Tag Archives: Apologetics

Polemics

A closer look at the journey to atheism of Nathan Pratt

10 Comments

I found a deconversion testimony by an atheist on Prayson Daniel’s blog, and I thought it might be useful to take a look at it.

But first, I want to recap some reasons why people think that God exists.

In addition to these arguments for theism, Christians would make be some sort of minimal facts case for the resurrection, one that leverages the early creed in 1 Corinthians 15:3-7. And some sort of case for the early belief that Jesus was divine.

In addition to those positive evidences, there would be informed defenses to other questions like the problem of evil, the problem of suffering, religious pluralism, the hiddenness of God, materialist conceptions of mind, consciousness and neuroscience, the justice of eternal damnation, sovereignty and free will, the doctrine of the Incarnation, the doctrine of the Trinity, and so on.

I listed these out so that you can see how many of these positive arguments and defenses that he wrestles with in his deconversion testimony, which is linked below.

So here is the deconversion testimony.

And here are some revealing snippets, under headings.

Legalist upbringing

” Being baptists things were pretty legalistic growing up.”

Anti-intellectual parents

His parents tell him: “This is the bible and its truth can’t be debated. It is what it is.”

Piety rather than apologetics

“Most of my young life I was “that” religious kid. You know him. He’s awkward looking with coke bottle glasses and horrendous hair and triple hand me down clothes. I told random kids on the bus that I would pray for them and would be mocked in return.”

Peer disapproval

“I told random kids on the bus that I would pray for them and would be mocked in return. One time I even got jumped while fishing and once they started punching me I didn’t even fight back, “turn the other cheek” was being said in my mind over and over. I got the crap kicked out of me and several months of ridicule at school over getting such a beating.

I think the most embarrassing time for me was in 8th grade science class when one kid started calling me a “bible beater” while the teacher was out of the room. He then got the entire class to mock and laugh at me. It wasn’t fun. In fact, it sucked.”

Deconversion prior to serious study of the evidence

“I think it was around 9th grade that my apathy for religion and god really started to set it. Being honest with myself I didn’t want to be the kid that got mocked anymore.”

Ineffective church leadership

“We’d laugh at our peers that were so moved by the message told by the church leaders… Everything I was seeing my peers do could easily be chalked up to a group or mob mentality. A psychological effect of emotions.”

I agree with him about this one, the church generally does nothing to form a Christian worldview, even though they have years and years to do it. And they are quite proud of this “focus on the gospel”, even as kids drop Christianity as soon as they hear intellectual objections to it in college.

Self-focus / autonomy

“The fact that our purpose of living was the blow smoke up the skirt of a god that will damn us to hell.”

Theological determinism

“The thought that a god with a plan can’t/won’t/doesn’t listen to your prayers because if your prayer isn’t in line with his plan then it goes unheard or unanswered.”

Bible difficulties

“God set up Adam and Eve for failure in the Garden of Eden. If he really didn’t want us to “fall from grace” then the tree never would have been there. He would’ve stopped the serpent from deceiving Adam and Eve. He would’ve equipped Adam and Eve with the knowledge of deceit so they could recognize when they’re being lied to.”

God’s job is to make us happy and healthy

“God would have either have had a direct hand in creating hell or allowing satan to create it with his knowledge. God created the rules by which people go to hell. He damns billions of people there. Is that love? Is that moral? Is that just?”

Accuracate knowledge of God’s character and historical actions are less important than “being good”

“Anne Frank, a Jew, is in hell because she didn’t recognize Jesus as the Son of God, but Ted Bundy, a serial rapist and murderer, is in heaven because he accepted Jesus into his heart before dying on death row. Is that fair? Is that love? Is that moral? Is that just?”

Emotional problem of evil

His brother was killed in a motorcycle accident, and his view is that it’s God’s job to keep everyone alive and happy. So this guy is reading the story of Jesus and he is saying something like this to himself when he reads the Bible, “see, the founder of Christianity has all his needs met by God and he is happy all the time, and everyone likes him and he never, ever has anything bad happen to him that isn’t his fault”. The problem of evil is one of the most responded-to problems in Christian apologetics. He didn’t cite anyone who has responded to it.

