My Favorite Apologetics Apps

I have been checking out the available apologetics apps and I wanted to share the ones that I have found most helpful.  They are all available for free!

1. The Cold-Case Christianity App- This one features the work of cold-case homocide detective J. Warner Wallace.  It offers articles, podcasts, videos, free bible inserts and more!

2. The Reasonable Faith App- With this free app you get access to Dr. William Lane Craig’s weekly Q&A, articles, audio and video of debates and talks, including Dr. Craig’s popular Reasonable Faith Podcast and Defenders Podcast.

3. The Cross Examined App- Featuring a "Quick Answers" section that helps you respond to popular objections to Christianity, the Cross Examined blog, speaker schedule, and radio recordings- this app can help you grow and defend the faith.

4. The gotQuestions? App- This application has over 4,400 of our most frequently asked questions about the Bible organized by topic, with a built-in search function, the ability to bookmark articles for easier future access, automatic downloading of new/updated articles, and the option to ask a question if the answer to your question is not already available in the app.

5. Reasons to Believe App- Get equipped with powerful new reasons to believe and enjoy content-rich apologetic material delivered to you, wherever you are.

6. The Stand to Reason App- Get equipped anywhere, anytime with Stand to Reason’s free iPhone, iPod touch, and iPad app. Stand to Reason trains Christians to think more clearly about their faith and to make an even-handed, incisive, yet gracious defense for classical Christianity and classical Christian values.

7. STR Quick-Reference App- Stand to Reason's Quick-Reference App summarizes the information you need to know about tactics, abortion, and other relevant topics through text and video, equipping you to engage in thoughtful conversation about the most important issues of life from a classical Christian perspective.

What about you?  What is your favorite apologetics app?  Please share in the comments!

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

Could Acceptance of Abortion Be a Matter of Ignorance?

In the subject piece, Amy Hall of Stand to Reason reflects upon the abolition movement's revelation of the truth of the slave trade and the revelation of the truth about abortion through the videos about Planned Parenthood this past year. Upon this reflection, she wonders why the public sentiment towards abortion has not shifted against abortion as it did with the slave trade when ignorance of its practices decreased. She then watched the video below and is hoping that ignorance of what abortion is is the reason.




I think ignorance is a main factor contributing to abortion still being acceptable.  What are your thoughts?

Stand firm in Christ,
Chase

Sunday Praise: "In the Eye of the Storm" by Ryan Stevenson (ft. GabeReal)

Stand firm in Christ,
Chase

What is Metaphysics?

If you go into a local bookstore and look in the section titled "Metaphysics" you are likely to find books on psychics, crystals and mysticism.  Sadly, the term has been hijacked and in this post I want to clarify just what metaphysics is.

Technically speaking, metaphysics is a discipline within philosophy.  According to H. Wayne House and Joseph M. Holden in their book Charts of Apologetics and Christian Evidences, metaphysics "literally means 'after physics' in Greek.  This thought process was named by Andronicus of Rhodes to designate the unnamed books that appeared after Aristotle's Physics.  Through the use of the term 'beyond' or 'after,' the term metaphysics has come to be known as beyond the physical, a study of being or reality.  'What are the ultimate, objective constituent of reality?' 'What is the nature of space and time?' 'Must every event have a cause?'"1

Author Dave Sterrett explains metaphysics as follows:

“Metaphysics has been defined as the branch of philosophy that deals with the first principles of things…Metaphysics also applies to concepts such as being, knowing, substance, cause, identity, time, and space.”2

So don't confuse "pop" metaphysics with the real thing!

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

Footnotes:

1. H. Wayne House and Joseph M. Holden, Charts of Apologetics and Christian Evidences, Chart 14.

2. Dave Sterrett, Aborting Aristotle, p. 13-14.  Our review is here.

Dude, What's Your Standard?

The title of this blog post was “borrowed” from the Morality chapter of Frank Turek’s book- Stealing from God: Why atheists need God to make their case. I thought of it recently while seeing Twitter feeds from prominent atheists promoting a cause to stop the annual Yulin Dog Meat Festival in China.  The event, held annually in June, leads to the deaths of over 10,000 dogs.  When I read descriptions of the festival and see images, I wholeheartedly agree this appears to be a very inhumane event. 

