difference between a Theist (such as a Christian) and an Atheist. Theists believe in a supreme, personal creator of the Universe. Atheists don’t. This difference has huge implications for how each carries out their lives.

Question: Do you think there are any major differences between Christians and Atheists?

Argument #4: Believing in God is like believing in Santa or leprechauns.

This statement calls God “made up,” equal on the level of something like Santa Claus. But the Christian claims to have evidence for God, and hardly anyone claims to have evidence for a real Santa. The alleged evidence for God cannot be simply dismissed with this silly statement.

Question: Do you think there is any evidence for the existence of God?

Argument #5: The gospels are full of myths

This objection completely ignores the definition of a myth in ancient literature. A myth looks back at the past to understand how something in the present came to be. The gospels were written as a historical narrative, discussing things that were happening at the time.

Question: What do you mean when you use the word “myth”?

Argument #6: Faith is belief without evidence 

This definition of faith is a clear strawman of the Christian position. Most Christians view faith as involving some sort of personal trust. The trust aspect of faith is simply ignored by the “no evidence” definition.

Question: How do you think Christians would typically define “faith”?

Argument #7: There’s no evidence for God

Christians claim to have philosophical arguments for God’s existence. It seems like those arguments could provide at least a tiny bit of evidence for God, even if an Atheist doesn’t consider the evidence close to satisfactory. Atheists who use this phrase are overstating their case.

Question: What type of evidence would you need to see in order to be convinced that there is at least some evidence for God?

Argument #8: God is a maniac slavedriver

The idea here is that God is some sort of dictator who tells us what to do and believe and threatens to send us to hell if we don’t listen. But this characterization of God contrasts from the understanding that God offers a choice for us to escape the “slavery” of sin and to experience life as it was meant to be lived.

Question: Do you think God gives us a choice in how to live our lives?

Argument #9: Science disproves God

This is one of the most broad arguments in the list. There are many fields in science, and some concepts about God are completely unrelated to those fields. What exactly is being said here? There needs to be more detail given before any substantial discussion can take place.

Question: What is one way in which science disproves God?

Argument #10: Stories of Jesus changed like the game of telephone

The story goes… You know the game of telephone? You start with a sentence and then it gets changed after being passed down from person to person? Well, that’s what happened when stories of Jesus were passed from person to person.

This objection does not take into account the communal aspect of oral tradition – people could check their stories against one another. The objection also causes the reliability of all ancient history to be called into question.

Question: How might the way stories were spread in ancient history be different than the game of telephone?

Argument #11: If you grew up somewhere else you would believe something else

This is one of the most common objections to Christianity – if you grew up in a middle eastern country, you would be a Muslim, not a Christian! While this concept does have some truth in it, it packs a load of unsupported assumptions. It also has little effect on the question of if God actually exists or not.

Question: How do you know I believe what I do because where I grew up?

Argument #12: Atheists can be good without believing in God

This statement is true in the sense that people who do not believe in God can make choices that are moral choices. But the statement ignores the grounding of the good – the question of what caused the existence of objective moral duties.

Question: I agree that Atheists can do good things without believing in God. But what caused “good” and “bad” to exist in the first place?

Argument #13: Religion is toxic

The idea here is that religious thought always motivates actions that are bad. One problem with this idea is that “religion” is a broad term. It puts people who follow all kinds of religions under one umbrella, even if the differences between those religions are stark. It also downplays any potentially “good” actions taken under religious motivations.

Question: Are you referring to one specific religion, or are you saying all religions are toxic?

Argument #14: Jesus is just a copy of pagan gods

This argument seems powerful on the surface as Atheists stack up to similar traits between Jesus and pagan gods – “born of a virgin,” “resurrected,” “born on December 25”, etc. But when you dig deeper into the primary sources for the pagan gods, you will find that the traits don’t align with the actual stories of those gods.

Question: Which god is Jesus a copy of, and how do you know that?

Argument #15: The Flying Spaghetti Monster

New Atheists intended to make a point by bringing up this fictional creature – that you could assign the attributes of God to any random thing. But many Atheists who mention the creature now seem to do so in order to mock religious ideas rather than make a substantial point about them. Overall an Atheist who brings the creature up today ends up looking more ridiculous than thoughtful.

Question: What relevance does the Flying Spaghetti Monster have to what you are saying about God?

Argument #16: Christians never agree

The argument goes like this: Since Christians always seem to disagree about everything, it’s clear that God isn’t involved in the whole process. This argument is incredibly broad and immeasurable – it is uncertain how much agreement there would need to be before the objector no longer sees a problem. It also ignores that “mere Christianity” – the divinity, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ – is almost entirely agreed on amongst Christians.

Question: How much agreement would you need to see between Christians in order to no longer consider this objection a problem?

Hopefully, this list gives you a better idea of how to respond to these bad arguments when they come up. We’re hoping that the Final Four also comes to the Twin Cities next year so we can do something like this again. At the very least, this was fun.

 

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

Original Blog Source: http://bit.ly/2DaNPe5

/by
My Discussion with Dr. Michael Shermer on God and Evil

J. Brian Huffling Discussion with Dr. Michael Shermer on God and Evil

, ,

By J. Brian Huffling

Having seen Dr. Michael Shermer debate many times, I was excited to be able to get a chance to have a discussion with him. Shermer, the founding publisher of Skeptic magazine, accepted Southern Evangelical Seminary‘s invitation to have an informal, but moderated, discussion with me on the topic, “Is the Reality of Evil Good Evidence against the Christian God?” This discussion was the culmination of a mini-conference on the problem of evil at SES. He was a delight to have, and the event was a blast.

My Discussion with Dr. Michael Shermer on God and Evil

I am not going to recount the whole debate. I am simply going to discuss some of the most important points and issues. (For those interested, Michael has a podcast of the debate/issue.)

What is ‘Evil’?

Michael was asked by the moderator, Adam Tucker (his thoughts on the discussion are here), to define what he meant by ‘evil.’ He said that evil is the intentional harm of a sentient being. There is no such thing, he said, of an entity that is evil, such as evil spirits, or anything that is pure evil.

