Friday, May 26, 2017

Video: What Caused God? featuring J.P. Moreland


In this short video (6 min 58 sec), Dr. J.P. Moreland addresses the common question, "What caused God?"

Dr. Moreland discusses:
  • why this question falls prey to what is known as the category fallacy
  • the definition of God and why it's not arbitrary 
  • why a self-existent being is necessary and sensible
Courage and Godspeed,

Thursday, May 25, 2017

Do You Want to Become a Christian Case Maker? Learn an Argument!

As I have written before, when you initially accept your duty as a Christian case maker, the task can seem daunting!  Where does one start? There are so many arguments!  How can a laymen, with a nine to five job and a family, be expected to master the case for Christianity?

While reading through cold-case homicide detective and Christian case maker J. Warner Wallace's latest book, Forensic Faith, he offers some practical advice for the Christian asking these types of questions:

"When I first decided to accept my duty as a Christian case maker, I felt overwhelmed by all the diverse disciplines from which I could make the case for Christianity.  I was already in my thirties and busier than ever as a homicide detective.  I couldn't imagine how I would ever find the time to master all the philosophy and science.  So I decided to specialize.  I picked the one line of evidence that most interested me and spent as much time as possible learning everything I could...It required me to study so I could defend the claims of the argument...I knew I needed to articulate the case and respond to objections."1

This is excellent advice that provides a concrete starting point for the Christian desiring to learn how to "give a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you" (1 Peter 3:15).

So, what argument are you going to master?  Please visit our recent post, "Mere Christianity Made Simple" for some resources to get you started.

Now, learn an argument, get out there and make the case!

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Our review of Forensic Faith is forthcoming!

Related Posts

Solving the "Who Made God?" Problem

A Cosmological Argument Primer

Abdu Murray makes his C.A.S.E. for the Resurrection of Jesus

Footnote:
1. J. Warner Wallace, Forensic Faith.

Wednesday, May 24, 2017

Counterpoints: William Lane Craig and Richard Dawkins on Evolution


Richard Dawkins- "...although atheism might have been logically tenable before Darwin, Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist."1

William Lane Craig- "“Barrow and Tipler, two physicists in their book "The Anthropic Cosmological Principle," list ten steps in the course of human evolution, each of which is so improbable that before it would occur the sun would have ceased to be a main sequence star and incinerated the earth. And they calculate the probability of the evolution of the human genome to be somewhere between four to the negative 180th power to the 110,000th power and four to the negative 360th power to the 110,000th power. So, if evolution did occur on this planet it was literally a miracle, and therefore evidence for the existence of God.”2

Checkout the rest of the posts in our "Counterpoints" posts here.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Related Posts

Richard Dawkins says aborting babies with Down syndrome is the “moral and sensible” choice

Ye Have No Definition of Faith?

Counterpoints: Richard Dawkins vs. John Lennox on Religion and Atheism

Footnotes:
1. Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker, p. 6.
2. Hitchens Debate Transcript found here. If readers would like to view the debate, it's here.

Tuesday, May 23, 2017

Video: True for You, but Not For Me? by Brett Kunkle


In this featured video, speaker, author and apologist Brett Kunkle of Stand to Reason demonstrates how to make the case for objective moral truths.  Kunkle writes:

"The culture has lost its moral common sense. It’s never surprising to hear students brush off clear-case examples of moral evil, relegating all moral claims to the realm of the subjective. We’re saturated in a sea of subjectivism, and we simply soak it up.

So, we have a big job in the church rebuilding an objective moral framework from which Christians can live and engage the culture. Here’s my attempt at helping people understand how we come to know objective moral truth, the complete deficiency of moral relativism, and why it matters..."1

Enjoy!

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Related Posts

Article: Can Moral Objectivism Do Without God? by Peter S. Williams

Video: The Moral Argument- Good without God?

Presenting the Moral Argument Clearly

Footnote:
1. Brett Kunkle, How to Make the Case for Objective Moral Truths, May 17, 2017.

Monday, May 22, 2017

The Ongoing Struggle Against the Culture to Defend Intrinsic Human Value


In the subject post on Stand to Reason's blog, Amy Hall compares the Church's struggle against infant exposure during the Roman era to it's struggle against abortion today. She writes:

In the Roman era, ordinary people routinely killed babies by leaving them on trash heaps. Today, ordinary people routinely kill babies in the womb by tearing off their limbs one by one. 

You can read the entire post here.

Stand firm in Christ and stand firm for the preborn,
Chase

Saturday, May 20, 2017

Worldview and Apologetics in the News

A (New) Argument for Abortion

Politics Disguised as Science: When to Doubt a Scientific ‘Consensus’

'Bible Answer Man' Hank Hanegraaff Reveals Battle with Cancer

Mormon church is pulling older teens from Boy Scouts' programs

Church of England Reviving with Rise in Patriotism

Book Review: Is Christianity Reasonable? A Review of Forensic Faith by J. Warner Wallace

Teacher Fired for Giving Student a Bible Gets Job Back — Victory!

