Article: "Why Is God So Hidden?" by J. Warner Wallace

In this featured article, J.Warner Wallace addresses the question, "Why is God so hidden?"

You can find the article here.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Video: "Amazing Grace (My Chains are Gone)" by Chris Tomlin

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Note: The movie scenes in the video are from the movie Amazing Grace that tells the story of William Wilberforce and his battle to end the slave trade in the British Empire.  The movie is highly recommended.

Further, William Wilberforce's book Real Christianity is also highly recommended!

Video: How to Defend the Faith without Sounding Defensive by Greg Koukl

In this lecture, author, speaker and apologist Greg Koukl explains some of the tactics one can use when discussing their Christian convictions.  

Koukl's book Tactics is highly recommended!

For more of Koukl's work, check out Stand to Reason.

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

Undesigned Coincidences: Part 2 by Tim McGrew

In this featured blog post, Dr. Tim McGrew continues to explain the "Undesigned Coincidences" found in scripture.

You can read the entire post here.

Part I is here.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Video: "God: Fact or Fiction?" by John Lennox

In this lecture, John Lennox, Professor of Mathematics at Oxford University, discusses the question, "Is God fact or fiction?"

You can checkout Dr. Lennox's books here.

Finally, here is his first debate with Richard Dawkins.  The second can be found here.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Essay: "On the Reading of Old Books" by C.S. Lewis

In C.S. Lewis's essay "On the Reading of Old Books" he recommends readers work through one old book for every modern book they read.

Further, he writes:

"Every age has its own outlook.  It is specially good at seeing certain truths and specially liable to make certain mistakes.  We all, therefore, need the books that will correct the characteristic mistakes of our own period...The only palliative is to keep the clean sea breeze of the centuries blowing through our minds, and this can only be done by reading old books.  Not, of course, that there is any magic about the past.  People were no cleverer then than they are now; they made as many mistakes as we.  But not the same mistakes."

You can read Lewis's entire essay here.

Audio can be found here and here.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Thomas Nagel on Atheism

"I want atheism to be true and am made uneasy by the fact that some of the most intelligent and well-informed people I know are religious believers. It isn’t just that I don’t believe in God and, naturally, hope that I’m right in my belief. It’s that I hope there is no God! I don’t want there to be a God; I don’t want the universe to be like that.” [1]

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Footnote:
1. The Last Word by Thomas Nagel, Oxford University Press: 1997.

J. Warner Wallace Blogs on Hell

Here are some helpful posts by J. Warner Wallace on the topic of hell:

Why Doesn't God Reform People Rather Than Punish Them in Hell? 

Why Would God Punish Finite, Temporal Crimes in Eternal Hell?


Why is the Penalty of Hell the Same, Even Though People are so Different?

Why Would God Send Good People to Hell?

Wouldn't a Loving God Make Sure Everyone Gets to Heaven?

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Sunday Praise: "Stronger" and "This is Our God" by Hillsong

Stand firm in Christ,
Chase

The Argument from Mind-Brain Dependence

I came across the subject argument this week. The argument is prefaced with the statement that by definition, personhood depends on consciousness at any extent, the capacity of cognition, and the capacity to interact with other persons. All of these things are then categorized as "mind" and, therefore, a mind of some sort is necessary for personhood. I agree that a mind is necessary for personhood.

It is also prefaced with the statement that a material, computational substrate (a brain) is a necessary condition for the existence of a mind. Five scientific facts are provided to bolster this statement. The only fact I see as debatable is number 1, however, for the sake of argument, let us grant all of these as facts. Here they are:

F1. The evolution of species demonstrates that development of the brain obtains a corresponding mental development. 
F2. The same principle is demonstrated by brain growth in individual organisms.
F3. Brain damage destroys mental capacities.
F4. Experiments and measurements on the brain (EEG, stimulation of various areas) indicate a correspondence between brain activity and mental activity.
F5. The effects of drugs show correspondence between brain activity and mental activity.

