Welcome! It's been wisely stated that the way one answers the question, "Is there a God?" defines a life.
Here at Truthbomb Apologetics we strive to offer apologetics resources to encourage and challenge both believer and unbeliever.
Critical thinking is strongly encouraged, reason is a must, and all are welcomed!
"While Western atheists turn from belief in God because a tsunami in another part of the world caused great suffering, many brokenhearted survivors of that same tsunami found faith in God. This is one of the great paradoxes of suffering. Those who don't suffer much think suffering should keep people from God, while many who suffer a great deal turn to God, not from him." Courage and Godspeed, Chad Footnote: 1. Randy Alcorn, If God is Good, p. 102.
It has been awhile since I've posted this excellent resource, but Brian Auten of Apologetics315 really did his research and created a 5 part primer on logical thinking. This is a unique and profitable free resource.
I encourage our readers to checkout these excellent primers in logic:
During the summer, Nabeel Qureshi sat down with Haven Today to talk about his book Seeking Allah Finding Jesus which describes his journey from Islam to Christ. In the five part series, Nabeel talks about his book, Ramadan, what it is like being a Muslim in America, a little about what God is doing in the lives of Muslims and more. Each part can be listened to from the following links: Part 1; Part 2; Part 3; Part 4; Part 5.
The Kalam cosmological argument for God's existence is as follows:
1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause. 
One argument offered in support of Premise (2) is the impossibility of an actually infinite number of things. The argument goes like this:
1. An actually infinite number of things cannot exist.
2. A beginningless series of events in time entails an actually infinite number of things.
3. Therefore, a beginningless series of events in time cannot exist. 
However, this often raises the question, "If an actually infinite number of things cannot exist, how can God be infinite as theists claim?"
As William Lane Craig explains, this question is based on a misunderstanding:
"When we speak of the infinity of God, we are not using the word in a mathematical sense to refer to an aggregate of an infinite number of finite parts. God's infinity is, if you will, qualitative, not quantitative. It means that God is metaphysically necessary, morally perfect, omnipotent, omniscient, eternal, etc." 
“The more I delve into natural laws – the atom, the
universe, the solid elements, molecules, the sun, and even more, the interplay
of all the mechanisms required to sustain life – I am astounded. The whole creation could collapse like a deck
of cards if just one of those factors were removed. Some people really believe that all the
design and precision in nature came about by chance, that if millions of
molecules bombard each other long enough a nerve cell and sensory ending at
exactly the right threshold will be bound to turn up. To those people I merely suggest that they
try to make one, as I did, and see what chance is up against.” - Dr. Paul Brand
Dr. Brand was the first physician to recognize that leprosy did not cause the loss of tissue, but is actually the loss of sensation that makes sufferers susceptible to injury.
In his book Where is God When It Hurts?, Philip Yancey states, “Dr. Brand received a several-million-dollar grant for the
express purpose of designing an artificial pain system… After five years of work, thousands of
man-hours, and several million dollars, Brand and his associates abandoned the
entire project… A warning system
suitable for just one hand was exorbitantly expensive, subject to frequent
mechanical breakdown, and hopelessly inadequate to interpret the profusion of
sensations… The body’s pain network
includes several hundred million sensors that function maintenance free
throughout a healthy person’s life.”
As the culture war continues to heat up, homosexuality continues to take center stage. It seems that one cannot even share an opposing opinion on the topic without being labeled "bigoted" or "homophobic."
In this featured talk, apologist Sean McDowellworks through a number of Bible passages to explain the biblical view of homosexuality. Sean also gives helpful advice on how the follower of Jesus can address this issue in a Christ-like manner.
I had the pleasure of attending the Mt. Airy "Defending the Faith" Conference this past weekend and heard an excellent lecture given by Marvin Patrick entitled, "Three Gods or One? Defending the Trinity." Later that day, during lunch, Truthbomb team member Chase Deener and my atheist friend were discussing the various analogies that Patrick had shared and the strengths and liabilities of each and I shared my favorite analogy brielfy. It is the musical analogy originally offered by theologian Jeremy S. Begbie. Peter S. Williams explains it in his outstanding article Understanding the Trinity: "...A musical chord is essentially composed of three different notes (to be a chord all three notes must be present), namely the first, third and fifth notes of a given musical scale. For example, the chord of C major is composed of the notes C (the root of the chord), E (the third from the root) and G (the fifth from the root). Each individual note is ‘a sound’, and all three notes played together are likewise ‘a sound’. Hence a chord is essentially three sounds in one sound, or one sound essentially composed of three different sounds (each of which has an individual identity as well as a corporate identity). By analogy, God is three divine persons in one divine personal being, or one divine personal being essentially composed of three divine persons. Moreover, when middle C (the root of the chord) is played it ‘fills’ the entire ‘heard space’. When the E above middle C is played at the same time, that second note simultaneously ‘fills’ the whole of the ‘heard space’; yet one can still hear both notes distinctly. When the G above middle C is added as well, a complete chord exists; one sound composed of three distinct sounds:  What could be more apt than to speak of the Trinity as a three-note-resonance of life, mutually indwelling, without mutual exclusion and yet without merger, each occupying the same ‘space,’ yet recognizably and irreducibly distinct, mutually enhancing and establishing each other? 
So the doctrine of the Trinity isn't self-contradictory, and there are some analogies that help us to conceptualize the Trinity." 
I agree with those who hold that the Trinity is unique and there is nothing that one can point to that is a strict analogy or parallel to it; however, I find the above analogy helpful in demonstrating that the Trinity is not self-contradictory or illogical.
What do you think of the analogy? What is your favorite analogy of the Trinity? Sound off in the comments below!