Ignorance of how the Bible defines faith

“Faith is believing in something without evidence.”

So he doesn’t even know what the definition of faith is, according to the Biblical use of the term, where faith is trusting in something you know to be true because of the evidence, e.g. – because of the resurrection, say. That was Jesus’ model of getting people to have faith in him, but apparently you can attend church and come up with a different, postmodern notion of what the word means. A definition that is pleasing to all the people in church who are there for emotional comfort, and not for truth and knowledge. His definition of faith is more like the atheist definition of faith, like they say “I have faith in the multiverse” or “I have faith in aliens seeding the Earth with life” or “I have faith that God has no morally sufficient reason for permitting this instance of apparently gratuitous evil”. Atheists project their own irrational epistemology onto Christians.

Unfamiliarity with Christian scholarship

“After I realized that my friends and church leaders had no good responses to anything I was saying I started searching for good apologist books on the internet. A good book about a good reason for belief. I can’t effectively relay my shock at turning up nothing worth the paper it was printed on.”

The purpose of life is to feel happy

“I’d heard through a friend that an old acquaintance from our youth group was now an agnostic… His reply was straight forward in that he’d realized that he’d gained nothing from trying to understand, follow and love god. Since it was bringing nothing positive to his life he left it behind. He shared that we’re all trained as kids in church that we have a god shaped hole in our hearts, but that it wasn’t true. Here he was, 11 years after leaving christianity, at the happiest and most content point of his life. He told me it was okay to doubt.”

Reads simplistic books by atheists

“That book that would ultimately be one of the most revolutionary books in my life was “50 Reasons People Give for Believing in a God.””

This book is a caricature of the reasons why people believe in God. I searched for the names of top Christian apologists, and there were none. No William Lane Craig, Hugh Ross, Gary Habermas, Michael Licona, Stephen C. Meyer, Mike Behe, etc. I took a look at the 50 arguments. They were generally re-phrasings of this “I’m stupid, so I’ll believe Christianity because it makes me happy”.

I clicked on the few that I thought might cite Christian scholars, but no Christian scholars were cited. For the chapter on “fine-tuning”, the author cited Ray Comfort. And his banana argument. In a chapter on fine-tuning. The chapter on intelligent design did not cite a single scholar, pro or con. ID was not even defined.

My conclusion

Well, I’ll leave the rest of his post to you. I did a quick search on the author’s blog for “William Lane Craig”, just to see, and found nothing. Then I did a search for “intelligent design”, and found nothing. Then I did a search for “minimal facts” and found nothing. His post on his journey to atheism is here. And let this testimony be a lesson to you parents and church leaders not to fail other Christians the way this guy’s parents and church leaders failed him. You should read the comments on his post, as well.

News

Is the vastness of the universe evidence against God’s existence?

4 Comments

Physicist Hugh Ross writes about it in Salvo Magazine.

First a quick blurb about Hugh Ross:

Hugh Ross launched his career at age seven when he went to the library to find out why stars are hot. Physics and astronomy captured his curiosity and never let go. At age seventeen he became the youngest person ever to serve as director of observations for Vancouver’s Royal Astronomical Society. With the help of a provincial scholarship and a National Research Council (NRC) of Canada fellowship, he completed his undergraduate degree in physics (University of British Columbia) and graduate degrees in astronomy (University of Toronto). The NRC also sent him to the United States for postdoctoral studies. At Caltech he researched quasi-stellar objects, or “quasars,” some of the most distant and ancient objects in the universe.

Now back to the topic “Is the vastness of the universe incompatible with God’s existence?”

Here’s Ross’ introduction:

Scientists seem more difficult to please than the golden-haired girl of fairy-tale fame. While Goldilocks troubled herself over the just-right porridge, chair, and bed, astronomers appear preoccupied with the size of the universe.