I largely agree. Following Augustine, I hold that evil is simply the privation of good. In other words, evil is the corruption of a good thing. The classic example is blindness in the eye. The eye should have a certain power (sight) that it does not. It is lacking and is corrupted. Thus, it is physically evil. Then there is a moral evil. This happens when a person lacks virtues. Overall, though, Michael and I basically agree on what evil is and that there is no existing thing that is pure evil. For Christians, to exist is to somehow be like God, which is good. Further, following Aquinas, good seeks its perfection. Thus, there is a contradiction with an existing evil. Evil really has no goal or purpose in itself. Thus, an existing thing that is somehow good since it has being (in a sense like God) and that seeks its perfection cannot be pure evil.

At this point, we discussed the problem of evil and what it is exactly.

The Problem of Evil Briefly Stated

There are basically 2 forms of the problem of evil: the deductive form and the inductive form. The deductive form is also called the logical argument from evil and argues that the co-existence of the classical view of God and evil are logically impossible. This is the argument Michael used (from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy):

  1. If God exists, then God is omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect.
  2. If God is omnipotent, then God has the power to eliminate all evil.
  3. If God is omniscient, then God knows when evil exists.
  4. If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil.
  5. Evil exists.
  6. If evil exists and God exists, then either God doesn’t have the power to eliminate all evil, or doesn’t know when evil exists or doesn’t have the desire to eliminate all evil.
  7. Therefore, God doesn’t exist.

This argument makes several assumptions. The most problematic in my view is that God is morally perfect. Many, if not most, Christian theologians take it for granted that God is morally perfect. However, I would argue that God is not the kind of being to be moral. That is not to say he is not good; he is just not morally good. I have written that God is not a moral being. I have also written that God’s goodness does not depend on what he does, but what he is. How does this relate to the problem of evil? If it is indeed the case that God is not a moral being with obligations to man, it makes all the difference in the world. I will not rewrite the articles above on God, morality, and goodness. I will summarize those positions here as they relate to the problem of evil.

As I said in the debate, J. L. Mackie, a notorious atheist of the twentieth century, said that if one gives up a premise in the problem of evil as just laid out, then the problem doesn’t arise (see The Problem of Evil edited by Adams and Adams, page 1). This is exactly what I said we need to do. There are certain assertions/assumptions that have to be made in order for this argument (the problem of evil) to work. I argue that the assertion that God is a morally perfect being is false. If we take that out of the problem, the problem falls.

I am not suggesting this simply to get out of this argument. There are really good reasons for not thinking that God is a moral being, at least in the sense we normally mean when referring to humans being moral. When we say a person is moral, we mean that he behaves well and as he should. In other words, there is a prescribed way in which men are supposed to behave. If they do, they are moral. If they don’t, they are immoral.

I am arguing that God has no prescribed way in which he should behave. There are no obligations imposing on God. God transcends the category of morality like he transcends time and space. Morality is a created category wrapped up in what it means to be a human. Without created beings to live up to some objective standard that God has created him to live up to, there is no moral law.

If this is correct, then God is not a moral being and thus cannot be a morally perfect being. But this is the linchpin of the logical problem of evil as Michael has argued. Once this assertion is removed, as Mackie says, there simply is no logical problem of evil. There is no contradiction with an omnipotent, omniscient being existing alongside of evil. Thus, the problem of evil does not even arise.

All of this is to say that God has no obligation to how he orchestrates the universe. To say that God is morally obligated means that he has to treat his creation in a certain way. This is the basic thrust of the problem of evil. To put it another way, as Michael did at one point, the problem of evil boils down to this: “If God really does exist I would expect the universe to be different/better.” The assumption here is that God should operate the way we think he should. He doesn’t. The inference is that he doesn’t exist.

Again, if we take away the assumption/assertion that God is morally perfect then the problem of evil not only fails, it never gets off the ground. (Please remember we are talking about the academic/philosophical issue of evil and not the emotional/pastoral concern.)

This is not to say God is not good; he is just not morally good. He is metaphysically good and perfect. Given our definition of evil, this just means God lacks nothing. His existence is perfect and cannot be corrupted.

The story of Job illustrates my point that God is not obligated to treat his creatures in any certain way. In the opening chapters of Job God basically dares Satan to attack Job. God maintains to Satan that Job will not curse him (God). Satan agrees. The only caveat is that Satan cannot touch Job. Job’s family (except his wife) is killed, and he loses all of his many possessions. Yet he does not curse God. God gives Satan another chance, but this time Satan can inflict Job with disease; although he cannot kill him. Job is inflicted with sores and physical issues. Still, he does not curse God.

Job’s friends show up and stay with Job, silent, for a week. For many chapters after this Job’s friends argue about what Job did to bring this judgment upon him. They maintain that God would not do this without some (just) cause. Job maintained his innocence and wanted to take God to court and try him for being unjust.

At the end of the book, God shows up. Does he try to explain to Job why he did what he did? Does he offer a theodicy or defense for his actions? No. He basically asks Job where he was when God made all of the wonders of the world. Job cannot answer and repents. In short, God does not try to get off the hook, as it were. Rather he says, “I’m God, and you are not.”

I think this illustrates my point that God does not have to act in any certain way with his people. He is not unjust in dealing with Job the way he did. However, let’s put a human in the place of God and Satan in this story. If a human did to Job what God and Satan did, we would almost certainly say the human would be unjust. However, we would not, presumably, say that God is unjust. Why? Because he’s God. There is no standard by which to judge him. God transcends morality and yet is still perfectly good.

Philosophy vs. Science

This above point is one that I could not get Michael to acknowledge. He did not want to stray from his scientific position. (By ‘scientific’ I mean the modern sense of the word to refer to the natural sciences like biology and chemistry. This should be contrasted with the historical sense of a discipline’s conclusions being demonstrated via first principles and logic. In this latter sense, philosophy and theology were considered sciences.) This is unfortunate because the issues of God and evil are inherently philosophical. As I have written, natural science alone cannot demonstrate God’s existence. Thus, to adequately deal with the issues of the discussion we have to delve into philosophy. Michael would have none of it.

Michael’s main point here is that if God is not measurable, then we can’t know he exists. As I pointed out this is a category mistake as God is not a material being. Thus, even if he did exist, we could not measure him–which Michael acknowledged.

