I’m a classical apologist, so I do use pre-suppositional arguments to question my opponents about whether their non-Christian worldviews can ground rationality and objective morality, etc. But I also use evidential arguments from nature and history. Some people think that evidential arguments should not be used and that they are not as persuasive as pre-suppositional arguments.
When I look the Bible, I don’t see any Biblical support for the view that pre-suppositional apologetics is the only approved way of defending the faith. Instead, the standard method seems to be evidentialism.
In Romans 1, Paul writes that people can learn about God’s existence from the natural world.
18The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness,
19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.
20For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.
22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools
23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.
And in Acts, Peter appeals to eyewitness testimony for the resurrection, and Jesus’ miracles.
22“Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.
23This man was handed over to you by God’s set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross.
24But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him.
And finally from the same chapter:
36“Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.”
So, I see that God uses nature and miracles to persuade, which can be assessed using scientific and historical methods. Can anyone find me a clear statement that states that only pre-suppositional arguments should be used? I could be wrong, and I am willing to be proven wrong.
I was supposed to work all through Thanksgiving on a project, but I ended up doing all my Christmas shopping. If you have a lot of people on your list like I do, you might want to consider the “Ministry Give-away” offers from Randolph Productions. They sell intelligent design DVDs and the new Illustra Media production of the Craig-Hitchens debate that occurred in Aptil this year at Biola University.
The ministry give-away packs are neat because they give you the DVD in a simple envelope. It doesn’t have the fancy packaging but then again, it costs $3 per DVD!! (or less, if you buy a bigger pack). I bought the 11-packs, which come with 1 full sized DVD ($20) and 10 give-away DVDs ($3 each!). Shipping is FREE. They have packages up to 100 give-away DVDs! But they don’t yet have Darwin’s Dilemma in Ministry give-away packs yet, so I bought a bunch of those at a discounted price from Amazon.
I have seen the Lee Strobel DVDs they are offering and I do not recommend them, as they are not as detailed as the Illustra/Coldwater DVDs. They try to cover too much in too little time, and some things get missed. Also, they are a bit too stylish and slick for my taste, with too much about Lee’s personal life experiences.
I haven’t actually got the DVDs from Randolph Productions yet, so… you might want to wait and see if mine are done right before you order anything from them! This is my first time ordering from them.
UPDATE: They shipped it by FEDEX ground and e-mailed me again.
Greer-Heard lectures
The Greer-Heard Point/Counterpoint forum is an annual debate run by the New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary. The only ones worth buying are the 2005 and 2009 ones, and they are both really, really worth buying. I will be writing about both of these pretty soon. The 2005 ones come on CD, although I e-mailed them and asked them to put up an MP3 version of it so y’all could all get it for a better price. No response yet on that.
J.D. Crossan and N.T. Wright — Jesus’ Resurrection – opening speeches and dialogue
R. Douglas Geivett — “What Should We Believe about Belief in the Resurrection”
Chuck Quarles — “The Gospel of Peter: A Pre-Canonical Resurrection Narrative?”
William Lane Craig — “Resurrection: Does it Matter?”
Gary Habermas — “Mapping Recent Trends in Critical Resurrection Theories”
Craig Evans — “The Place of Wright and Crossan in Jesus Research”
Ted Peters — “The Future of the Resurrection”
Concluding Comments from J.D. Crossan and N.T. Wright
Wright laid out his standard case for the 6 mutations, and Crossan tried to explain the resurrection as metaphor. Crossan was hard to pin down, but he eventually did come clean in the discussion time, and even allowed the empty tomb. Doug Geivett’s response was the jewel in a magnificent crown of debate. He was merciless. Chuck Quarles and Craig Evans were very effective and Craig and Habermas were OK. Ted Peters supported Crossan’s view.
Harold A. Netland and Paul F. Knitter — Religious Pluralism – opening speeches and dialog
Paul Copan — “Is the World Religiously Ambiguous? No, and Neither Is Religious Pluralism”
S. Mark Heim — “No Other Name: The Gospel and True Religions”
R. Douglas Geivett — “The Futility of Neutrality: The Uniqueness of Jesus in a World of Religions”
Millard J. Erickson — Evangelical Philosophical Society Plenary Address
Terrence Tilley — “Principles for Assessing Theologies of Religious Diversity”
Keith Yandell — “Does Religious Pluralism Have Sufficient Rationale?”
Concluding Comments from Paul Knitter & Harold Netland
I just downloaded this set and it is extremely addictive. I’ve listened to it THREE TIMES! Netland was pretty moderate, and Knitter was a pretty typical religious pluralist – irrational and indifferent to evidence. Copan’s response was the best of a great bunch – it was vicious. Yandell’s paper a close second (his paper had to be read by someone else – if he had read it, he might have surpassed Copan!) Geivett was pretty moderate this time, but still good. Heim was OK and Erickson just made some general comments about postmodernism that were OK. Tilley supported Knitter’s view.