I was reminded of this quote from Dr. Turek-

“Atheists are caught in a dilemma.  If God doesn’t exist, then objective moral rights don’t exist, including all those that atheists support.  If God does exist, then objective moral rights exist.  But those rights clearly don’t include cutting up babies in the womb, same-sex marriage, and other invented absolutes contrary to every major religion and the “self-evident” natural law.”1

I am sure there are those who may want to debate whether or not dogs should be used for food, similar to how cows are used for beef.  But as an atheist, what is the standard that tells you whether or not it’s wrong to torture dogs?

If you want to see Dr. Turk defend a challenge to the moral argument for the existence of God, click here for a brief 8 minute video. 

Have a great Memorial Day weekend.  If you happen to see someone who serves or has served in our Armed Forces, take a moment to thank them for their service!

God Bless,

The Other Chad

Footnotes: 

1: Stealing from God p. 107

The 10 Commandments of Logic

These are not original to me; however, I have seen them around the internet and find them most helpful.  May all of us strive to obey these in our interactions and discussions!

1. Thou shall not attack the person’s character, but the argument. (Ad hominem)

2. Thou shall not misrepresent or exaggerate a person’s argument in order to make them easier to attack. (Straw man fallacy)  

3. Thou shall not use small numbers to represent the whole. (Hasty generalization) 

4. Thou shall not argue thy position by assuming one of its premises is true. (Begging the question) 

5. Thou shall not claim that because something occurred before, it must be the cause. (Post Hoc/False cause) 

6. Thou shall not reduce the argument down to two possibilities. (False dichotomy) 

7. Thou shall not argue that because of our ignorance, claim must be true or false. (Ad ignorantum) 

8. Thou shall not lay the burden of proof onto him that is questioning the claim. (Burden of proof reversal) 

9. Thou shall not assume “this” follows “that” when it has no logical connection. (Non sequitur) 

10. Thou shall not claim that because a premise is popular, therefore it must be true. (Bandwagon fallacy)

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

The Argument from Efficient Causality

In their short book the Pocket Handbook of Christian Apologetics, Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli share the following argument:

We notice that some things cause other things to be (to begin to be, to continue to be, or both).  For example, a man playing the piano is causing the music that we hear.  If he stops, so does the music.

Now ask yourself: Are all things caused to exist by other things right now? Suppose they are.  That is, suppose there is no Uncaused Being, no God.  Then nothing could exist right now.  For remember, on the no-God hypothesis, all things need a present cause outside of themselves in order to exist.  So right now, all things, including all those things which are causing other things to be, need a cause.  They can give being only so long as they are given being.  Everything that exists, therefore, on this hypothesis, stands in need of being caused to exist.

But caused by what?  Beyond everything that is, there can only be nothing.  But that is absurd: all of reality dependent- but dependent on nothing!  The hypothesis that all being is caused, that there is no Uncaused Being, is absurd.  So there must be something uncaused, something on which all things that need an efficient cause of being are dependent.

Existence is like a gift given from cause to effect.  If there is no one who has the gift, the gift cannot be passed down the chain of receivers, however long or short the chain may be.  If everyone has to borrow a certain book, but no one actually has it, then no one will ever get it.  If there is no God who has existence by his own eternal nature, then the gift of existence cannot be passed down the chain of creatures and we can never get it.  But we do get it; we exist.  Therefore there must exist a God: an Uncaused Being who does not have to receive existence like us- and like every other link in the chain of receivers.

So what do you think of the argument?  If you are still scratching your head, you can watch J.P. Moreland unpack it here. 

Please feel free to share your comments below!

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Footnote:
1. Peter Kreeft and Ronald K. Tacelli, Pocket Handbook of Christian Apologetics, p. 20.

Bart Ehrman and Mike Licona Dialogue on the Historical Reliability of the New Testament

From February 19 through May 6, 2016, TheBestSchools.org hosted an in-depth dialogue on the historical reliability of the New Testament between biblical scholars Bart D. Ehrman and Michael R. Licona. 

The dialogue is now complete and comments are still open on each portion of the dialogue so feel free to join the discussion!