In the days before telescopes, when an observer could count a few thousand stars in the night sky, many considered the universe too small and unimpressive to be the work of an almighty, all-knowing Creator. Only an infinite cosmos, they said, would befit an infinite deity. But then, others argued, an infinite cosmos might eliminate the need for a Creator.

Thanks to the Hubble space telescope, scientists now see that the universe contains roughly 200 billion large- and medium-sized galaxies and about a hundred times as many dwarf galaxies. The stars in those galaxies add up to about fifty billion trillion, and they comprise a mere one percent of the mass of the observable universe.

Because of the travel time of light, the universe humans can observe is really the universe of the past. What researchers know about the expansion and geometry of the universe informs us that the universe of today is at least several hundred times more enormous than the universe we can see. The universe is trillions of trillions of times larger and more spectacular than what the earliest astronomers presumed!

And yet, this new knowledge of the vastness of the universe has led to new complaints. In his book, God: The Failed Hypothesis, Victor Stenger says, “If God created the universe as a special place for humanity, he seems to have wasted an awfully large amount of space.” Stephen Hawking, in the best-selling science book of all time, A Brief History of Time, shares Stenger’s view: “Our solar system certainly is a prerequisite for our existence. . . . But there does not seem to be any need for all these other galaxies.” So now the universe is too big to befit the all-wise, all-powerful God of the Bible.

I like how he quotes an atheist physicist to get the challenge right. No sense in caricaturing the claim of your opponent.

I formalized Stenger’s argument like this:

  1. If all things in the universe are done the way that Victor Stenger likes them, then there is a God.
  2. It is not the case that all things in the universe were done the way Victor Stenger likes them.
  3. Therefore, there is no God.

I would deny premise 1, there, since there is no reason to believe that’s it’s true.

Anyway, let’s see what Hugh Ross says:

The hot big bang model (now firmly established by observations) tells us that at the moment of cosmic creation, the universe was infinitely or near-infinitely hot and compressed, and all the ordinary matter existed in the form of hydrogen. As the universe expanded, it cooled. The rate at which the universe expanded and cooled depended in large part on its mass—the greater the mass, the slower the expansion and cooling rate. The slower the expansion and cooling rate, the more time the universe would spend in the temperature range (13–150 million degrees Centigrade) at which nuclear fusion can occur.

Because of its mass, the universe spent about twenty seconds in the nuclear fusion temperature range when it was between three and four minutes old. As a result, 24.77 percent of the universe’s hydrogen (by mass) fused into helium. Thus, when stars began to form—about 380,000 years later—they started off composed of about 75 percent hydrogen, 25 percent helium, and trace amounts of deuterium, lithium, and beryllium.

In the nuclear furnaces of the stars themselves, more hydrogen fused into helium, and, in addition to the extra helium, all the rest of the elements that appear in the periodic table were synthesized (created). The capacity of stellar nuclear furnaces to produce an abundance of elements heavier than helium (all but two of the elements) depended critically on how much of the universe’s initial hydrogen was fused into helium and heavier elements during the first several minutes after the cosmic creation event. How much fusion of the universe’s primordial hydrogen actually occurred at this time depended, in turn, on the universe’s mass or mass density.

If the universe’s mass (or cosmic mass density) had been even the slightest bit less than a hundred times the fifty billion trillion stars occupying the observable universe, nuclear fusion during the first several minutes of its existence would have proceeded less efficiently. Thus, the cosmos would have been forever incapable of generating elements heavier than helium—elements such as carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorus, sodium, and potassium—all of which are essential for any conceivable kind of physical life.

On the other hand, if the universe’s mass had been even the slightest bit greater, nuclear fusion during the first several minutes after its beginning would have been too productive, and all the hydrogen in the universe eventually would have been fused (after just two generations of stars) into elements as heavy as iron or heavier. Again, all the most life-essential elements, including hydrogen itself, would have ceased to exist.

Basically, your body is made up of heavier elements, and if the universe was not as massive as it is (and as old as it is), then there would not be enough heavy elements to make you, or to make massive stars like our Sun which burn steady for long periods of time. We need the heavy elements and we need the steady source of heat. And while we are waiting on these heavy elements, the universe is expanding.