Let us grant the conclusion; a brain is necessary for the existence of a mind. Since, we agreed above that a mind is necessary for personhood, it follows then that the existence of personhood requires a brain as well based on the conclusion in the previous sentence.

Now, here is the argument:

1. None of the organic minds we have observed can exist without a brain. (from F1 to F5)
By induction, we obtain:
2. Probably, no organic mind can exist without a brain.
To be fair, we do not expect a hypothetical god to have an organic mind. So we extend 2 to:
2b. Probably, no mind can exist without a material, computational substrate.
But:
3. A god cannot be material.
4. A god, if it exists, has a mind.
Therefore:
5. Probably, gods cannot exist. (from 2b, 3 and 4)

I think this argument falls right out of the starting gate with premise 1. Here is why. First, we agree that a mind is necessary for personhood, however I see no reason to think that personhood is "organic". Consciousness, cognition, and interaction with other persons are not organic objects. Further, if personhood and the mind are nothing but organic brain activity, the first premise should read "None of the brains brains have observed can exist without a brain" for the prefaced language and "facts" make personhood, the mind, and the brain all synonymous. I see no reason to think that this is the case. We clearly see this association in the "generosity" to extend premise 2. 

Second, I do not understand how premise 1 is deduced from F1 through F5. I think at most it can only be deduced from these facts that brain activity and mental activity are correspondent.  

Those are my thoughts (And only I could have revealed them. No one could have determined them by examining my brain activity) on where I think this argument fails. Feel free to leave your thoughts on the merits or failings of the argument.

Stand firm in Christ,
Chase

All Brain, No Mind

In this article, Greg Koukl examines the question, "Are we just a brain?" and responds to a Time article that supports that we are. He states:

Of course I think you know better than to accept this, but you may be intimidated by scientists in white coats telling you that you aren't really feeling love, you're just having a chemical reaction. You're not really seeing something beautiful, this is just light of various wave lengths. You're not really hearing something wonderful, it is just vibrating molecules.

But there is a deeper problem. If consciousness is just a property created by the brain, then when you make a decision who or what does the deciding? If consciousness is a mere effect of chemical reactions in the brain, then your conscious act of deciding is not a free will act of your own, it is a result of some physical process that came before it. Your choices are controlled by physical events outside of your will. To put it more bluntly, you have no will at all. Not really. Why not? According to this view, physical states produce particular mental states, which produce particular physical states all following one after another in a determined pattern just like railroad cars following an engine. guess what? You have not only lost the rose and Beethoven and your teenage puppy love, you've lost you, too. And by the way, that is exactly what this article says.

Again, you can read the article in its entirety here.

Stand firm in Christ,
Chase

Book Review: Near-Death Experiences as Evidence for the Existence of God and Heaven by J. Steve Miller

Introduction

Last year a relative encouraged me to read a book entitled Heaven is for Real by Todd Burpo and Lynn Vincent.  The book tells the account of 4 year old Colton’s experience after a medical crisis.  Upon his resuscitation, little Colton was able to tell his family amazing things that they claimed he could not have known.  For example, Colton claimed to have met a sister that was miscarried that he didn’t know about.  After reading the book, I remember thinking that Colton’s alleged experience, while fascinating, wasn’t concrete enough for me to say, “Okay, I believe it.”  I simply needed more evidence and background knowledge about Colton and his family.  I had heard scholars such as Gary Habermas [1] and J.P. Moreland discuss near-death experiences and while I always found these accounts intriguing, I never imagined I would reach a concrete conclusion on how reliable they were.  For me, near-death experiences [NDEs] were possible evidence for the existence of God and the afterlife, but how could one really know for sure?  Therefore, I never imagined them finding a home in my personal apologetic.

Well, as often happens when one reads a solid work on a given topic, my pre-suppositions have been challenged by author J. Steve Miller in his book Near-Death Experiencesas Evidence for the Existence of God and Heaven. 