The dialogue is as follows:

Interview with Bart Ehrman (February 19, 2016)

Interview with Michael Licona (February 19, 2016)

Major Statement by Bart Ehrman (March 12, 2016)

Major Statement by Michael Licona (March 12, 2016)

Detailed Response by Bart Ehrman (April 12, 2016)

Detailed Response by Michael Licona (April 12, 2016)

Final Reply by Bart Ehrman (Friday, May 06, 2016)

Final Reply by Michael Licona (Friday, May 06, 2016)

To learn more about this dialogue and the participants, go here.

Enjoy!

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

Craig and Moreland on the Importance of Philosophy

It is not just scholars and ministers who will benefit form training in philosophy, but also laypeople who need to be intellectually engaged if our culture is to be effectively reformed. Our churches are unfortunately overlying populated with people whose minds as Christians, are going to waste...they may be spiritually regenerate, but their minds have not been converted; they still think like nonbelievers. Despite their Christian commitment, they remain largely empty selves. What is an empty self? An empty self is a person who is passive, sensate, busy and hurried, incapable of developing an interior life.  Such a person is inordinately individualistic, infantile and narcissistic...if wee as the church are to engender a current of reform throughout the culture, then we need laypeople who are intellectually engaged with their faith and take their Christian identity to be definitive for their self-conception.

Stand firm in Christ,
Chase

Footnote:
Craig, William Lane and Moreland, J.P. Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview. Pages 5 and 6.

Sunday Praise: "The Old Rugged Cross" Chris Rice

Stand firm in Christ,
Chase

Don't Extraordinary Claims Need Extraordinary Evidence?

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

Michael C. Sherrard on Religious Pluralism

"What is painstakingly ironic about religious pluralism…is that the moment you have evidence for religious pluralism you can no longer have religious pluralism. The evidence would point to its religious claim being right, which leaves many other religious claims to be wrong. It becomes exclusive. It makes a claim about God that should be believed and thereby states that all opposing beliefs are wrong. When religious pluralism has a good reason to be believed that causes one to reject other religious claims, namely the religious claim that there is only one way to heaven, it ceases to be pluralistic."

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

Note: Religious pluralism is the belief that all religions are true.

HT: The Poached Egg

What is Intelligent Design? by Dr. Stephen C. Meyer

In this talk, Dr. Stephen Meyer gives an introduction to Intelligent Design.

Meyer is the author of Signature of the Cell and Darwin's Doubt.

Enjoy!

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

Free Booklet: Digging for Evidence by Peter S. Williams

As I have stated before, Peter S. Williams is one of my favorite thinkers and writers which is why I am excited to share that Christian Evidence has published a free 90 page booklet by Williams that "gathers together the archaeological finds of the past 50 years which have unexpectedly shed fresh light on the New Testament."

Williams states:

‘I’m glad Christian Evidence are publishing this book because it’s one way of calling the bluff of influential but ignorant New Atheists who assert that there’s no evidence for the historical reliability of the Bible. Some so-called “sceptics” make rhetorical demands for evidence while turning a blind eye to relevant data from entire academic fields. Digging for Evidence will make some of the latest archaeological evidence relating to the New Testament freely available to all.’

The booklet, which includes links to articles, news reports and videos on the net, explores how modern archaeology illuminates and verifies the New Testament in three areas:

Culture – people’s beliefs and practices
Places – from urban centers to individual buildings
People – people’s names, titles and relationships.

You can download your free copy here.

To learn more about Peter S. Williams and his work, go here.

This booklet has been added to our Free Apologetics E-book Library located here.

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

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

Richard Dawkins: "Imagine, with John Lennon, a world with no religion. Imagine no suicide bombers, no 9/11, no 7/7, no Crusades, no witch-hunts, no Gunpowder Plot, no Indian partition, no Israeli/Palestinian wars, no Serb/Croat/Muslim massacres, no persecution of Jews as 'Christ-killers', no Northern Ireland 'troubles', no honor killings', no shiny-suited bouffant-haired televangelists fleecing gullible people of their money ('God wants you to give till it hurts').  Imagine no Taliban to blow up ancient statues, no public beheadings of blasphemers, no flogging of female skin for the crime of showing an inch of it."1

John Lennox: "You ask us to imagine with John Lennon a world without religion. Well I'd like you to imagine with John Lennox a world without atheism: with no Stalin, with no Mao, with no Pol Pot, today the heads of the three officially atheistic states. A world with no Gulag, no Cultural Revolution, no Killing Fields. I think that would be a world worth imagining too."2

To see the other posts in our "Counterpoints" series, go here.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Footnotes:
1. Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, p. 1.
2. The God Delusion Debate: John Lennox vs. Richard Dawkins.  The transcript is here.