The upcoming 2010 forum on “The Message of Jesus” is set for February 2010. They got Crossan to come back, which is great, because he is a fine speaker and a good participant in these dialogs. I can’t stand his positions, though. And his opponent is Ben Witherington, who is a well-respected historian. Non-Christian respondents are Amy-Jill Levine and Alan F. Segal. Christian respondents are Craig A. Evans, Craig Blomberg, and Darrell L. Bock. All 3 of them participate in debates before.
John Dominic Crossan & Ben Witherington III — opening speeches and dialog
Darrell L. Bock — response
Amy-Jill Levine — response
Craig Blomberg — response
Craig A. Evans — response
Alan F. Segal — response
I’ll probably get this set as MP3s if they keep the price down. It looks like this will be a good one.
I like Craig Evans and Darrell Bock MORE than Witherington and Blomberg, because I think they”ll be more aggressive. All four of these Christian scholars have participated in debates before. Blomberg and Witherington were respondents to the Craig-Crossan debate (the book version). Craig Evans responded to Crossan in the 2005 Greer-Heard forum. And Darrell Bock responded to Borg in the Craig-Borg debate.
You can probably find free lectures from many of these scholars at the Veritas Forum web site.
The best books of 2009, and some older ones you might have missed
If you haven’t bought “Signature in the Cell” yet, what are you waiting for? This is the book of the year. It was named to Amazon’s top 10 science books and to the Best Books of 2009 list compiled by the UK Times Literary Supplement, (selected by the brilliant and honest atheist Thomas Nagel, who is the atheist I would most like to see become a Christian, now that Anthony Flew has left atheism).
For the person who has everything, you can always donate to charity on their behalf.
This year I donated to the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture, the Ruth Institute, Reasonable Faith, the Evangelical Philosophical Society, and Michele Bachmann. I also donated to specific debates and conferences that featured Christian scholars in dialog with non-Christian speakers, in non-Christian settings. My goal is to address non-Christian audiences with scholarship that is consistent with and supportive of the Christian worldview. I favor charities that use sound logical arguments supported by objective, verificable evidence.
Something just for fun
I recommend the 1960s spy series “Danger Man“, starring Patrick McGoohan. They’re about $25 from Amazon. McGoohan’s character John Drake is the anti-James Bond. He always put the mission first – he never allowed himself to be manipulated or distracted by enemy agents. And it’s filmed in black and white – exactly the way secret agent John Drake operates.
Here are a couple of videos to give you an idea of what it’s all about.
John Drake infiltrates a murder-for-hire ring based in Italy:
John Drake attempts to kidnap a professional assassin behind the Iron Curtain:
I hope talking about Danger Man doesn’t prevent Brian Auten of Apologetics 315 from adding this post to his Twitter feed. His list of recommended books is here.
The United States Supreme Court has refused to hear the case of a high school valedictorian whose microphone was turned off by school officials after she began speaking about the part her Christian beliefs played in her success in life.
Attorneys for The Rutherford Institute asked the Supreme Court to hear the case of Brittany McComb, charging that school officials violated McComb’s free speech rights and engaged in viewpoint discrimination when they censored her speech because of its Christian content.
[…]McComb is a Christian and a top student, who graduated with a 4.7 grade point average from Foothill High in Henderson, Nevada. She knew that her valedictorian address would probably be cut short, but was determined to go ahead and mention her faith anyway.
School officials had previously edited her speech to remove Biblical references and one mention of the name of Jesus Christ, warning her she would be interrupted if she deviated from the approved text.
“I went through four years of school at Foothill and they taught me logic and they taught me freedom of speech,” McComb stated. “God’s the biggest part of my life. Just like other valedictorians thank their parents, I wanted to thank my lord and savior.”
The 400 plus graduates and guests who had gathered at a Las Vegas casino for the commencement ceremony, booed and jeered after McComb’s speech was cut short, chanting “Let her speak!”
If this young lady were gay or a Muslim or anything else, she would have been allowed to speak about that, and Christians would have remained silent and respectful. Only Christians are suppressed, and that should tell you something about our government-run, unionized public schools today.
Video of her speech:
Video of her on Fox News:
Props to Alan Colmes for taking her side against the anti-Christian school administrators.
A lot of non-Christians and fake “Christians” on the secular left think that they are doing a good thing by silencing authentic Christians in the public square. They have decided that it is better to hurt the feelings of Christians by forcing them to keep silent and act like non-Christians, than to hurt the feelings of non-Christians. The problem with this is that ultimately, if Christianity is true, it only matters how each of us makes Jesus Christ feel. And if you hurt the feelings of Christians who are busy following Christ, then you are really hurting Christ.
1At that time the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?”