When Miller was 16 he became obsessed with the importance of seeking God.  He reasoned that life was but a brief moment compared to eternity so his first priority should be to determine if God existed and, if He did, to figure out what He wanted out of his life. [xi] However, the author was faced with a problem- he was a skeptic.  He explains:

“Not in the narrow sense of someone who puts down religion, but in the general sense of one who always questions everything.  My dictionary defines skeptic as ‘one who by nature doubts or questions what he hears, reads, etc.’ That’s me.  My picture should be in the dictionary beside that definition.” [ix]

I suspect a result of his skepticism is Miller’s tendency to exhaustively document and research each claim that he makes and in many cases offer resources for the reader to explore a given topic more in-depth.

The author is also sure to note that he not only sought God academically, but also through “prayer and trying to maintain a teachable, open heart.” [xii]

This is a great lesson for those seeking God.

Strengths of the Book

This book has many strengths, three of which I’ll highlight here.  The first strength of this piece, as hinted at above, is Miller’s ability to write about something as technical as NDEs in laymen’s terms.  Throughout the book I don’t recall once being bogged down by medical jargon or abstract argument.  An as the author explains, this was by design:

“I try to write as simply as possible.  Sloppy argumentation often dresses up in technical vocabulary and literacy profundity.  Thus, while some NDE literature speaks of myocardial infarctions, I’ll simply call them heart attacks.” [xiii]

This reviewer was impressed with the results.  Miller’s efforts certainly paid off as this book, while simple to read, doesn’t sacrifice any precision in its explanations.

Second, Miller does an outstanding job documenting his claims, as if daring the reader to check him out!  The author further calls upon the best of the best in the relevant fields.  As he explains:

“…I looked for serious books on the subject-books by objective authors (not pastors or new age gurus who might be out to evangelize) who had the academic credentials to do solid research on multiple cases.” [p. 19]

As a result, the reader is treated to overviews of works such as Dr. Raymond Moody’s seminal 1975 study Life After Life and Dr. Pim van Lommel’s Consciousness Beyond Life: The Science of the Near-Death Experience.  Both Moody and van Lommel’s backgrounds are fascinating.  Neither grew up believing in God or life after death, but through their exhaustive research on NDEs changed their minds! 

The author briefly explains van Lommel’s conclusion:

“Near-death experiences don’t fit into a naturalistic worldview.  There is life after death.  His patients experienced, not vivid dreams, but very real journeys to the other side, the most significant part of which was an encounter with a personal being of light.” [p. 22]

Finally, Miller provides the reader with a wealth of information and resources should they want to explore NDEs more in-depth.  If one desires to begin researching NDEs, I can’t imagine a better work to start with than this one.

Arguments Dealt with in the Book

In the Preface, Miller spends his time explaining why the book was written, his personal background and how his background informs his study of NDEs.

In Chapter 1, Miller recounts how after reading the account of Colton Burpo, he began asking questions about NDEs to “satisfy” his skeptical mind. [p. 18]

In Chapter 2, the author surveys many of the works he studied (some I’ve already mentioned above) on NDEs and reports that NDEs are not only written about in books, but in scholarly, peer-reviewed literature. 

He notes:

“In the 30 year period after Moody published Life after Life, 55 researchers or teams published at least 65 studies of over 3500 NDEs.” [p. 23]

He further explains the impact NDEs had on many of the researchers:

“It’s important to the note that most of these researchers don’t come across as heralding their pet theological or philosophical positions.  Most that I read began their research doubting that NDEs involved anything spiritual but become convinced by the weight of the evidence.” [p.23]

Miller begins Chapter 3 by explaining that NDEs, contrary to what this reviewer initially thought, are not rare:

“Studies found four percent of the populations of Germany and the USA reporting that they had experienced one.  That’s over one out of 25 people, or over nine million Americans.”  [p. 25]

Upon reading such data, the thought occurred to me, “Then why don’t we hear about them more often?” 