Book Review: The Walls Are Talking: Former Abortion Clinic Workers Tell Their Stories

You do not want to read this book. Abby Johnson and Kristin Detrow of And Then There Were None reveal through the accounts of former abortion clinic workers a world full of suffering, oppression, moral numbness, bottom lines, and death. A world that remains unknown to most. For that reason, you must read this book. Johnson writes in the introduction:

Although it will be difficult to read, and at times tough to fathom, the clinic walls will speak through these women, and it will be a beautiful thing as the light of truth and forgiveness illuminates a dark place. Pg. 15

One account effectively demonstrates that dark place, and it is one that has particularly stuck with this reader. My summary of the account follows:

It is the account of a woman who was forcibly made to continue the abortion of her 28 week old child. On the first day of her procedure the luminaria rods were inserted and digoxin was injected into the amniotic fluid (the luminaria causes the cervix to dilate and the digoxin causes the baby’s heart to stop). She was instructed to return the next day. When she did, the baby’s heart beat was still strong and steady. New luminaria rods were inserted and again she was instructed to return the next day (digoxin can take up to 48 hours to cause the baby’s death). But the next day she did not return. The doctor of the clinic became irate. The woman’s cell phone was called repeatedly with no answer. He then told the nurse to call the hotel where she was staying (there are few late-term abortion clinics so typically women travel great distances to them). The hotel manager got her on the phone and she said that she needed to go the ER and that she wanted to save her baby. After realizing he was not getting anywhere, the doctor hung up, took the nurse and his assistant with him to the hotel and brought the woman to the clinic through the back door under sedation. They got her on the procedure table and when she began to struggle they administered more sedative. The doctor then injected more digoxin and in 30 minutes the baby was dead. Because she was unconscious, the staff had to push on the woman’s stomach to deliver the dead baby boy. When she came to she desperately begged to see her son; to hold him and to ask for his forgiveness. Her pleas fell on indifferent and annoyed ears and she was escorted out by the police.

Evil thrives in darkness (John 3:20) and through the accounts in this book Johnson and Detrow thoroughly clean out the closet of the abortion industry. From accounts such as the one above, to clinics being privy to prostitution, or misinforming women about the risks of medication abortion in order to achieve easier profits, the darkness is deep. But the light throughout each of these accounts is the light of redemption and healing that only comes through Jesus and is available to everyone who repents.

Abby indicates in the preface that the individuals who came forward with these stories want the lives of others to be changed for the better as a result. This book will motivate those who are pro-life to contend earnestly in making abortion unthinkable and unavailable and challenge those who are pro-choice to reconsider supporting an industry whose “heart beats”, as one former worker states, “exclusively for the almighty dollars made shedding innocent blood”. Pg. 70 Most importantly, the book will glorify Christ as the power of the gospel is on full display. I have no doubt that these accounts will change the lives of those who read them for the better.

Again I say, you must read this book!

Thank you to Abby Johnson, Kristin Detrow, and Ignatius Press for the review copy.

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

Sunday Praise: "Because He Lives" Shane and Shane

Stand firm in Christ,
Chase

C.S. Lewis on a Moral Standard

"The moment you say that one set of moral ideas can be better than another, you are, in fact, measuring them both by a standard, saying that one of them conforms to that standard more nearly than the other.  But the standard that measures two things is something different from either.  You are, in fact, comparing them both with some Real Morality, admitting that there is such a thing as a real Right, independent of what people think, and that some people's ideas get nearer to that real Right than others.  Or put it this way.  If your moral ideas can be truer, and those of the Nazis less true, there must be something-some Real Morality-for them to be true about."1

To learn more about the moral argument for the existence of God, go here.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Footnote:
1. C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, p. 25 as quoted by Frank Turek and Norman Geisler in I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist, p. 178.

The Scariest Reason Trump Won

If you are still scratching your head like me and wondering how in the world did Donald J. Trump beat out 16 other Republican candidates in this year's primary, check out this interesting article from Town Hall.