Throughout the debate, Michael approached the issue from the point of view of natural science. I approached it from philosophy. In short, the questions of God’s existence and evil cannot be decided by natural science since they are not physical things in the natural world to be studied: God is not a being in nature and evil is a description of the nature of being (a philosophical concept).

Michael offered a lot of red herrings. I will not deal with those here as they are, well, red herrings.

Conclusion

The problem of evil is not a problem concerning God’s existence if God is not a moral being. Further, questions of God’s existence and evil are inherently philosophical. If you are interested in this topic, I recommend Brian Davies’ The Reality of God and the Problem of Evil.

 

J. Brian Huffling, PH.D. have a BA in History from Lee University, an MA in (3 majors) Apologetics, Philosophy, and Biblical Studies from Southern Evangelical Seminary (SES), and a Ph.D. in Philosophy of Religion from SES. He is the Director of the Ph.D. Program and Associate Professor of Philosophy and Theology at SES. He also teaches courses for Apologia Online Academy. He has previously taught at The Art Institute of Charlotte. He has served in the Marines, Navy, and is currently a reserve chaplain in the Air Force at Maxwell Air Force Base. His hobbies include golf, backyard astronomy, martial arts, and guitar.

Original Blog Source: http://bit.ly/2v4rTNa

/by

Unplanned and the Abortion Debate with Dr. Mike S. Adams

Podcast: Play in new window

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

In this episode, Frank talks about the movie Unplanned, based on the dramatic true story of a former Planned Parenthood leader who, after participating in an actual abortion procedure for the first time, walked down the street to join the Coalition for Life. He also interviews the great Dr. Mike S. Adams about his debate with Dr. Willie Parker, an abortion doctor who has performed thousands of abortions and claims to be a Christian. We don’t shy away from the truth, you shouldn’t either, listen to this important episode of the Cross Examined Official Podcast.

Keep us busy by sending your questions to Hello@CrossExamined.org and don’t miss this episode!

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

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

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

/by
Twitter suspends account of pro-life movie “Unplanned”, deletes 99% of their followers

Twitter suspends account of pro-life movie “Unplanned”, deletes 99% of their followers

,

By Wintery Knight

Wow, big social media companies like Facebook, Google, Youtube, and Twitter are really ratcheting up their suppression of any accounts that challenge their allies in the Democrat Party. For example, on the weekend Twitter decided to suspend the account of the new pro-life movie “Unplanned.” And then they deleted 99,000 of their followers.

PJ Media reports:

The pro-life movie Unplanned surprised at the box office its opening weekend, taking 5th place with $6.1 million. That didn’t stop Twitter from attacking the film twice in one weekend, however.

The movie’s Twitter account was briefly suspended on Saturday, mere hours after its release on Friday. On Sunday, the account seems to have mysteriously lost 99,000 of its 100,000 followers.

There was a backlash against the suspension of the account. Twitter didn’t provide any rule that was violated, but they reinstated the account – with zero followers. People trying to re-follow the account were prevented from doing so, including the author of the PJ Media article:

I attempted to follow the page, but the same thing happened to me.

However, the movie performed so well at the box office that they are expanding the number of theaters next week to 1,700:

Despite the Twitter suspension and sudden mysterious loss of followers, Unplanned racked up more than $6.1 million at the box office, despite being predicted to take in only $2-3 million. Even more impressive, the film only played on 1,060 screens, earning an average of $5,770 per screen.

On Sunday, the film announced that its distributor, Pure Flix, will add an additional 600 screens for a count of 1,700 screens next week.

The movie also earned an A+ rating from CinemaScore, and it has a 93 percent positive rating on RottenTomatoes.

I’d make sure that you go see it as soon as possible. Remember what happend to the Gosnell movie, last time? The theaters pulled it very early, even though it was doing very well.

This isn’t the first time that Twitter has censored voices critical of their allies in the Democrat Party. Remember when they refused to allow a pro-life election ad from (now Senator) Marsha Blackburn? Or when they censored pro-life ads from the well-known pro-life Susan B. Anthony List group? Or when they said that death threats against conservative Dana Loesch were permissible? They also allowed threats of violence to be made against the pro-life Covington students. They also blocked pro-life ads from Live Action. Basically, they censor anything that makes their pro-abortion allies in the Democrat Party look bad.

I understand that companies make mistakes, but why are all the mistakes made by these big social media companies in favor of their allies in the Democrat Party? Is it because they don’t want their allies in the Democrat Party to lose elections?

 

Original Blog Source: http://bit.ly/2IbAy8l

/by

Collusion against the Truth

Podcast: Play in new window

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

If the evidence is so good for Christianity, why don’t more people follow Christ? There are three possible factors for it and Frank discuss each one of them in this episode of the Cross Examined Official Podcast. We’ll see what motivates people to come to conclusions that are completely opposite to the facts.

Keep us busy by sending your questions to Hello@CrossExamined.org and don’t miss this episode!

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

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

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

/by
Meet the New Apologists (Part 1)

Meet the New Apologists (Part 1)

By Jordan Apodaca

God is doing an awesome work around the world. He is calling His church back to the defense and proclamation of the Gospel and you get to be a part! If you’ve been Apologetics sites like this one for a while, my guess is that you have an itch. There is a deep yearning within your soul to take the apologetics knowledge you’ve accumulated and use it to minister to others.

“Yes, you’re quite right. But do I know enough?”

If you could give me a basic five-minute explanation of God’s existence, Jesus’ resurrection, and the problem of evil, and if you’re humble and willing to trust God for this journey, then you are ready. The world is dying because of “lack of knowledge” (see Hosea 4:6). You have that knowledge! You know the Gospel, and you know that it is true! The world and the church need that knowledge!

“But how in the world do I start?”

Well, let’s ask seven thinkers who are relatively new to the apologetic scene! These are all apologists who have begun young and thriving apologetics ministries. In this first post, we will meet the apologists and hear the stories of how God led them to begin their ministries, what that looked like, and what makes their ministries unique. In the next post, we’ll hear them share advice on a broad range of topics, from how to reach local churches to picking names to finding a niche. But first, let’s meet the “new apologists!”

Tim Stratton (Free Thinking Ministries)

Q: Who are you? How did you get into apologetics? And how did you decide to begin an apologetics ministry?