Miller was quick to answer:

“People tend to keep these experiences to themselves, fearing that people will think they’re crazy.” [p. 25]

The chapter continues with the author sharing numerous statements from the many NDE reports he personally read.  I was surprised to see the commonalities in these reports.  Details such as the presence of a being of light, an overwhelming feeling of peace and the awareness of the absence of time were just some of the things those who claimed to have experienced an NDE reported.  Further, follow up studies have shown that those who've experienced NDEs are most often times changed permanently by the experience.

In Chapter 4, Miller examines 13 different naturalistic explanations for NDEs.  The explanations are sub-categorized as follows:

·    
 Explanations from a Materialist Worldview

·      Theoretical Objections

·      Methodological Objections

·      Psychological Explanations

·      Physiological Objections

Most interesting to this reviewer was the author’s response to Objection #1: “The mind doesn’t exist separate from the brain.  Thus, the mind can’t survive the death of the brain.  NDEs must therefore be produced solely by the brain.”

In response to this, Miller first points out that the materialist will often offer as proof to sustain this objection that as we age, our minds tend to work less efficiently. 

However, as Miller points out, researchers such as “van Lommel…and many others surmise that the brain functions as a receiver for the mind.  The mind connects with the brain while we are in our body, but isn’t dependent upon the brain for its existence.  Damage to the brain impacts our ability to access our minds, much as damage to a radio impacts our ability to access radio signals.” [p. 33]

Miller ends the chapter concluding that “the present state of research finds naturalistic explanations inadequate.” [p. 48] However, as we’ll see in the next chapter, he does not then simply conclude, “Therefore, God…”

The thrust of Chapter 5 is to address the question, “Do NDEs provide compelling evidence that God and heaven exist?”  Miller argues that they do by “weighing the evidence to decide which hypothesis best fits the data…” [p. 49]

According to the author, we have only two possible [broad] explanations:

Explanation #1- The spiritual explanation

Explanation #2- The naturalistic explanation

Miller then spends the rest of the chapter examining 12 known facts [“exhibits”] about NDEs and argues persuasively that the spiritual explanation is the more robust one.

One of the key claims dealt with in this chapter is, “An NDE is no more than a vivid dream caused by people’s expectations of the hereafter.” [p. 59]

Miller reports:

“Several studies have found that the beliefs prior to the NDE didn’t impact whether people had an NDE or not- neither prior knowledge of NDEs, their religious beliefs, nor their standard of education.  Many who had NDEs didn’t have a prior belief in life after death at all.” [p. 59]

Finally, in Chapter 6, the author assesses what exactly we can learn from NDEs about other worldviews and about God. 

According to Miller, and this reviewer agrees, if NDEs are a reality, they are incompatible with naturalism.  Further, I would also argue, along with the author, that philosophical materialists, determinists, deists and pantheists are going to find their worldview inadequate to explain the data observed from NDEs.

This chapter ends with the author explaining what the evidence from NDEs tell us about God. 

Conclusion

Before reading Near-Death Experiences as Evidence for the Existence of God and Heaven, I would not have imagined using the reality of NDEs in my personal apologetic.  However, Stephen Miller has removed many of the false assumptions this reviewer had before reading his book.  The evidence for NDEs is persuasive and surely should cause the naturalist pause.

Miller’s self-confessed skepticism I believe proved to be an asset throughout this work.  His writing is well-documented, persuasive and well-argued.  Further, in many parts of the book he seemed to anticipate a possible objection to his arguments and dealt with the objection thoroughly and convincingly. 

If you desire to learn more about the reality of NDEs and what they tell us about God and Heaven, in a way that is easy to understand, this is surely the book for you.  Miller takes what is many times a very technical discussion and puts it on the bottom shelf where all can enjoy.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Note: As stated in the review, Miller thoroughly documents his claims and provides numerous opportunities for the reader to study NDEs more in-depth.