Dr. Ross has another reason why God would use vast space and long periods of time, and if you want to read that, you can click here. I think that it’s important for us all to get used to the idea that we all need to understand science apologetics. God put these evidences into the universe for us to discover and use.

Mentoring

Cold Case Christianity: best posts, podcasts and videos of 2014

1 Comment
This assault rifle is OK, but apologetics is better
This assault rifle is pretty cool, but apologetics is even cooler

J. Warner Wallace has posted the top 10 blog posts, podcasts and videos for 2014.

Blog posts:

10. 10 Important Questions for the Jehovah’s Witness Worldview
There are a number of philosophical and theological questions exposing the internal contradictions of the Jehovah’s Witness worldview.

9. How the Book of Abraham Exposes the False Nature of Mormonism
By taking an evidential approach to Christian and Mormon scripture, I confirmed the veracity of Christianity and guarded myself from the falsity of Mormonism

8. Ten Principles When Considering Alleged Bible Contradictions
If we objectively examine the Scriptures with these principles in mind, we’ll grow in our understanding of the Bible and better resolve the difficulties

7. Is Jesus Simply a Retelling of the Horus Mythology?
Is Jesus simply a retelling of the Horus myth? How similar is Horus to Jesus upon close examination? Do these similarities invalidate the historicity of Jesus?

6. Why Are Young Christians Leaving the Church? It’s Simple Math
Why Are Young Christians Leaving the Church? Three powerful forces are driving the current departure of young Christians from the Church.

5. The Inevitable Consequence of An Atheistic Worldview
What are the inevitable consequences of an atheistic worldview? A summary from an honest (if not politically correct) comment from an atheist.

4. Investigating the Evidence for Mormonism In Six Steps
Given the evidence, there is more than enough reason to conclude Joseph Smith was a fraud and the Book of Mormon is a work of fiction.

3. Is the Bible True? The Cumulative Case for the Reliability of the Gospels (Free Bible Insert)
Is the Bible true? The case for the reliability of the Gospels is strong and substantive.

2. The Difference Between “Natural Talents” and “Spiritual Gifts”
Natural talents are the result of our genetic inheritance and the training in our family environment. Spiritual gifts are given to us by the Spirit of God once we are saved.

1. Is There Any Evidence for Jesus Outside the Bible?
The ancient non-Christian interpretations (and critical commentaries) of the Gospel accounts serve to strengthen the core claims of the New Testament.

And the podcasts:

10. Is the Christian Faith Evidentially Reasonable?
J. Warner makes a case for the reasonable nature of the Christian Worldview. Does Christianity require blind faith? Are we to accept the claims of Christianity without evidence or even in spite of the evidence? Or are we called, as Christians, to place our trust in Jesus because of the evidence? Jim also examines the way Jesus responded to those who had doubts.

9. The Problem with the Problem of Evil
J. Warner talks about the challenge we face, as Christian Case Makers, when trying to respond to the problem of evil. If God is all-powerful and all-loving, why is there so much evil in the world? Jim talks about the need for a cumulative response and explains why the problem of evil may be a bigger problem for atheists than for Christians.

8. The Case for Christian Case Making
J. Warner makes a case for an evidential, reasoned, case-making form of Christian belief. Using the New Testament gospels and letters as a guide, Jim articulates the foundation for a reasonable faith in Jesus and our common calling as Christians to a life of case-making.

7. Are the Gospels Eyewitness Accounts?
J. Warner makes a case for the eyewitness status of the New Testament Gospel accounts. Is it appropriate to evaluate these accounts as eyewitness statements? Were they intended to be read in this manner? Jim provides several reasons to accept the accounts as eyewitness testimony.

6. Four Ways to Strengthen Your Kids Faith
J. Warner reviews the statistics related to young people leaving the church and then offers four simple ways parents can help make sure their kids stay in the Christian faith. Jim also discusses the simple math behind the problem and illustrates the challenges facing young Christians.

