Category Archives: Commentary

Commentary

Interview with one of my favorite Christian scholars, Paul Copan

5 Comments

I found the interview here, thanks to Brian Auten’s weekly Apologetics 315 round-up, which is a must-read every week.

Excerpt:

Dayton: Outside of my apologetic endeavors, I work with middle school and high school students. As a rule, I keep copies of your book “True For You But Not For Me” on hand to give away to either students interested in learning more about apologetics or to unbelievers looking to explore Christianity. What other books have written that you could recommend be used in this manner?

Paul Copan: I appreciate your keeping copies of “True for You” handy!  I’ve written several books at a more popular level that either deal with a wide range of common criticisms or slogans leveled against Christianity, and I try to make more accessible topics like Christian philosophy of religion or dealing with Old Testament ethical problems.  So here are the other books to check out:

“That’s Just Your Interpretation” (Baker)
“How Do You Know You’re Not Wrong?” (Baker)
“When God Goes to Starbucks: An Introduction to Everyday Apologetics” (Baker)
“Loving Wisdom: Christian Philosophy of Religion” (Chalice Press)
“Is God a Moral Monster? Understanding the Old Testament God” (Baker, January 2011)

Dayton: Speaking of books you have written, is there anything new in the works? Do you have any forthcoming books you could tell us about?

Paul Copan: For a fuller picture of what I’m working on, people can check out my website: www.paulcopan.com.  I’m on Twitter (I tweet weekly); so people can keep up with my writings and speaking engagements that way.  I’m very excited about my book, Is God a Moral Monster? (forthcoming with Baker in January 2011).  The noted Old Testament scholar Gordon Wenham (University of Gloucestershire) has given this endorsement:  “Lucid, lively, and very well informed, this book is the best defence of Old Testament ethics that I have read.  A must-read for all preachers and Bible study leaders.”  Christopher J.H. Wright, a noted Old Testament scholar (specializing in Old Testament ethics) and author of Old Testament Ethics for the People of God and The God I Don’t Understand, has this blurb: “This is the book I wish I had written myself. It is simply the best book I have read that tackles the many difficulties that the Old Testament presents to thinking and sensitive Christians and that give such ammunition to the opponents of all religious faith…. I strongly recommend this book. We have wanted and needed it for a long time.”

I am coediting another book with William Lane Craig: Come Let Us Reason.  This is the third apologetics book we’ve edited for B&H Academic (the other two are Passionate Conviction and Contending with Christianity’s Critics); it is filled with cutting-edge essays on important topics such as issues surrounding the Qur’an’s authority, Jesus’ resurrection as a pagan myth, postmodernism, problems with naturalism, and so on.

I’m coauthoring a book on the moral argument with Mark Linville (Continuum), and another book on biblical ethics with Robertson McQuilkin called Living Wisdom (InterVarsity Press).  I’m also contributing several chapters to various books: on the Protestant view on human dignity (Routledge); on why ethics needs God (Oxford University Press); on theism’s contribution to bioethics (Routledge); two on the problem of the Canaanites (B&H Academic and another to be determined); on the moral argument (a short article) in The Dictionary of Christian Theology (Cambridge).  I’ve also contributed a series of articles on Old Testament ethics to Enrichment Journal.

I recently contributed a chapter “A Time for Truth” in The Complete Christian Guidebook to Understanding Homosexuality, edited by Joe Dallas and Nancy Heche (Harvest House) and a chapter on the moral argument to Mike Licona’s and Bill Dembski’s The Evidence for God (Baker).

Paul Copan is not only one the nicest guys, but he is also quite tough and combative about his faith. A real fire-breathing evangelical who writes about things that are relevant to rank and file. Whenever I send out beginner apologetics packages, I always include lots of Paul Copan books because his books are the most practical. For evangelicals who like to defend their faith to their co-workers and friends, Paul Copan is a must-read.

The other guys who write good books for beginners are Lee Strobel and Sean McDowell. All practical evangelicals used to fielding questions.

Commentary

How can you tell whether something is designed or not?

9 Comments

In honor of William Dembski’s debate tonight at 8 PM Eastern time, I present this article from Access Research Network.

Excerpt:

Instead of looking for such vague properties as “purpose” or “perfection”—which may be construed in a subjective sense—[intelligent design] looks for the presence of what it calls specified complexity, an unambiguously objective standard.

That term sounds like a mouthful, but it’s something we can all recognize without effort. Let’s take an example.

Imagine that a friend hands you a sheet of paper with part of Lincoln’s Gettysburg address written on it:

FOURSCOREANDSEVENYEARSAGOOURFATHERSBROUGHTFORTHONTHISCONTINENTANEWNATIONCONCEIVEDINLIBERTY …

Your friend tells you that he wrote the sentence by pulling Scrabble pieces out of a bag at random.