Evidence of this can be found in the 9 Appendixes included in the book.  They are as follows:

Appendix 1- Do NDEs Differ Across Cultures?
Appendix 2- Two Recent Articles Proclaim that Science Has Explained NDEs’ Paranormal Features
Appendix 3- Interviewing Circles of Trust- My Original Research and Tips
Appendix 4- But is the Evidence Scientific?
Appendix 5- Blackmore’s Dying Brain Hypothesis
Appendix 6- Nelson’s Spiritual Doorway in the Brain
Appendix 7- Reflections on NDEs and Christian Teachings
Appendix 8- NDEs with Corroboration
Appendix 9- Guide to Further Research

Footnote:

1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hx_TvFCIRX4

Article: Preparing Kids to Encounter Atheism Online by Natasha Crain

In this guest post over on J. Warner Wallace's blog, Christian Mother Natasha Crain deals with six key things kids need to know before facing the online battle of worldviews:

• Personal attacks need never be taken seriously
• You can't assume something is fact just because someone states it as such.
• False dichotomies are the bread and butter of overly simplified faith  discussions.
• A person can quote the Bible without knowing anything about the Bible.
• What passes for "common sense" has no bearing on truth.
• As Christians, we must remain motivated by love in our discussions.

You can checkout the entire article here!

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

Counterpoints: Pope Francis and Jesus Christ

Pope Francis on May 22, 2013 conducting Mass: The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! "Father, the atheists?"  Even the atheists. Everyone! And this Blood makes us children of God of the first class! We are created children in the likeness of God and the Blood of Christ has redeemed us all! And we all have a duty to do good. And this commandment for everyone to do good, I think, is a beautiful path towards peace. If we, each doing our own part, if we do good to others, if we meet there, doing good, and we go slowly, gently, little by little, we will make that culture of encounter: we need that so much. We must meet one another doing good. "But I don’t believe, Father, I am an atheist!'  But do good: we will meet one another there. [1]

Jesus Christ: Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for unless you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins. [2]

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Footnotes:

1. Originally quoted in Pope Francis Claims God Will Save Atheists by Kyle Butt
2. John 8:23; NASB, Emphasis mine.

Article: Politically Incorrect Salvation by William Lane Craig

In this featured article, Dr. William Lane Craig deals with some of the possible challenges the follower of Jesus Christ could face when they claim, as Jesus did, that Christ is the exclusive way to heaven [John 14:6].

In the article, Dr. Craig addresses:

• The Problem of Religious Diversity
• Religious Diversity and Objective Truth
• The Offense of Christian Particularism 
• The Problem with Christian Particularism
• A Solution to the Problem of Christian Particularism

You can read the entire article here.

I especially like Dr. Craig's treatment of the question, "What about those who have never heard the gospel?"

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Sunday Praise: "Manifesto" by The City Harmonic

Stand firm in Christ,
Chase

The Real Issue

Anyone seeking God in truth will find Him and be accepted by Him. The heathen of any land – even ours – will seek his Creator only if God has already moved in his heart to do so. If God is moving in that person’s heart, nothing will keep him from the content of the Gospel necessary to complete his work of faith.

However, this isn't the real issue for you and me. When each of us faces God, there will be no discussion about the heathen who never heard. Instead, the question will be: What about those who have heard? What about you and I? Did we bend the knee and ask Jesus to forgive us?

God does not condemn us for rejecting a Jesus of whom we've never heard. We are held accountable for our own moral crimes against God, and for rejecting the Father, whose voice is heard everywhere.1

Stand firm in Christ,
Chase

Footnotes:

1. Koukl, Greg. Worshipping the Unknown God:  The Heathen and Salvation. Clear Thinking. Vol. 1 No. 2. Page 14.

How We Got the Bible: The Sinaitic Manuscript

Chapter 4 of the book discusses the discovery of the Codex Sinaiticus in detail and its importance as a witness to the text of the New Testament. Here are some main points to take from this chapter:

• 43 leaves of the Manuscript were discovered by Constantin von Tischendorf in May of 1844 at the Monastery of St. Catherine at Mount Sinai (pictured above)
• The principal portion of the Manuscript was discovered by Tischendorf at the same location in February of 1859
• More than a dozen additional leaves were discovered on 26 May 1975 after the clean up of a fire at the Monastery resulted in finding them buried underneath the rubble a ceiling collapse had caused more than 200 years earlier
• The Manuscript is the oldest complete manuscript of the New Testament that exists today. It dates from the fourth century and extensive studies of it have verified the antiquity and quality of its text.