Disdain for political correctness and the Republican establishment, the white working class frustration, and media frenzy; all valid factors that attributed to Trump's apparent path to the nomination.  But there is one more big and scary reason to consider.

To read more, click here.

While I do believe there are some good points in this article, I would have to disagree with the author's closing remark stating that "I will vote for him if he wins the nomination -- because there is no choice."

We have a choice to vote for conservative values.  And as a Christian Conservative, it's important to remember it's not ultimately about who wins an election, but voting based on one's moral values and duties.  As there will come a time when it's all said and done when we will be held accountable for who and what we support as it relates to our worldview.

Respectfully,

The "Other Chad"

Video: What's Your Worldview?

Here is another great video from Impact 360.  What is your worldview?  Please feel free to share in the comments below!

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

Common Objection #28- "Tolerance Requires Us to Accept All Views Equally!"

In his most recent post, J. Warner Wallace explains why this oft-repeated claim is not only false, but is self-refuting:

"A...self-refuting statement lurks here in this common errant definition of tolerance. Folks who hold to this corrupted view say they accept all views as equally true. But if you make the claim that some ideas are patently false and have less value than others, they will quickly reject your statement. In other words, they will accept any view as equally valuable except your claim that some views are not equally valuable. See the inconsistency? People who embrace this definition of tolerance cannot consistently implement their own view of tolerance."

Check out our responses to "Common Objections" here.  To learn more about the purpose of this series, go here.

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

To learn more about tolerance and what the word really means, check out these resources:

1. The Three D's of Tolerance by J. Warner Wallace

2. The Intolerance of Tolerance by Greg Koukl

3. The Tolerance Bargain by Greg Koukl

How Can Mothers Get Engaged in Apologetics?

Happy belated Mother's Day!

Stand firm in Christ,
Chase

Sunday Praise: "Great is Thy Faithfulness" by Chris Rice

Stand firm in Christ,
Chase

Video: What's The Difference Between I.D. And Creationism?

In this video Jonathan McLatchie explains the difference between Intelligent Design and Creationism.  No, they are not the same thing!

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

Is the Trinity a Problem or a Solution?

Many claim that the doctrine of the Trinity is contradictory.  We have offered analogies here and here that demonstrate that claim is false.

However, I wonder how many people have considered that the Trinity may be a solution and not a problem?

In this featured post, J. Warner Wallace explains why he believes that is the case.  Wallace writes:

"The Trinity is definitely mysterious and difficult to grasp, but it is not a 'problem' if you really stop to think about it. In fact, the Trinity actually solves the allegedly irreconcilable 'problem'. It reconciles passages that describe one God with passages that describe the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as God. The truth of the Trinity is not a problem, it is a solution."

You can check out the entire post here.  

Further, you can find my favorite article on the Trinity by Peter S. Williams here.  Greg Koukl also writes on this topic here.

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

Quote: Francis Schaeffer on Apologetics

"Defense is proper and necessary because in every age historic Christianity will be under attack. Defense does not mean being on the defensive. One must not be embarrassed about the use of the word defense. The proponents of any position who are alive to their own generation must give a sufficient answer for it when questions are raised about it. Thus, the word defense is not used here in a negative sense, because in any conversation, in any communication which is really dialogue, answers must be given to objections raised. Such answers are necessary in the first place for myself as a Christian if I am going to maintain my intellectual integrity, and if I am to keep united my personal, devotional and intellectual life."

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

HT: The Poached Egg

Share Your Thoughts: A Reader on God and Presidential Candidates

I was interacting with a reader yesterday on Twitter who stated that he is very skeptical of the claim that God may prefer one presidential candidate over another.  He said that our allegiance is to God alone.  If I understood him correctly, he wasn't sure someone could rightly claim that God would prefer to have someone like Ted Cruz in office versus someone like Hillary Clinton.

What are you thoughts on this?  Do you believe God is indifferent to what candidate gets into office or do you think God clearly would prefer one type of candidate over another?

Please sound off in the comments below!

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

9 Things You Should Know About Jehovah's Witnesses

The subject post on The Gospel Coalition is a great introductory summation of key Jehovah's Witness doctrine and their organization structure.

Read the full post here.

Stand firm in Christ
Chase

Sunday Praise: "One True God" by Steven Curtis Chapman

Stand firm in Christ,
Chase