Gregory Koukl's Blog, page 128
July 15, 2013
Do Denominations Disprove Christianity? (Video)
Do so many denominations prove that Christian orthodoxy is a fiction?
July 12, 2013
How to Raise Your Kids So They Will Remain in the Faith
As most of you know who follow my Twitter feed,
I read hundreds of blog posts every day and tweet the best of these
apologetics resources so you can stay on top of the best Christian case
making. I recently tweeted a blog from Daryl Evans, the pastor at First Baptist of Fairbury, entitled, How To Raise A Child In A Christian Home: 10 Important Tips.
Daryl wrote the post from the perspective of a parent and pastor; he’s
had the opportunity to see what works (and what doesn’t). Here is his
advice for parents:
1. Put Christ first in your life
2. Model what a Christian should look like
3. Make family a priority
4. Teach your children the Bible and about God
5. Make sure you are connected to a church
6. Regularly attend a church
7. Encourage your children to have Godly influences in their lives
8. Pray regularly with and for your children
9. Serve others with your child/children
10. Share your faith with others around your children
Some
good guidance here (please visit Daryl’s post for all the details). The
most striking “tip” Daryl offered, however, was #4: Teach your children
the Bible and about God. Who wouldn’t agree with this priority? For
many of us, however, the challenge seems daunting. Do we know enough
about the Bible to teach it to our children? What else do we need to
know in order to effectively teach our children about God? Does this
also involve making a case for God’s existence and answering the
objections they will ultimately face from the culture? I think it does.
Two years ago, Jon Nielson, the college pastor at College Church in Wheaton, Illinois wrote an article entitled, Why Youth Stay in Church When They Grow Up.
Jon cited three important characteristics of college aged Christians
who held on to their faith and were committed to their church family:
1. They are converted.
2. They have been equipped, not entertained.
3. Their parents preached the gospel to them.
Any of this sound familiar? I’m convinced that young people ought to be the focus of our case making efforts and we need to stop entertaining them and start training them. In fact, we need to shift completely from teaching to training. In addition, we must accept our God-given responsibility as parents
and be our children’s primary source of information about God (both in
word and example). We need to provide the truth about the Gospel, the
content and reliability of the Bible, and the nature and evidence for
God’s existence, even as we seek to model the love of Christ. We must
become the best Christian Case Makers our kids will ever meet. If we can
learn to do what Daryl suggests, we can help our kids become what Jon
has described.
Subscribe to J. Warner’s Daily Email
STR's 20th Anniversary
We hosted a luncheon after the Biola conference in May to celebrate STR's 20th anniversary. We recorded the remarks made by Greg and others associated with STR and thought you'd like to hear them.
July 11, 2013
Presuppositions and the Gospel of John
John Shelby Spong, a retired bishop of the Episcopal church and participant in the Jesus Seminar, has a new book he summarized in a recent article. He gives six reasons his book expands on for why the Gospel of John is not a reliable, historical source. J. Warner Wallace responded to it on the podcast this week.
The critical thing in understanding Spong's view of John is his presuppositions, just as much as the reasons he gives. He claims that the book was written long after the eyewitnesses were dead by a handful of people. What he doesn't volunteer is that he believes this because of a presupposition. John's Gospel has a high Christology (theology of Jesus' divinity) and has the most unique material not included in the other three Gospels. Spong thinks that high Christology must have taken some time to evolve, well past the lifetimes of eyewitnesses. And he believe that unique material in the Gospel must have come from sources other than the group that followed Jesus. So from the start, the conclusion is that the Gospel couldn't have been written by John.
Greg explains in this article why these two presuppositions are wrong. J. Warner gives further reasons here.
J. Warner offered a couple of rules of thumb to watch out for when reading something by someone with strong presuppositions he brings to the material.
Be careful of how presuppositions shape analysis of details
Be careful of overstatements because they betray presuppositions.
Spong claims that Jesus never uttered the "I am" sayings or the "Farewell Discourse." But that's because these are unique and have no parallel in the other Gospels. He presumes that uniqueness means later authors made it up. But that's not even consistent with our ordinary lives. People with tremendous credibility have unique remembrances. Historical accuracy doesn't require corroboration; it requires reliability from people in a position to know.
Spong says that none of the famous miracles in John happened - Jesus turning water into wine, feeding 5000, or raising Lazarus from the dead. What he doesn't tell us is that he doesn't think miracles happen so, of course, these miracles never occurred. Since he doesn't think they happened in history, he has to surmise some literary reason for them.