My name is Tim Stratton. I never really thought that much about apologetics until after being in full-time youth ministry for several years. This was because teenagers and college students were asking hard questions and raising tough objections against Christianity. I had no idea how to answer the good questions of many students. I tried ignoring them, then telling them to simply have more faith or “just believe harder.” This ultimately backfired and many of them left the church. Some lost their faith and became atheists.

God used this to spark something in me. I started listening to Dr. Craig’s Reasonable Faith podcasts every day. Sometimes I would listen to several episodes in one day. If I did not comprehend the topic I would listen to that episode over, and over, and over, and over – and over, and over again until it “clicked.” After completing all the podcasts I realized I needed more so I enrolled at Biola University and majored in Christian Apologetics in the MACA program.

I did not really decide to start an apologetics-based ministry. It just sort of happened. Or perhaps I should say, “God did it!” I was content to continue pastoring at my church in Nebraska and trying to influence students and others in the congregation by sprinkling my sermons with “apologetics goodness” (like a Tim Keller). But then, one day in early April (2015) I went to go meet with my tax guy. He was aware of the online presence I had via social media. He asked me if I had ever thought about starting an apologetics-based ministry. I thought something like that could never happen, but he asked me to do him a favor and dream about it and to also write up a proposed job description along with a mission and vision for what “Tim Stratton Ministries” might look like. I really thought this was a waste of time but I typed something out and brought it back to him a couple days later. To my surprise, two weeks later I was having breakfast with my tax guy (he is a CPA), a couple successful businessmen, a lawyer, two pastors from the area, and a couple profs from the local university. I sat back and listened to them discuss finances, 501c3 stuff, a website, and more. Then they turned to me and asked, “So, Tim, do you want the job?”

This still seems surreal to this day and I can only give credit to our sovereign God!

However, if I had to give any advice (and in a nutshell) I would point out that FreeThinking Ministries began to exist because God led me to be a forceful presence on Facebook and social media. I would constantly defend the faith of Christians — especially young Christians — whenever I saw the opportunity. Eventually parents started tagging me in threads in which atheists were attacking their kids. This online battle for the mind was noticed by many and eventually a few of these guys asked me to start a website as a resource. This eventually turned into FTM.

Q: What Else Should We Know About You?

My wife Tia, and I have one son Ethan who is currently a sophomore in High School (and a great wrestler). Besides theology and apologetics, I love to spend time with my family. I enjoy working out with my wife and doing mixed martial arts with his son. I used to compete professionally in martial arts and had a successful coaching career in MMA. I also was an accomplished bass player in several Christian rock bands and I continue to occasionally record as a studio musician. I have recently taken up competitive pistol shooting. I love watching football, basketball, superhero movies and Star Wars!

Q: What currently makes your ministry unique compared to other ministries? What is the focus of your ministry?

Probably the one thing that sets FreeThinking Ministries apart from all the other apologetics-based organizations is our heavy emphasis on libertarian freedom (commonly referred to as free will) and how Molinism (a view explaining God’s sovereignty and human freedom/responsibility) answers so many apologetics-related questions. FTM definitely discusses a plethora of other issues, but a majority of our content defends the truth of Christianity through the lens of Molinism.

Q: Did you know from the beginning what would make your ministry unique? Or did you figure it out on the go? Explain how you came to focus on what you focus on.

Answer: It was definitely “on the go” for me! I did know that I wanted to push what I refer to as the “Freethinking Argument Against Naturalism,” but I had no intentions of writing so much about Molinism. This was a byproduct, however, of advancing the Freethinking Argument because so many Christians who opposed the idea of libertarian free will attacked the Freethinking Argument which was aimed at atheists. I thought this was odd since the argument is against naturalism and eventually seeks to show that the biblical view of God is the best explanation of the free will possessed by humanity. I never thought that my fellow brothers and sisters in Christ would attack my argument more than atheists. To counter this unexpected problem I appealed to Molinism. In fact, I changed the focus of my PhD work from philosophy and metaphysics to systematic theology so that I could study Molinism in depth.

Q: How do I pick a name for my ministry? How important is having a good name?

See my above answer.

Yes, I think it is good to have a unique name. Some of the men who helped start my ministry really thought I should name it “Tim Stratton Ministries.” I felt that this was a bad idea for several reasons. The primary reason is that I hope FreeThinking Ministries becomes bigger than just one guy (this is also why I developed a team and love to post guest blogs).

Scott Olson (Free Thinking Ministries)

Q: Who are you? How did you get into apologetics? And how did you decide to begin an apologetics ministry?

My name is Scott Olson, and I’m the director of media content for Freethinking Ministries. I’m also one of the hosts of the Freethinking Podcast which I cohost with Tim Stratton. I was first introduced to apologetics when I was in junior high. We watched a series of videos called TrueU (at least I think that’s what it was called) by Dr. Stephen Meyer for Sunday School, and I was riveted by the arguments being made for theism. That curiosity continued into high school when I first read half of Dr. William Lane Craig’s book On Guard. I don’t entirely remember why I ended up not finishing that book at that point, but I do remember finally finishing it my sophomore year of college. From that moment on, I couldn’t stop talking and reading about apologetics and theology. I managed to get several of my friends into it, and we began meeting and studying the arguments and evidence together. I suppose I haven’t ever started an apologetics ministry, but Tim and I had become acquaintances through my brother and so when Tim reached out and asked if I’d like to help out, I jumped at the opportunity. I managed to convince Tim to do a podcast with me, and we’ve been going at that for awhile now.

Q: What Else Should We Know About You?

I’m fascinated by marketing, persuasion, and influence, and I think that’s an area where Christians could use a stronger focus. For that reason, I’ve been taking a bit of a break from any hardcore studying of apologetics and I’ve been focusing on how we as Christian apologists can better articulate the importance of doing strong apologetics within the church.

Q: What currently makes your ministry unique compared to other ministries? What is the focus of your ministry?

Answer: I would say our ministry is the most prolific in terms of its defense of libertarian free will. Tim is constantly writing on the subject, applying it to numerous apologetics and theological issues, as well as talking about it with me on the podcast.

Q: How do I pick a name? How did you pick your name for your ministry? Are you happy with the name? How important is having a good name?