Would you believe him? Probably not. But why?

One reason is that the odds against it are just too high. There are so many other ways the results could have turned out—so many possible sequences of letters—that the probability of getting that particular sentence is almost nil.

But there’s more to it than that. If our friend had shown us the letters below, we would probably believe his story.

ZOEFFNPBINNGQZAMZQPEGOXSYFMRTEXRNYGRRGNNFVGUMLMTYQXTXWORNBWIGBBCVHPUZMWLONHATQUGOTFJKZXFHP …

Why? Because of the kind of sequence we see. The first string fits a recognizable pattern: It’s a sentence written in English, minus spaces and punctuation. The second string fits no such pattern.

Now we can understand specified complexity. When a design theorist says that a string of letters is specified, he’s saying that it fits a recognizable pattern. And when he says it’s complex, he’s saying there are so many different ways the object could have turned out that the chance of getting any particular outcome by accident is hopelessly small.

Thus, we see design in our Gettysburg sentence because it is both specified and complex. We see no such design in the second string. Although it is complex, it fits no recognizable pattern. And if our friend had shown us a string of letters like “BLUE” we would have said that it was specified but not complex. It fits a pattern, but because the number of letter is so short, the likelihood of getting such a string is relatively high. Four slots don’t give you as many possible letter combinations as 143, which is the length of our Gettysburg sentence.

So that’s the basic notion of specified complexity.

This is something you really need to understand in order to understand the arguments from biological building blocks and biological information in DNA.

Commentary

Why do some women tolerate jerks as boyfriends?

21 Comments

What causes Christian women to pass on strong, capable Christian men and to choose weaker non-Christian men instead?

Fears of rejection

On the one hand, most women want men to provide them with good things, to love them, to treat them honorably and to lead them. But on the other hand, they fear abandonment and rejection. Sometimes this fear of abandonment and rejection is so strong that it causes them to pass on men who they think are “too good for them”. A good man may seem unattainable to a woman who has not put in the same amount of effort to prepare for him.

Fear of moral obligations

Sometimes a really good man places moral and spiritual obligations on a Christian woman that require her to improve and grow, in order to help him with his life plan. Also, men flourish when a woman encourages him, recognizes him, supports him in his male roles. A good man who has definite ideas on what counts as good behavior may expect more from a woman, and those moral obligations can get in the way of her selfish pursuit of happiness.

Strong, good men are avoided

So it turns out that the fear of rejection or abandonment can be STRONGER when the man is good at his Biblical roles, because she feels like she doesn’t measure up and will have to work hard to keep him. And the expectation to fulfill moral obligations can be STRONGER when the man has a well-developed sense of morality, because he actually knows how women are supposed to act and he may hold the woman accountable.

Weak men are easier to blame and control

Let me explain some other reasons why a Christian woman might prefer to have a weaker, non-Christian man:

  1. A woman may prefer to blame a man in order to rationalize her selfish actions, and an immoral man is easier to blame.
  2. A woman may prefer to blame a man in order to punish him for some real or imagined crime, and an immoral man is easier to blame.
  3. A woman may want to avoid moral obligations to a man, and a weaker man is easier for her to control. (e.g. – using pre-marital sex in order to avoid having to love a man self-sacrificially)
  4. A woman may need to avoid being judged or led morally by a man, so she prefers a man who is weak at morality and moral reasoning.
  5. A woman may need to avoid being judged or led spiritually by a man, so she prefers a man who is weak at theology and apologetics.

So, it’s not that the poor, sweet, innocent women are helpless victims of nasty, evil, brutish man-beasts, at all. Far from it. Some of them DELIBERATELY CHOOSE to pass up the best Biblical Christian men, because they fear rejection or moral judgment or loss of control, and/or they want to avoid moral obligations to men that may interfere with their selfishness.

Disclaimer

I just want to reiterate before anyone freaks out that I know a LOT of Christian women who are heroic at letting Christianity influence their choice of romantic partners. Actually, I know women who are MORE courageous than I am in resisting bad partners. And it’s harder for a woman to do because women have concerns about the future, and so on. The choice to be faithful to God, to be chaste and to choose a godly man is nothing less than an act of incredible heroism. I wish more women did that. It is really amazing and admirable when women hold out for a good man, then answer his call to step up into the role that he needs her to play to help him with his plan to serve God effectively.

I actually know more of the good kind than the bad kind, especially since I started writing and the good ones just showed up! Pow! There you all are! Where had you all been hiding?