He thinks that figures of speech used in the Gospel prove that its not to be taken literally. But we use figures of speech all the time along with speaking literally. It certainly isn't a clue that nothing is literal.
Finally, he believes that the supremity of Jesus' miracles indicates that they're exaggerations. Jesus makes 150 gallons of wine, not just one. Well, since Spong doesn't think Jesus even turned one gallon of water into wine, it kind of seems irrelevant to his analysis of the historicity of this miracles that it was 1 or 150. He's ruled out these miracles from the get go so this factor hardly counts against them.
Jim pointed out in the podcast that Spong betrays his purpose in the conclusion of the article - to update our understanding of the Gospels so they're less offensive. That's his fundamental presupposition - a goal that directs his analysis from beginning to end.
Jim provides further explanation how to analyze the evidence fairly in his book Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels. He explains how to approach the evidence for the Gospels in a methodical and factual way.
July 10, 2013
Is God Anti-Gay?
A New Response to the Violinist Argument
The “Violinist” argument for keeping abortion legal is an
illustration created by Judith Jarvis Thompson for the purpose of clarifying
our moral intuitions about abortion by considering a parallel situation. The Violinist
story goes like this (see the full, original story here):
A woman wakes up to find she’s been attached without her consent to a famous
violinist who needs the help of her kidneys for the next nine months in order to
live. If the woman detaches herself from him, he will die.
According to Thompson, since it’s clear that the woman ought
not be forced by law to remain attached to this man (though he is a person with rights), in the same way, the law
ought not force a woman to remain attached to an unborn child who is similarly
using her body to live (though he is a person with rights).
In response to this bodily rights argument, Stephen Wagner, Josh Brahm, and Timothy Brahm (along
with others—see acknowledgments) have developed a new illustration that more closely
parallels the situation of a pregnant woman (including those who are pregnant
by rape), which they call “The Cabin in the Blizzard.” From Stephen Wagner’s
paper, “De Facto
Guardian and Abortion”:
Imagine that a woman named Mary
wakes up in a strange cabin. Having gone to sleep in her suburban home the
night before, she starts to scream frantically. She goes to the window and sees
snow piled high. It appears she is snowed in. On the desk by the window, she
finds a note that says,
“You will be here for six weeks.
You are safe, and your child is,
too.
There is plenty of food and water.”
Since she just gave birth a week
ago, she instinctively begins tearing through each room of the cabin looking
for her infant son. She finds an infant in a second room, but it is not her
infant. It is a girl who appears to be about one week old, just like her son.
Mary begins to scream.
Pulling herself together, she goes
to the kitchen area of the cabin and finds a huge store of food and a ready
source of water. The baby begins to cry, and she rightly assesses that the baby
is hungry. Mary sees a three-month supply of formula on the counter in the
kitchen area.
Now imagine that the police show up
at the cabin six weeks later, and Mary emerges from the cabin. After
determining she is in good health, albeit a good bit frazzled, one policeman
says, “We’ve been investigating this situation for some time. The Behavioral
Psychologists from the nearby University of Lake Wobegon are responsible. We’ll
bring them to justice. We’re so glad you’re okay. Is there anyone else in the
cabin?”
Mary said quietly, “There was.”
“There was?” The police hurry past
her to the cabin. They search the cabin and find the infant formula unopened on
the counter. They find the infant dead on a bed. The coroner confirms that the
infant died from starvation.
We can see that Mary was wrong for not feeding the baby in
this situation, regardless of the fact that she did not consent to these
demands being placed on her. As Wagner points out, our moral intuition tells us
her obligation to feed the child exists even if her only option is to use her
own body to breastfeed that child, causing her great discomfort. And even if the note Mary found had a fourth line saying, “If the child in the cabin dies,
you will be rescued immediately,” we still would not think her justified in killing the baby either actively or passively.
Wagner analyzes why this obligation exists:
What’s going on here? My colleague
Timothy Brahm and I, in trying to put our finger on what seems to be happening
in her case, called her a de facto guardian. It just happens
to be the case, for whatever reason, that Mary is now in a situation in which
she is the only person in the vicinity who can help a child in need. It’s as if
Mary is now situated in the same way a parent or guardian is situated most of
the time, but in Mary’s case, it’s by accident. Finding herself situated as a
parent, she now shoulders the same obligations of a parent or guardian,
and in her case, temporarily. It’s as if the obligations slipped over onto her
by the accident of the situation….
A parent’s moral obligations, at
least for feeding and sheltering their children, are so strong that we say
there should also be laws forcing parents to do these things. If the moral
obligations of a de facto guardian like Mary are simply the same obligations of
a parent, yet temporary, then they must also be legal obligations. In other
words, it should not be legal for a person in the de facto guardian
position to neglect the feeding and sheltering of the child.
Wagner’s paper explores different variations of the cabin
story (formula vs. no formula, the existence of severe physical difficulties, the
baby is her own child, she’s trapped for two years instead of six weeks, etc.),
responds to objections, and explains why this illustration is a much more
accurate analogy to pregnancy than is Thompson’s Violinist. The full paper is worth
a read.
July 9, 2013
Links Mentioned on the Show
The following are links that were either mentioned on this week's show or inspired by it, as posted live on the @STRtweets Twitter feed:
Unsilenced: How to Voice the Gospel by James Boccardo
More God, Less Crime by Byron Johnson
J. Warner responds to this study: Study: Religion May Help Hardcore Criminals Justify Their Crimes
Scientists Use Ethical Stem Cells Grow Liver Tissue by David Prentice
Listen to today's show or download any archived show for free. (Find links from past shows here.)
To follow the Twitter conversation during the live show (Tuesdays 4:00–7:00 p.m. PT), use the hashtag #STRtalk.
What If Christians Were “Unsilenced”?
I love to borrow a good idea, and I’ll confess that I’ve been borrowing from James Boccardo for some time now. James wrote a book a few years ago called, Unsilenced: How to Voice the Gospel,
and I have been using it with groups around the country ever since. I
met James at a conference in North Carolina where he and I were
speaking; he sent me the book prior to the event. As soon as I read it I
knew I’d discovered an “evergreen” resource I would use for years to
come. I’ll be interviewing James on the Stand to Reason Radio Show today
(you can look for this show in the STR Podcast Archive), and I’m excited to introduce the book to readers of my daily blog.
If
you’re the kind of person who recognizes your responsibility to share
the Gospel with people in your life, but find yourself hesitant or
uncertain as to how you ought to begin, this book is for you. Although
I’ve explored a number of books on evangelism (while in seminary and
during my time as a pastor), I continue to return to this book for the
following reasons:
It’s Practical
James is focused like a laser beam. He understands our fear and
hesitancy and has learned to overcome these obstacles in his daily life.
He’s an active evangelist who uses a single question
to begin conversations that lead to the gospel: “What do you think
happens after you die?” This simple approach is an effective “jump
starter”; it is the practical foundation from which James begins.
It’s Accessible
Unsilenced
is a very quick read. I read it on the flight to the North Carolina
conference from Southern California. James is a layperson (graduating
from UNC Chapel Hill and currently pursuing his M.A. in Biblical
Studies) and he’s written the book in accessible language that
simplifies the important issues as a catalyst for other laypeople.
It’s Responsive
What I love most about Boccardo’s book is the time he spent anticipating objections from non-Christians. In this sense, Unsilenced
is a Case Making book that provides readers with a simple apologetic
approach to evangelism. James’ “Bumps in the Road” chapter provides a
responsive strategy for nineteen common objections. You’ll love the
simplicity with which he navigates conversations.
It’s Doable
Unsilenced
is a “get off your butt and get moving” kind of book that will provide
you with an effective strategy to start sharing the Gospel. It has a
modest goal and achieves this goal in 170 quick pages. Unsilenced takes the fear out of evangelism by providing a path to the Gospel, and Boccardo has cleared this path for us.
If
you’re like me, you’ve been in conversations with people you hardly
know and wanted to find a way to share the Gospel. Maybe you tried to
direct the conversation toward the things of God, or maybe you waited
patiently for the topic to emerge on its own. Now, when I find myself in
these situations, I immediately think of Unsilenced and find the
courage to ask the first question. James Boccardo has accomplished what
he set out to achieve; he’s helped me to speak up when I might
otherwise be silent. I can only imagine what a difference it would make
if all of us were unsilenced.
Subscribe to J. Warner’s Daily Email
Book Review: Cold-Case Christianity
Let me put my cards on the table. J. Warner Wallace (Jim to those who know him
personally) is one of my best friends.
For almost 10 years, we’ve been invested in each other’s life. We’ve done ministry together. We’ve served in the local church together. We’ve led student mission trips
together. Our families have spent time
together (my teenage daughter regularly crashes at his house and gets spoiled
by Jim’s wonderful wife, Susie). And now
we’re speaking together, as colleagues at Stand to Reason. Jim is a close friend, partner, and ally.
So yes, as I offer a review of Jim’s book, Cold-Case Christianity (CCC), you could
argue that I’m biased. However, if you
dismiss my book review as unreliable on the sole basis of bias, then you need
to read Jim’s book! In chapter 14, he
deals with a similar charge of bias against the disciples. And had you read it already, you’d know bias
does not preclude one from being
reliable, as Jim’s “Mark Hillian” illustration demonstrates (see page 246). So, don't dismiss this review before you
consider the reasons why I think you need to read Jim’s book.
The secular university is a huge mission field. We need smart Christians who will earn their Ph.Ds.
and go on to do high-level apologetic work in a multitude of academic
fields. To this end, I thank God for the
William Lane Craigs, Alvin Plantingas, and J.P. Morelands of the contemporary
apologetics movement. However, this is
just one point of what should be a multi-pronged strategy. Not only do apologists need to make
incursions into the Academy, but we must continue our infiltration of the
church. The average church-goer needs to
be equipped with “the weapons of our warfare” (2 Cor. 10:3-5) in order to fend
off the secularism of our culture, to protect the impressionable hearts and
minds of our children, and to advance the gospel with unbelieving friends and
family. To this end, I thank God for the
Lee Strobels and now, with his writing of CCC, the J. Warner Wallaces of the
contemporary apologetics movement. To
this latter strategy, Jim makes an extraordinary contribution.
In this book, Jim does four key things as he defends the
reliability of Gospels, that will appeal to the non-specialist masses sitting
in our churches:
#1 – Cold-Case
Christianity is accessible. If we
don’t make apologetics accessible to the average Christian, we run the risk of
making it seem irrelevant. I’ve talked
to that man or woman with the deer-in-the-headlights look after attending one
of their first apologetics conferences.
I’ve heard their “if-this-is-what-apologetics-is-then-it-isn’t-for-me”
dismissals. Thus the contemporary
apologetics movement is in need of more translators and Jim steps up with this
offering.
No, no, no, he does not put the cookies on bottom
shelf. Hear me carefully; I’m not saying
we need to dumb down things. No, Jim
actually raises the bar—just check out his historical work in chapters 11
through 13—but does so without blowing people out of the water. And because of this, CCC is also a tremendous
tool for Christians to use with their skeptical friends. It’s the kind of book you can confidently
give to an unbeliever, knowing they’re in good hands with Jim.
#2 – Cold-Case
Christianity is interesting. As far
as I know, Jim is the only man on the planet who could’ve written this
book. He’s a cold-case homicide
detective and a first-rate
apologist. The combination allows Jim to
weave gripping stories and illustrations into his apologetic. It’s one of the most engaging apologetics
books I’ve ever read. Seriously.
#3 – Cold-Case
Christianity teaches the reader how to think, not just what to think. This could be the most valuable aspect of the
book. Jim doesn’t lay out a laundry list
of apologetic pat answers. Using his
training as a detective and experience in the courtroom, Jim teaches the reader
how to think well through the first ten chapters. Yes, ten whole chapters. Indeed, it takes up the entire first half of
the book, but it’s indispensable. Jim
lays down a foundation for thinking carefully not just about the Gospels, but
for all areas of truth.
#4 – Lastly, and most
importantly, Cold-Case Christianity is backed up by a writer who lives what he
writes. Any bias I may have toward
Jim is actually a benefit, not a barrier.
I’ve seen Jim, outside of the limelight.
I’ve been on mission trips where he and I have shared sleeping quarters
with a bunch of foul-smelling high school boys.
I’ve watched Jim go head-to-head with advocates of atheism. And through it all, I’ve seen a man who loves
Christ, loves people, and whose life overflows with integrity.
Thankfully, Jim’s life has also spilled out onto
the pages of CCC, giving the reader a small glimpse of what I’ve observed for
years. It’s only after seeing this man
practice what he preaches that I became a J. Warner Wallace-onian (again see
page 246!). Go buy the book and read it,
and your bias for Jim and his work will grow as well.
Book Review: Cold Case Christianity
Let me put my cards on the table. J. Warner Wallace (Jim to those who know him
personally) is one of my best friends.
For almost 10 years, we’ve been invested in each other’s life. We’ve done ministry together. We’ve served in the local church together. We’ve led student mission trips
together. Our families have spent time
together (my teenage daughter regularly crashes at his house and gets spoiled
by Jim’s wonderful wife, Susie). And now
we’re speaking together, as colleagues at Stand to Reason. Jim is a close friend, partner, and ally.
So yes, as I offer a review of Jim’s book, Cold Case Christianity (CCC), you could
argue that I’m biased. However, if you
dismiss my book review as unreliable on the sole basis of bias, then you need
to read Jim’s book! In chapter 14, he
deals with a similar charge of bias against the disciples. And had you read it already, you’d know bias
does not preclude one from being
reliable, as Jim’s “Mark Hillian” illustration demonstrates (see page 246). So, don't dismiss this review before you
consider the reasons why I think you need to read Jim’s book.
The secular university is a huge mission field. We need smart Christians who will earn their Ph.Ds.
and go on to do high-level apologetic work in a multitude of academic
fields. To this end, I thank God for the
William Lane Craigs, Alvin Plantingas, and J.P. Morelands of the contemporary
apologetics movement. However, this is
just one point of what should be a multi-pronged strategy. Not only do apologists need to make
incursions into the Academy, but we must continue our infiltration of the
church. The average church-goer needs to
be equipped with “the weapons of our warfare” (2 Cor. 10:3-5) in order to fend
off the secularism of our culture, to protect the impressionable hearts and
minds of our children, and to advance the gospel with unbelieving friends and
family. To this end, I thank God for the
Lee Strobels and now, with his writing of CCC, the J. Warner Wallaces of the
contemporary apologetics movement. To
this latter strategy, Jim makes an extraordinary contribution.
In this book, Jim does four key things as he defends the
reliability of Gospels, that will appeal to the non-specialist masses sitting
in our churches:
#1 – Cold Case
Christianity is accessible. If we
don’t make apologetics accessible to the average Christian, we run the risk of
making it seem irrelevant. I’ve talked
to that man or woman with the deer-in-the-headlights look after attending one
of their first apologetics conferences.
I’ve heard their “if-this-is-what-apologetics-is-then-it-isn’t-for-me”
dismissals. Thus the contemporary
apologetics movement is in need of more translators and Jim steps up with this
offering.
No, no, no, he does not put the cookies on bottom
shelf. Hear me carefully; I’m not saying
we need to dumb down things. No, Jim
actually raises the bar—just check out his historical work in chapters 11
through 13—but does so without blowing people out of the water. And because of this, CCC is also a tremendous
tool for Christians to use with their skeptical friends. It’s the kind of book you can confidently
give to an unbeliever, knowing they’re in good hands with Jim.
#2 – Cold Case
Christianity is interesting. As far
as I know, Jim is the only man on the planet who could’ve written this
book. He’s a cold-case homicide
detective and a first-rate
apologist. The combination allows Jim to
weave gripping stories and illustrations into his apologetic. It’s one of the most engaging apologetics
books I’ve ever read. Seriously.
#3 – Cold Case
Christianity teaches the reader how to think, not just what to think. This could be the most valuable aspect of the
book. Jim doesn’t lay out a laundry list
of apologetic pat answers. Using his
training as a detective and experience in the courtroom, Jim teaches the reader
how to think well through the first ten chapters. Yes, ten whole chapters. Indeed, it takes up the entire first half of
the book, but it’s indispensable. Jim
lays down a foundation for thinking carefully not just about the Gospels, but
for all areas of truth.
#4 – Lastly, and most
importantly, Cold Case Christianity is backed up by a writer who lives what he
writes. Any bias I may have toward
Jim is actually a benefit, not a barrier.
I’ve seen Jim, outside of the limelight.
I’ve been on mission trips where he and I have shared sleeping quarters
with a bunch of foul-smelling high school boys.
I’ve watched Jim go head-to-head with advocates of atheism. And through it all, I’ve seen a man who loves
Christ, loves people, and whose life overflows with integrity.
Thankfully, Jim’s life has also spilled out onto
the pages of CCC, giving the reader a small glimpse of what I’ve observed for
years. It’s only after seeing this man
practice what he preaches that I became a J. Warner Wallace-onian (again see
page 246!). Go buy the book and read it,
and your bias for Jim and his work will grow as well.