Answer: This might come as a surprise, but I don’t think the name of your ministry is nearly as important as you might think. The number of people who will come to be familiar with your ministry as a result of your name is really not that many. What’s much more important is that you create valuable content, and that those who read your content truly believe in what you’re doing. Your audience sharing your content is what will contribute the most to your growth, so I wouldn’t fret too much about the name. I suppose some good advice might be to pick a name that accurately reflects the niche you’ve chosen. Spell out the solution to the problem you solve in your name if at all possible.

Matt Schmidt (Engage 360)

Q: Who are you? How did you get into apologetics? And how did you decide to begin an apologetics ministry?

My name is Matt Schmidt.  I have an incredible wife and four young children.  My wife and I moved to Charlotte, NC for me to attend Southern Evangelical Seminary and have ended up settling here for the foreseeable future.

I had a great family growing up, and my parents instilled a lot of really great values in us.  We grew up in Nebraska and attended a conservative, mainline Lutheran Church until I was 12 or so.  I always had a lot of questions and remember challenging the pastor even when I was younger. By the end of high school, I would have considered myself an atheist, though a fairly moral atheist, believing that science had enough answers that you did not need God.  That combined with a comfortable middle-class life with loving parents, success in academics, success in sports, and a wide social circle created a situation with no existential need for God. For me it was just a matter of if it was true or not. That was it.

I had a lot of questions about how we got the Bible, whether science could prove that we don’t need God, and others.  I did not find Christians that were able to answer any of these questions. To keep the story short, over a period of about three years early on in college, I went from atheism, to deism (though I did not know that word at the time), to theism (though I did not know the distinction from Deism), to Christianity, to actually understanding the Gospel.  This was largely on my own. I heard the Gospel through the radio ministry of Alistair Begg and began listening to his show more regularly. One time I left it on after and hear R.C. Sproul’s Renewing your Mind.  I was amazed and excited that there were other people (even Christians) asking and answering the kind of questions I had wrestled with for years on my own.  I immediately became an apologetics junkie. I ended up also hearing Ravi Zacharias on the same channel and started purchasing books on a regular basis.

How I ended up starting an apologetics ministry is a bit of a complex story, so I will give a brief version.  I entered seminary to study philosophy, theology, and apologetics. I did not have any clear intention of getting a “job” because of my degree.  I just wanted to learn and be more prepared in my life, to serve whatever church we were a part of, and be more effective at sharing with others.  A few years into my studies, I was asked to take over a local chapter of a new apologetics-based campus ministry that had started out of Southern Evangelical Seminary called Ratio Christi.  I was then asked to join the National Team of Ratio Christi overseeing hiring and new chapter formation. After four years and overseeing close to 200 people coming into the organization, circumstances required that I had to take a new direction.

One conviction I had throughout much of my time in Ratio Christi was a frustration over the disconnect with the church and its integration of both apologetics and evangelism.  Most of our chapters were doing great work with their students but churches were not interested for the most part, even in situations where the local directors were working to establish relationships.  I had been thinking about how we could better serve the local church and how crucial they were to the long-term success of what we were doing in Campus Ministry with students who cycled out every few years.  Once it was clear I was needing to change directions, more directly addressing the need of apologetics-evangelism in the local church was a very clear direction. I was immensely blessed with a large number of people whom I had been laboring alongside for several years who had this same conviction and Engage 360 went from an idea to an official para-church ministry quite quickly.

Q: What Else Should We Know About You?

I am an untrained entrepreneur at heart, and I love doing things as a team.  True teamwork is immensely valuable, and it takes much more than having a group of people trying to do the same thing to have a team.  A healthy team can emphasize everyone’s strengths and largely cover up each person’s weaknesses. I love taking on new challenges and figuring out how to solve them.  I am very passionate about helping all Christians understand that they can be more effective at understanding and sharing their faith no matter what their individual gifts and abilities are.

Q: What currently makes your ministry unique compared to other ministries? What is the focus of your ministry?

As far as apologetics ministries go we are unique in our focus on hands-on, guided evangelism training by focusing on how to have spiritual conversations in everyday life.  Our training is highly interactive and focused on modeling how to put the apologetics evangelism content into practice in everyday life. Relative to most Evangelism ministries, we are unique in our emphasis on not taking a one-size-fits-all approach but asking questions to learn who a person is and presenting Christianity and the Gospel in light of who that person is (which means a variety of other “methods” can be effective if used in the right way with the right person).  Working with the same basic training concepts, we are offering three ways of accomplishing our vision of helping people have spiritual conversations in everyday life. First through hands-on church training, second through geographically based online communities, and third through University outreach events (which will combine church training and an online community with a multi-day outreach event on a University campus).

Q: Did you know from the beginning what would make your ministry unique? Or did you figure it out on the go? Explain how you came to focus on what you focus on.

I knew before we started that it was fairly unique in that most apologetics ministries to the church were focused on events, lectures, and conferences.  These are really valuable, but we saw a gap in people actually applying what they learned in everyday life, so we zeroed in on that as our focus. Charlotte has no lack in apologetics-based training, but even with the churches that emphasized apologetics there was a disconnect between getting people to use their apologetics knowledge in everyday conversations.  We wanted to try to focus on a very entry level approach that was something anyone could benefit from and use in their lives. We trust that those who begin the process with us will continue to grow and will most often get deeper into apologetics as time goes on. We are trying to offer a very practical, “entry level” onramp into apologetics evangelism.

Q: How do I pick a name? How did you pick your name for your ministry? Are you happy with the name? How important is having a good name?

That is a really hard one.  I was stuck on a very descriptive name for our ministry that was way too long but it said what we were doing so well.  My incredible wife rescued us and came up with the name Engage 360 as a way of summarizing: Engage the whole person, take them through a whole training process, that they can be effective in their whole life.  It is helpful to have a simple descriptive word that can be used in many ways. Engage is becoming more of a buzz word and does a good job of saying what we are about in one word. It also can be used in different formats.  For instance, our podcast will be called Engage Your World.

Cameron Bertuzzi (Capturing Christianity)

Q: Who are you? How did you get into apologetics? And how did you decide to begin an apologetics ministry?