2He called a little child and had him stand among them.
3And he said: “I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
4Therefore, whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.
5“And whoever welcomes a little child like this in my name welcomes me.
6But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.
7“Woe to the world because of the things that cause people to sin! Such things must come, but woe to the man through whom they come!
8If your hand or your foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life maimed or crippled than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire.
9And if your eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell.
10“See that you do not look down on one of these little ones. For I tell you that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven.
This story is in Mark, Matthew and Luke: it’s early and multiply attested, and is therefore authentic.
This cannot be any more clear. If you discourage people from following Christ then you are in big trouble. I think that this suppression of Christians is worse than murder. Jesus is threatening people who discourage Christians with the eternal fires of Hell. Christians are morally obligated to talk about Jesus in public, and particularly to give thanks to him in public. When you tell Christians not to act like like Christians, then you are really forcing your religion onto them, and expecting them to act as if you are more authoritative than Jesus Christ.
The purpose of life, on Christianity, is not to hide your commitment to Christ in order to make non-Christians feel comfortable about their rejection of Christianity. The purpose of life, on Christianity, is to publicly acknowledge God in everything that you do and to have a relationship with God, as revealed by Christ’s life and teachings. The most important relationship is the vertical relationship – with God, not the horizontal relationship – with people. It is a non-Christian viewpoint that faith should be kept private and hidden.
Remember that the first commandment is not “Thou shalt avoid offending people who are in rebellion against God” nor is it “Thou shalt hide your faith from non-Christians so that they don’t feel badly about rejecting God”. There’s a temptation to pick moral rules like “don’t murder” and “don’t commit adultery” – things we don’t do, and then to say that those things are the really bad things. And since we don’t do those bad things, that makes us good. But what does God consider to be the really bad thing?
The first commandment, according to Jesus, is found in Matthew 22:34-38:
34Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together.
35One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question:
36“Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”
37Jesus replied: ” ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’
38This is the first and greatest commandment.
This story is in Mark, Matthew and Luke: it’s early and multiply attested, and is therefore authentic.
13“You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled by men.
14“You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden.
15Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house.
16In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven.
This story is in Mark, Matthew and Luke: it’s early and multiply attested, and is therefore authentic.
(This is one of my favorite verses in the Bible. I always feel sad when I think of it because I think of it when dealing with laziness, ignorance and cowardice from fake Christians – which is often!)
26“So do not be afraid of them. There is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known.
27What I tell you in the dark, speak in the daylight; what is whispered in your ear, proclaim from the roofs.
28Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.
29Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father.
30And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered.
31So don’t be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows.
32“Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven.
33But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven.
This story is also in Luke, so it is part of the Q source shared by Matthew and Luke, which is very early and likely to be authentic.
One has to remember that for this young woman, her relationship with Christ is as real to her as her relationship with her parents – and she wants to honor him in her moment of celebration. It is striking that school administrators encourage other politically correct groups to express themselves in public. Only Christians are singled out for persecution and suppression. Christians can’t speak freely, but non-Christian school officials can call all pro-lifers murderers and Democrats can force Christians to pay for abortions.
People today seem to think that God, if he exists, would be loving. And what they mean by love is “making people feel happy regardless of what they believe about God’s existence and character”. People imagine what God is like for them using emotions and intuitions, instead of looking at the life of Jesus historically, and asking whether God really stepped into history to show us what he is really like. Biblical Christians don’t comport with this intuitive/emotional understanding of love, so that is why they are persecuted by non-Christians and fake Christians.
This bias against Christians sharing their faith is common in most non-Christian religions who would prefer to silence Christians rather than debate them with arguments and evidence. Countries like the UK and Canada punish Christians for speaking about Christianity, India and Israel consider passing anti-conversion laws, and in the atheistic North Korea or Muslim Iran they just imprison or kill Christians outright. When non-Christians persecute Christians for behaving like Christians, they really are aggrieving Christ himself.
My advice for non-Christians
If you are a non-Christian or an emotional/intuitive “Christian”, you want to avoid denying authentic Christians the rights of free speech and freedom of religious expression. Feel free to spend your lives on Earth seeking pleasure and avoiding a relationship with the God who is there. Even God won’t reveal himself overtly to you to compel you into a love relationship with him. But don’t make it harder on yourself in the after-life by persecuting Christians here and now for behaving like authentic Christians.
Some people think that by suppressing Christians, they actually are doing what God wants because God’s goal for us is to have happy feelings. But if your method of discovering God’s existence and character is by using your emotions and intuitions, then you should be careful about inventing a God in your own image. My advice is to conduct a genuine investigation of whether God exists, and what he is like, using arguments and evidence, not emotions and intuitions. If God is real, then he already has a personality. He isn’t YOU.
Related posts
Here is a series of posts I did on why people go to Hell.
WINTERY KNIGHT 