Currently, the initial 43 leaves are located at the Leipzig University Library. The principal portion of the Manuscript is located at the British Library. Parts of six leaves are at the National Library of Russia and further portions remain at the Monastery.

If you are interested in learning more about the Codex Sinaiticus you can go here.

Stand firm in Christ,
Chase

Video: The One Minute Apologist Interviews J. Warner Wallace

The J. Warner Wallace Interview

What Investigative Principle Does Every Christian Need?

What Can a Christian Learn From Cold-Case Principles?

Why Does Every Christian Need Abductive Reasoning?

How Can We Reasonably Examine the Evidence for Christianity?

Did the Disciples Lie about the Resurrection?

Can We Trust the Gospels if They Were Written by Christ's Followers?

For more from the One Minute Apologist, see here.

For more from J. Warner Wallace's work, go here.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Video: Challenge Response- The Best Possible World Wouldn't Have Non-God Objects by Brett Kunkle

The argument from the "Problem of Non-God Objects" is as follows:

Below, Brett Kunkle of Stand to Reason critiques the argument:

Further, you can checkout the comments section here for a great discussion of the argument!

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

Article: Sexual Immorality and Five Other Reasons People Reject Christ by Don Johnson

In this featured article, Don Johnson of Evangelistic Ministries writes about six reasons people reject Christ:

• Christians Behaving Badly
• Heartbreak
• Fatherlessness
• Social Pressures
• The Cost of Discipleship
• Immorality

You can checkout the entire article here.

Many thanks to J. Warner Wallace for drawing attention to it on twitter!

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Article: Undesigned Coincidences: Part I by Tim McGrew

Last week, we featured this interview with Dr. Tim McGrew in which he discusses some of the "undesigned coincidences" that can be found within the pages of scripture.

In today's featured article (Pt. 1), Dr. McGrew explains:

• What are "undesigned coincidences?"
• Who is responsible for developing the arguments from undesigned coincidences?
• What are some of the influential works on the topic?

You can checkout the entire article here and we will continued to follow this series.

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

Sunday Praise: "When Death Dies" by Gungor

Stand firm in Christ,
Chase

James Beilby on Apologetic Success

"Apologetic success, however, is neither strictly a matter of the quality of one's arguments nor the apparent response of your interlocutor...apologetic success is best understood as faithfulness to Jesus Christ. In our apologetic endeavors, we are called to be faithful to Christ in at least three senses. First, what we say should accurately represent who Jesus is, what he taught and, specifically, the good news he brought to the world. Second, the way we do our apologetics should augment our arguments, not detract from them. We must defend Christ in a way that fits with Christ's message. Finally, we must be faithful to God's purposes in specific situations. In some cases, apologetics appropriately and naturally leads to an offer for a person to commit her life to Christ, but in the vast majority of cases, our apologetic endeavors are a small step in a person's long and winding journey that one hopes will culminate in relationship with Jesus Christ."1

Stand firm in Christ,
Chase

Footnote:

1. Beilby, James K. Thinking About Christian Apologetics. Pages 22-23.

Alan Shlemon on Tolerance

"Tolerance...has never meant endorsement or acceptance, but just the opposite. The dictionary defines it this way:  'To recognize and respect others' beliefs and practices without sharing them, to bear or put up with someone or something not necessarily liked.' Notice, you must disagree with someone before  true tolerance is possible...Further, tolerance can be applied to behavior, ideas, and people. No culture tolerates all behaviors. Murder, theft, and child abuse (to name a few) are a threat to the common good, so we make laws restricting them. We don't tolerate all ideas, either. Though people are free to express their views, not every view has equal merit. We reject some ideas (geocentrism, bigotry, slavery, etc.) as false or immoral. When it comes to people, though, we show tolerance-that is, we treat them with equal dignity. Even when we vehemently disagree with them, we still respect them as individuals. A problem occurs, though, when these three categories of tolerance (behavior, ideas, and people) are conflated. When a Christian rejects another person's behavior or ideas, he is immediately accused of being intolerant of the person. This is confused. Opposition to the idea of Islam is not the same as intolerance to Muslm people. Opposition to homosexual behavior is not the same as intolerance to homosexual people. It's possible to oppose their ideas and behavior while remaining tolerant of them."1

Stand firm in Christ,
Chasen

Footnotes:

1. Shlemon, Alan. The Ambassador's Guide to Understanding Homosexuality. pages 4-6.

Video: How to Study the Bible with Michael Patton

In this brief video, Michael Patton of Credo House Ministries discusses how to study the Bible. Patton also mentions a book entitled Living by the Book that readers can checkout here.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Book Preview: A Reasonable Response by William Lane Craig

Dr. William Lane Craig has released a new book entitled A Reasonable Response.  

The description is as follows:

Followers of Jesus need not fear hard questions or objections against Christian belief. In A Reasonable Response, renowned Christian philosopher and apologist William Lane Craig offers dozens of examples of how some of the most common challenges to Christian thought can be addressed, including:

• Why does God allow evil?
• How can I be sure God exists?
• Why should I believe that the Bible is trustworthy?
• How does modern science relate to the Christian worldview?
• What evidence do we have that Jesus rose from the dead?

Utilizing real questions submitted to his popular website ReasonableFaith.org, Dr. Craig models well-reasoned, skillful, and biblically informed interaction with his inquirers. A Reasonable Response goes beyond merely talking about apologetics to showing it in action. With cowriter Joseph E. Gorra, this book also offers advice about envisioning and practicing the ministry of answering people's questions through the local church, workplace, and in online environments.

Whether you're struggling to respond to tough objections or looking for answers to your own intellectual questions, A Reasonable Response will equip you with sound reasoning and biblical truth.

Brett Kunkle of Stand to Reason writes of the book:

"This is a Q&A book that goes well beyond mere questions and answers. It will linger with

you, inviting you into the practice of thinking itself. If you study this book carefully, you will

certainly gain a rich storehouse of Christian answers. But more importantly, it will equip

you to think for yourself so that eventually you're able to arrive at answers on your own.

And when you can do that, you will be well-positioned to help others discover satisfying

answers to their deepest questions."

You can get it here.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Audio: Undesigned Coincidences in the Gospels by Tim McGrew

In this audio, Dr. Tim McGrew is interviewed on the topic of Undesigned Coincidences in the Gospels. Readers may also want to checkout J.J. Blunt's classic book on the topic here.

You can checkout more great resources from Evidence4Faith here.

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

HT: Apologetics315

Video: The Moral Argument for God's Existence by Doug Powell

In this video, Doug Powell argues that God provides the only coherent grounding for morality.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Sunday Praise: "Though You Slay Me" by Shane & Shane

The LORD gives, and the LORD takes away. Praise the name of the LORD - Job 1:21

Nebuchadnezzar asked them, "Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, is it true that you don't serve my gods or worship the gold statue I have set up?...But if you don't worship it, you will immediately be thrown into a furnace of blazing fire-and who is the god who can rescue you from my power?" Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego replied to the king, "Nebuchadnezzar, we don't need to give you an answer to this question. If the God we serve exists, then He can rescue us from the power of you, the king. But even if He does not rescue us, we want you as king to know that we will not serve your gods or worship the gold statue you set up." - Daniel 3:14, 15b, 16-17

My eager expectation and hope is that I will not be ashamed about anything, but that now as always, with all boldness, Christ will be highly honored in my body, whether by life or by death. - Philippians 1:20

Stand firm in Christ,
Chase