Hi, I’m Cameron Bertuzzi. I’m a professional photographer and Christian apologist. I stumbled into apologetics back in 2012 when I learned that my brother had become an atheist. I worked through a period of doubt myself while attending Bible school a few years earlier, and figured, quite wrongly, that my brother’s doubts could easily be resolved. Boy was I wrong! His questions far outstripped what I was prepared to answer. After our initial conversation, I decided that I would get to the bottom of this. I wanted to know for myself whether Christianity could be rational. In my research, which has now spanned over the course of several years, I’ve discovered that Christian belief is entirely rational and that there are very good answers to the questions and objections he raised.

I started Capturing Christianity (CC) primarily as a place to blog and start practicing my writing. At the time, back in 2016, I didn’t think CC would grow beyond that. But 2 years later, the ministry has quite literally exploded–not just in our viewership, but in the kind of content we produce. We’ve moved beyond blog posts and now have a podcast, host live discussions between Christians and non-Christians, and film high quality interviews with professional philosophers and apologists. We have big plans for the future, too! God is good.

Q: What Else Should We Know About You?

You should probably know that I have a beautiful wife and two adorable children. Another fun fact: Cameron is my middle name. My full name is Richard Cameron Bertuzzi.

Q: What currently makes your ministry unique compared to other ministries? What is the focus of your ministry?

There are at least 5 things that make us unique. First, CC is unique aesthetically. All you’ve got to do is look at our website or watch any of our interviews to know what I’m talking about. My background in photography has set pretty high standards for the way we present our content. Second, CC is not all about Cameron Bertuzzi. There’s a term one of our board members came up with that I like: Platform Model. CC is really a platform to showcase the work of other thinking Christians. Third, our social media presence, at least on Facebook, is unparalleled. Our posts get commented on, shared, and liked more than ministries that have twice as many followers (as I’m writing this, we’re just now passing 7,000 likes). Check out our Facebook page to see what I mean. Fourth, our content is philosophically informed. Part of what’s great about having a platform model is that a lot of the content we produce comes from actual professionals. Even the stuff I write, I try to make it as informed as I can. Lastly, what makes Capturing Christianity unique is Cameron Bertuzzi. I don’t mean for that to sound haughty or arrogant, but that’s something that other ministries don’t have. In the same way, part of what makes Reasonable Faith unique is having William Lane Craig. God has gifted us each with unique abilities. It’s our job to take the talents and gifts that God has given us and creatively further the Kingdom (see the Parable of the Talents).

Our target market is Christians who are interested in apologetics. That sounds straightforward, but it’s actually pretty specific. On our website and in our podcast we typically mark the difficulty level for our content. The difficulty we produce most regularly is ‘intermediate.’ There’s a reason for that. Part of what it means to expose the intellectual side of Christian belief is to bring the very best ideas to light. It’s just a fact that many of those ideas are highly nuanced and complex. We do what we can to summarize, but what often happens is that the content ends up requiring some existing background knowledge in apologetics. And we’re okay with that. The ultimate goal is to expose the intellectual side of Christian belief.

Q: Did you know from the beginning what would make your ministry unique? Or did you figure it out on the go? Explain how you came to focus on what you focus on.

Answer: I knew from the beginning that our website would be pretty, but I did not know that social media would be our thing. If you can believe it, I wrestled with the idea of starting a Facebook page. I’ve started other pages in the past, I even have one for my personal photography page (Bertuzzi Photography), but none of them were very successful. CC is an enigma. It started out as a place where I would just share blog posts and do my best to get likes and shares. I used it solely as a marketing tool. But nowadays it’s a place to share ideas, start conversations, and even meme.

The platform model (mentioned in the previous question) is also something that came later. Not much later, but definitely later. As I said, CC started out as a blog for my own thoughts. Everything else we do developed organically.

Q: How do I pick a name? How did you pick your name for your ministry? Are you happy with the name? How important is having a good name?

Once I became comfortable with embracing my identity as a photographer, the name ‘Capturing Christianity’ soon followed. I knew that I didn’t want “Apologetics” in the name because most people have no idea what that means. That’s also the reason it’s not in our tagline (ie: Exposing the intellectual side of Christian belief.)

Selecting a name is important, but don’t spend too much time thinking about it. My wife and I have started several businesses over the course of our marriage that never panned out. Don’t get me wrong–we learned a lot from those experiences, but countless hours were spent thinking about what to name our business when what we should have been thinking about was how we were going to make it successful. Success in business has way more to do with discipline and execution than it does having a clever name (e.g., “Google”).

Travis Pelletier (Ratio Christi)

Q: Who are you? How did you get into apologetics? And how did you decide to begin an apologetics ministry?

My name is Travis Pelletier, I got into apologetics when I first read C.S. Lewis at 12 years old. I ended up rejecting my faith in College and regained it through a deeper study of apologetics. I decided to begin an apologetics ministry when I saw that my experience of doubt was very common, and that there was a huge need for apologetics Training.

Q: What Else Should We Know About You?

I’m married to a beautiful wife, and I have a 1 year-old son!

Q: What currently makes your ministry unique compared to other ministries? What is the focus of your ministry?

Our ministry is focused on reversing the trend in which Christian youth walk away from their faith in College. We do this by 1) Starting apologetics clubs on campus to discuss the evidence for and against the Christian faith, 2) Getting into high schools to prepare students before they get to college, and 3) Getting into churches to teach parents how to strengthen the faith of their children.

Jeremy Linn (Twin Cities Apologetics)

Q: Who are you? How did you get into apologetics? And how did you decide to begin an apologetics ministry?

I got into apologetics after a winter conference I went to with the organization Cru. At the conference they had a seminar based on the book Reason for God by Timothy Keller. I got interested in the arguments for God’s existence, as I grew up in an area where Christianity was always assumed to be true and those things weren’t discussed. Then I went into a “crisis of faith” mode a few months later after getting into online debates with Atheists, and started an investigation into the truth of Christianity.

I decided to start an Apologetics ministry after a friend who is passionate about Apologetics and I talked about the idea of starting an Apologetics group. That was it. But over time as conversations about it with others started to happen, the vision of the group expanded beyond anywhere we expected at the time.

Q: What Else Should We Know About You?

I went to UW-Green Bay for an undergrad and accounting. I work full time as an accountant right now along with co-leading the ministry, focused on the social media side of things. I also go to Bethel Seminary for their Christian Thought masters degree program.