5. Did Jesus Claim to Be God?
J. Warner examines the statements of Jesus to see if He ever claimed to be God. While skeptics may acknowledge Jesus’ existence and even the value of His teaching, any assessment of Jesus’ instruction must account for his obvious claims of Deity. Jim looks at the cumulative case and assembles the evidence from the Gospels to demonstrate Jesus’ claims to Deity.

4. What (and When) Were the Earliest Claims About Jesus?
J. Warner examines the history related to the eyewitness observations of Jesus. How early are the eyewitness accounts and what precisely was being said about Jesus prior to the creation of these written documents?

3. Four Lies the Culture Tells About the Truth
J. Warner examines four popular misconceptions and misstatements about the nature of objective truth, tolerance and our over-reliance on science. If there are no objective truths (or they can’t be known) there is little reason to examine the truth about God. We need to get to the truth about truth before we can ever know the truth about anything else.

2. Conversations with Atheists: Four Observations
J. Warner provides four observations from his youth ministry trips to UC Berkeley. These simple observations may help you improve the quality of your discussions with non-believers and help you better understand the underlying issues in some of these conversations. J. Warner also answers viewer email related to the disagreements between Christian denominations and the need for personal research.

1. Is Jesus a Copycat Savior?
In this inaugural Cold-Case Christianity video broadcast / podcast, J. Warner re-examines an atheist objection related to the historicity of Jesus. Is Jesus merely a copycat of prior mythologies like Mithras, Osiris or Horus? How can we, as Christians, respond to such claims? Jim provides a five point response to this common atheist claim.

And the videos:

10. The Case for Truth
In this video, J. Warner Wallace teaches high school and college students at Summit Worldview Conference in Manitou Springs, CO. What is the nature of truth? What is the difference between objective and subjective truth and why does it matter? J. Warner talks about three lies related to truth and offers a proper definition of truth for his students.

9. When Do We Have Enough Evidence to Know Christianity Is True?
J. Warner Wallace was interviewed by Bobby Conway and discussed the role of evidence in determining truth claims. When we can be certain we have sufficient evidence to believe something is true?

8. The Apostle John’s Chain of Custody
J. Warner Wallace provides a detective’s perspective related to the New Testament and the Christian Life as he talks with Rob Melnichuk of “It’s Your Call”

7. Making a Case for the Resurrection of Jesus
J. Warner Wallace was interviewed on 100 Huntley Street and talked about the case for Easter by examining the Resurrection of Jesus through abductive reasoning.

6. Laura Ingraham Interview with J. Warner Wallace
Laura Ingraham interviews J. Warner Wallace about his book, Cold Case Christianity

5. Why Some Skeptics Deny the Credibility of the Gospels
J. Warner Wallace provides a detective’s perspective related to the New Testament and the Christian Life as he talks with Rob Melnichuk of “It’s Your Call”

4. Were the Gospel Authors Really Present?
J. Warner Wallace spoke at the University of Kentucky Christian Student Fellowship in November 2014 about the reliability of the New Testament. In this portion of the talk, J. Warner examines the dating of the Gospels.

3. The Difference Between Objective and Subjective Truth
What is the difference between “Objective Truth” and “Subjective Truth”? How can mastery of the distinction between these two definitions help us to think clearly before we begin to examine the case for the Christian Worldview? (from J. Warner’s talk at Calvary Chapel Bangor)

2. Why Does Every Christian Need Abductive Reasoning?
J. Warner Wallace was interviewed by Bobby Conway and discussed the importance of Abductive Reasoning and its application to the Resurrection of Jesus.

1. Did Jesus Think Jesus Was God?
J. Warner Wallace, was interviewed by Bobby Conway and discussed the Deity of Jesus. Did Jesus make claims about His nature as God? Did He intend for others to believe He was God?

If you see one you think is interesting – well, they are all interesting – then click through and take a look. He produces so much material and it’s fun to listen to a guy who solves murder mysteries and shoot guns at criminals.