Objections to Christianity: Who Created God?

I’m going to borrow an illustration I heard John Bevere use once (which he probably borrowed from someone else — there is, after all, nothing new under the sun, is there?). ¬†I’ll be paraphrasing, of course ūüôā

Have you ever watched a particularly poignant, well-crafted movie? ¬†One that methodically and artfully sets you up with¬†an hour and fifteen minutes of pathos for that one heart-wrenching moment at the plot’s climactic moment? ¬†When that moment comes, your eyes start welling up, your breathing becomes a little shallower, you move to the edge of your seat — you feel the strong empathetic connection to the characters in the movie. ¬†You almost can’t help it. ¬†Unless you’re a sociopath — c’mon, would it kill you to show a little human emotion now and then… dad…?

Just kidding, my dad’s great. ¬†Anyway, imagine your roommate¬†walking in right when the big climactic moment occurs — he’s never seen the movie before, and so he’s missed out on all the exposition and buildup. ¬†He looks at the characters on the screen, looks over to you bawling your eyes out on the couch (mostly obscured¬†by your tissue-box fort), and scoffs, “What’s with you? ¬†It’s just a stupid movie.”

First of all, your roommate’s kind¬†of a jerk¬†and you should probably consider moving. ¬†(Then again, he does pay¬†the rent on time, and his mom is friends with your boss… I guess he’s not all that bad.) ¬†But, really, the illustrative detail is the difference in how the two of you view the movie in that moment: ¬†You have been taken on this hour-long journey preparing you for this scene; you connect with the characters, their stories touch you, you empathize with their plight and take on some of their pain upon yourself; your roommate, on the other hand, couldn’t give two figs¬†about the characters, doesn’t connect with the moment,¬†isn’t compelled in the least by the scene unfolding on the screen. ¬†Why? ¬†Because he’s missing the context of the scene. (more…)


What Has Convinced Me?

One of my favorite people with whom to discuss, hero4thought, recently asked me a question:

What are two or three top factors in your mind that convince you that a God in fact exists?

It’s such a great question that I wanted to expand my answer into a separate post. ¬†As always, comments and thoughts are welcome ūüôā As I said in my original response, I’ll arrange these talking points in a somewhat logical order, rather than anything reflecting any chronology of my particular faith journey. (more…)

What IS naturalism, really?

A light bulb just went off for me.

There has been much talk lately (on this blog and elsewhere) about the respective merits of naturalism and theism as competing worldview philosophies — emphasis on competing, which implies that they are distinct enough as philosophies so as to be essentially mutually exclusive. ¬†Now, I’ve been a part of this ongoing conversation for a little bit, and every now and then someone with whom I am discussing the issue will make a statement that stuck like a barb into my conscious mind — such as: (more…)

John Lennox on Intelligent Design

John Lennox is absolutely my favorite Christian apologist of our time.  Ravi Zacharias is up there too.

What I love about both these men is¬†their style of communicating. ¬†Yes, they make brilliant points and are strong thinkers — but they are able to avoid the communicative pitfalls that often accompany members of the intelligentsia. ¬†Never in my experience of watching either of these gentlemen has there ever been an¬†ounce of arrogance, self-promotion,¬†or¬†malice in anything they say — but on the contrary, they exude respect, compassion, honesty, and integrity. ¬†I want to be like these men, for I see them as strong imitators of Christ.

And I came across a clip from a talk that seems to feature both Lennox and Zacharias!  I need to find out what event this was, and if a full video of it is available.  In this clip, Lennox is responding to the following question from an audience member:

If humans and life were intelligently designed, then why do our bodies not show intelligent design so much as they reveal the evidence of evolutionary ancestry?

I think his answer is elegant, incisive, and brilliant. ¬†But, then again, I shouldn’t be surprised, we’re talking about John Lennox — this is par for the course.

Some reheated Aristotle (maybe)

I’m going to try my hand at one of the classical arguments for the existence of God: the cosmological argument, or the first-cause argument. ¬†A lot of you have heard it before, I’m sure — it’s one of William Lane Craig‘s favorites, in any case; and as I don’t have an original thought in my head, I’m¬†pretty sure that anything I say here has been said by someone else before. ¬†That being said, here we go!


What’s Your Favorite Discipline?

Hello Readers!  Hope everyone had a good Christmas.

When discussing the existence of God, the¬†realms of evidence to be considered quite literally span the gamut of possible disciplines; there’s applicable information to be considered everywhere, from cosmology to history to philosophy to mathematics.

Most every great thinker I’ve heard on the subject, whether they be for or against the existence of the Almighty, usually specialize in one discipline: Dawkins in biology, Lennox in mathematics, Ehrman and Habermas in history, etc. ¬†So it got me curious¬†which specialties were more common among the readers of this blog. ¬†(I’m a philosophy guy myself.)

Feel free to weigh in on the poll below — and, as always, your comments are most welcome!