Q: What currently makes your ministry unique compared to other ministries? What is the focus of your ministry?

We are the only ministry of its kind in the Twin Cities… and there are MANY Christian ministries here. What I mean is, we are the only ministry (outside the university) that provides training specifically for Apologetics to Christians in the area.

Q: Did you know from the beginning what would make your ministry unique? Or did you figure it out on the go? Explain how you came to focus on what you focus on.

In a sense we didn’t know what would make it unique, and thought it wouldn’t attract much interest. But then when we started talking to people about it, we realized it was something that wasn’t provided in our area, and people were seeking opportunities to be built up in Apologetics.

Q: How do I pick a name? How did you pick your name for your ministry? Are you happy with the name? How important is having a good name?

I gave some ideas for a name earlier. I picked the name after starting to brainstorm, writing down Twin Cities Apologetics, and pretty quickly realizing that nothing is going to top it. It came from the idea that there is a gap in the cities for Apologetics, so we are going to fill the gap with this ministry. I’m not extremely happy with the name because it doesn’t create too much appeal for our content for people outside the area. I start to question if we should have gone with a more general name, but then that brings me back to the idea that we would just be like any other apologetics ministry then. I can kind of go in circles that way. Having a name is one of the most important aspects of starting and growing the name. I mentioned Capturing Christianity earlier – one of the most successful Facebook pages out there. Much of that is because the name – It has alliteration. It is a play on words in light of the fact that the creator is a photographer. And it may appeal to people who don’t know what the word Apologetics means.

Matt Slama (Twin Cities Apologetics)

[He didn’t answer the first two questions; suffice it to say he is the other mastermind behind Twin Cities Apologetics.]

Q: What currently makes your ministry unique compared to other ministries? What is the focus of your ministry?

Perhaps we are not unique in format or structure. However, we are unique in the sense that we have decided to be a strong point of apologetics here in our own community, the Twin Cities. There is a huge need in today’s church to teach the defense of the Gospel. Talking with pastors here in the Twin Cities, it became very apparent that this is where we need to focus. Reaching outside of the Twin Cities would be an abandonment of our own community.

So, with that, we have 3 areas were we focus: building Christians up who need help with their faith, dialoguing with non-believers, and defending the faith against attacks here in our community.

Q: Did you know from the beginning what would make your ministry unique? Or did you figure it out on the go? Explain how you came to focus on what you focus on.

We never wanted to be unique. We saw the need that we needed to fill and decided on what was going to be the most effective. There is a vast amount of apologetic material online from trained philosophers. Jeremy and I are not trained philosophers. Fortunately, because those resources have been put together by great men and women of God, we don’t need to be. Taking those materials, we decided to train people up in sound doctrine and teaching. Looking at current science and also the philosophy of antiquity, we help people defend their faith and use that as a stepping stone for evangelism.

 

Jordan is a Christian, the husband of Tarah, an evangelist-apologist with Ratio Christi, a volunteer with Engage 360 and Reasonable Faith, and an aspiring philosopher studying at Southern Evangelical Seminary. His intellectual passions include the study of free will and the doctrine of heaven. His ministry passions are to share the love of the Gospel and to equip ordinary Christians to do the same. Other interests include sports (especially Ultimate Frisbee), time management, veganism, peanut butter, and personality theories.

Original Blog Source: http://bit.ly/2TBnQC3

/by
Seven Aspects of Jesus’s Life that are Historically Certain

Seven Aspects of Jesus’s Life that are Historically Certain

,

By Brian Chilton

When I had struggled with my faith, it was not in the area of science. I believed that science and faith can coexist, and I still do. The God who gave the special revelation of the Bible is also the same God who created the heavens and the earth from no materially existent thing. My struggles were in the area of history. In 1997, I came across a work by a group called the Jesus Seminar (composed of individuals such as John Dominic Crossan, Robert Funk, and Marcus Borg) which claimed that the majority of the words of Jesus as recorded in the Gospels could not be historically verified. I later came to find that the Jesus Seminar had no evidence to support their claims, just their own presuppositions.

However, as I began studying the areas of history, philosophy, and theology, I came to realize that the core details of Jesus of Nazareth’s life can be known with great certainty. One of my professors at Liberty, Gary Habermas, developed what he calls the minimal facts approach. This approach lists out six areas of Jesus’s life that are universally accepted by all historians. He also adds a seventh which holds strong support, albeit less than the other six. So, what are these seven historical aspects of Jesus’s life that can be held with great certainty? They are as follows.

  1. Jesus died on a Roman cross. It is universally accepted that Jesus of Nazareth died by crucifixion. Even agnostic leaning atheist New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman states that “The crucifixion of Jesus by the Romans is one of the most secure facts we have about his life.”[1] The Romans were efficient killers. They would ensure that the individuals whom they were instructed to kill died. Otherwise, their lives would have been taken in the victim’s place.
  2. The disciples had experiences that led them to believe that Jesus had risen from the dead. It may surprise you to discover that nearly all historians accept that the disciples had experiences that led them to believe in the resurrection of Jesus. Nearly all scholars agree that something happened on the first Easter Sunday. But what happened is where they differ.
  3. The disciples were transformed by their experiences to the point that they were willing to die for what they knew to be true. People die for what is false all the time. Many individuals have fallen in a war for nations that did not have noble causes. However, it is far different when the person dies for something they know to be true or false. The early disciples were willing to lay their lives on the line, and the lives of those they loved, for what they knew to be true or false. They literally believed that Jesus had risen from the dead.
  4. The resurrection message was promoted early in the church’s history. This is one of the points that excites me. I hope to write my dissertation on this very topic. Throughout the New Testament are early creeds that predate the New Testament documents. One of the earliest is 1 Corinthians 15:3-7 which tells of Jesus’s resurrection appearances to the disciples, James, and 500 witnesses at one time. The creedal formulation is extremely early. Bart Ehrman, an agnostic, holds that the material goes back “to the early 30s of the Common Era.”[2] James D. G. Dunn holds that the material dates to “within a year or two of the events themselves.”[3] More likely, the creed dates to the very year of Jesus’s death, burial, and resurrection. This along with Galatians 1:18-19 and the early creeds are among the earliest material in all of the New Testament record.
  5. Paul of Tarsus, the former opponent of Christianity, became a Christian after encountering the risen Jesus. No one denies that Paul of Tarsus had some experience on the road to Damascus which radically transformed his life. What could have transformed this Pharisee of Pharisee who was either a member of the Sanhedrin or one who was on his way to becoming a member (a position that paid extremely well)? Having an encounter with the risen Jesus would have brought such a transformation.
  6. James the brother of Jesus, a former skeptic, became a Christian after encountering the risen Jesus. The same holds true for James the brother of Jesus who was not a follower of Jesus until after the resurrection. James disproved of Jesus’s ministry (see Jn. 7:5) perhaps in part because it was expected that the oldest sibling would take over the family business. Jesus didn’t. Instead, he went on a preaching campaign. James probably felt great resentment towards Jesus during Jesus’s earthly ministry. However, his experience with the risen Jesus changed all that.
  7. The tomb was found empty. While this fact is not held as strongly as the other six, 75% of historical scholars accept that the tomb of Jesus was found empty on the first Easter Sunday. It is also interesting to note that the preaching of the resurrection happened early in Jerusalem. This is compelling because the skeptic would have known where the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea was located. The tomb could easily be checked. Jesus was not there.

More likely than not, as we approach the Easter season, you will encounter shows, books, and booklets that will try to dissuade you from believing that Jesus rose from the dead. The reality is, the best evidence supports not only that Jesus lived and that he died, but that he also rose again from the dead. As James and Paul were transformed by the resurrection of Jesus, so can you! Let us shout in triumph with the angels standing by the empty tomb of Jesus, “He is not here, but has risen” (Lk. 24:6).

Notes

[1] Bart D. Ehrman, Why Was Jesus Killed?, Kindle ed.

[2] Bart D. Ehrman, Did Jesus Exist? This Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth (New York: HarperOne, 2012), 141.

[3] James D. G. Dunn, Jesus Remembered, Christianity in the Making, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2003), 864.

 

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 enrolled in the Ph.D. program in Theology and Apologetics at Liberty University and is a member of the Evangelical Theological Society and the Evangelical Philosophical Society. Brian has been in the ministry for over 15 years and serves as the Senior Pastor of Westfield Baptist Church in northwestern North Carolina.

Original Blog Source: http://bit.ly/2HI5Bte

/by

Is the Quran the Word of God? w/ Dr. David Wood

Podcast: Play in new window

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

Dr. David Wood joins Frank during this episode of the Cross Examined Official Podcast. They tackled the question: Is the Quran the Word of God? David talks about how he became an expert on Islam and how that’s related to his friendship to the late Nabeel Qureshi.

Islam is the fastest growing (enforced) religion in the world and we as Christians should know how to speak intelligently with Muslims about the truth of Christianity.

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

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

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

 

/by
Knowledge and Certainty Can You Know that God Exists

Knowledge and Certainty: Can You Know that God Exists?

, ,

Mikel Del Rosario

Do you have to be absolutely certain about something like “God exists” before you can say that you actually know it? Christians who talk about the evidence for God sometimes get frustrated when skeptics challenge a basic premise like “everything that begins to exist has a cause,” by saying that we haven’t explored the entire universe to know if that’s true. Maybe you’ve heard a friend say you can’t actually know anything about God unless you’re absolutely sure about it.

But saying this is an either-or kind of thing is a false dilemma. In this post, I’ll explain why you don’t have to have 100% certainty before you can know that God is real.

No good reason for either-or-thinking

In Philosophy, saying you have certainty about something means it’s impossible for you to be wrong. So, maybe saying “I exist” is one of the few things that fall into that category. But some skeptics say you can’t really know much about anything at all. Others say your beliefs aren’t justified even if they turn out to be true. For them, we can know almost nothing about God and our world since nobody can be absolutely certain about most things. But the idea that knowing something is the same as being absolutely sure about it turns out to be self-defeating. In fact, even though they say we can’t know much about anything, many seem to think they know enough to correct you if you say you know God is real. [1]

Think about it. The hyper-skeptical view is that you can’t say you know that God exists unless it’s impossible for you to be wrong about it. But is there any good reason to say that knowledge is the same as certainty? No. For example, I know that I’m writing this post on my computer. But it’s possible that I’m just dreaming about it. Still, does the mere fact that it’s possible that I’m dreaming means that I can’t know that I’m using my computer? Of course not.

Skeptics think they know something you don’t when they say you’re wrong

The thing is, skeptics, do claim to know certain things. For example, “Since we can’t go back in time to watch the big bang, we can’t know that the universe had a beginning” or “since we haven’t yet discovered every possible naturalistic option, we can’t know that God caused the universe.” These are actually claims to know something. But how do they know that?

Some skeptics have told me that in order for you to know something, you have to be 100% sure that you know it. But can’t you know something even if you aren’t entirely sure that you know it? Sure you can. For example, imagine that you memorized all the correct answers to the review questions in your textbook for class. Even if you’re not sure what questions will be on the quiz, you have a pretty good guess that some of them will be. Unbeknownst to you, every single one of those questions you studied actually make up the entirety of next week’s quiz.

In this scenario, you would actually know all the answers to the questions on next week’s quiz. You’d know the answers to a quiz you haven’t taken yet—even if you don’t realize that you actually know the answers! Turns out, you don’t have to be 100% sure (or even aware) that you know something in order for you to actually know it.

If the evidence for God’s existence seems compelling to you, there’s no need to be shy or tentative about your beliefs. You don’t have to have 100% certainty before you can know that God is real. [2]

 

Mikel Del Rosario helps Christians explain their faith with courage and compassion. He is a doctoral student in the New Testament department at Dallas Theological Seminary. Mikel teaches Christian Apologetics and World Religion at William Jessup University. He is the author of Accessible Apologetics and has published over 20 journal articles on apologetics and cultural engagement with his mentor, Dr. Darrell Bock. Mikel holds an M.A. in Christian Apologetics with highest honors from Biola University and a Master of Theology (Th.M) from Dallas Theological Seminary where he serves as Cultural Engagement Manager at the Hendricks Center and a host of the Table Podcast. Visit his Web site at ApologeticsGuy.com.

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

/by