Cosmic Inflation Theory Faces Challenges

It’s time to get rid of Mother’s Day: Teitel

History Made: ‘American Gods’ Features TV’s Most Explicit Gay Sex Scene Between Muslims

Podcast: BreakPoint: The Hopeless World of “13 Reasons”

Abortion is the solution to climate change?

Ravi Zacharias, Ministry Team Say 'Goodbye' to Cancer-Stricken Nabeel Qureshi
Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/ravi-zacharias-ministry-team-say-goodbye-cancer-stricken-nabeel-qureshi-183726/#pOyMF10OGSfUWhIr.99
Ravi Zacharias, Ministry Team Say 'Goodbye' to Cancer-Stricken Nabeel Qureshi
Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/ravi-zacharias-ministry-team-say-goodbye-cancer-stricken-nabeel-qureshi-183726/#pOyMF10OGSfUWhIr.99
Ravi Zacharias, Ministry Team Say 'Goodbye' to Cancer-Stricken Nabeel Qureshi

The left’s new response to mental illness: killing people

The Discovery of Joshua’s Ai at Khirbet el-Maqatir

Christians in India Under Pressure to Convert to Hinduism, Can't Talk About Jesus, Heaven or Hell
Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/christians-india-pressure-convert-hinduism-cant-talk-about-jesus-heaven-hell-184056/#wLfKw0FqTll58wWP.99
Christians in India Under Pressure to Convert to Hinduism, Can't Talk about Jesus, Heaven and Hell

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Last week's edition is here.
Ravi Zacharias, Ministry Team Say 'Goodbye' to Cancer-Stricken Nabeel Qureshi
Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/ravi-zacharias-ministry-team-say-goodbye-cancer-stricken-nabeel-qureshi-183726/#pOyMF10OGSfUWhIr.99

Friday, May 19, 2017

Rape, Pork, and God



Recently I saw a Facebook post with a meme that stated “Rape someone and pay 50 shekels of silver to her dad” and “eat pork and go to hell.”  Both of these statements were attributed to the God of the Old Testament.  Like Chad Gross, I am not a fan of memes, especially ones that are “ridiculing and take shots at the opposition.”  But my main reason for responding to this would be  to provide an understanding of these two laws that are described in the Old Testament.  Clearly we cannot get this from a few words on a meme. 

Rape Someone and Pay 50 Shekels

Deuteronomy 22: 28-29
28 If a man comes upon a young woman, a virgin who is not betrothed, seizes her and lies with her, and they are discovered, 29 the man who lay with her shall give the young woman’s father fifty silver shekels and she will be his wife, because he has violated her. He may not divorce her as long as he lives. 1

Critics attack these verses as the woman appears to be nothing more than her father’s property.  But a closer look will provide evidence that this law was actually meant to protect the woman.  Exodus 22: 15-16 helps to provide a backdrop for this scenario:

15 When a man seduces a virgin who is not betrothed, and lies with her, he shall make her his wife by paying the bride price. 16 If her father refuses to give her to him, he must still pay him the bride price for virgins.2

In each case, the man is guilty. However, in verse 28, it does say that “they” (as opposed to he) are discovered.  This seems to imply the woman was complicit in the act, although the man clearly bears the burden of responsibility for initiation.

It is important to understand in this culture and time period that it would become very difficult for a woman to find a husband if she is no longer a virgin.  So this law is actually for women’s protection.
According to Paul Copan, these passages allow for two courses of action:

1.        If the father and daughter agree to it, the seducer must marry the woman and provide for her all of her life, without the possibility of divorce.  The father (in conjunction with the daughter) has the final say-so in the arrangement.  The girl isn’t required to marry the seducer.

2.       The girl’s father (the legal point person) has the right to refuse any such permanent arrangement as well as the right to demand the payment that would be given for a bride, even though the seducer doesn’t marry his daughter (since she has been sexually compromised, marriage to another man would be difficult if not impossible).  The girl has to agree with this arrangement, and she isn’t required to marry the seducer.  In this arrangement, she is still treated as a virgin. 

Again, we don’t see a lack of concern for the woman.  Her well-being is actually the underlying theme of this legislation.3 

Eat Pork and Go to Hell

Regarding this statement, I am not familiar with an OT passage that states this.  Deuteronomy 14:8 mentions even touching the carcass of a pig makes one unclean.  But this is not eternal condemnation. If an Israelite ate or even touched pork, they would then need to adhere to the process of being made clean.


There are various reasons given as to why the Israelites were called to refrain from pork in the Old Testament.  Some scholars point to the fact that other nations surrounding them sacrificed pigs to idols.  So refraining from eating this type of meat was a distinct reminder for them to refrain from mixing pagan practices with their worship of the one true God.  This command only applied during OT times.  It is made clear in the New Testament that all foods are made clean (Mark 7:19).  So this temporary restriction most likely served as a specific purpose to draw God’s chosen people closer to Him.

Footnotes:
1.  Taken from www.biblegateway.com and the NASB revised edition
2.  Ibid
3.  Is God a Moral Monster by Paul Copan pgs. 118-119

Related Resources: