Posts Tagged ‘ Truth Quest ’

Truth Quest 2025: Doubt & Deconstruction: How Do I Keep My Faith?

The annual Truth Quest Youth Apologetics Conference in Prescott, AZ, happened again! The theme this year was “Light & Truth”. It was Friday and Saturday, March 28-29, 2025, and I was blessed and able to change it up this year and give a presentation on Doubt & Deconstruction.

The extra blessing this time was my helpful panel for QnA discussion. Abi Marshall from Cornerstone Church and both Noah Ulrich and Freddy Garcia from Quad City Church filled out the panel.

Below are the video, my presentation, and the notes. (As usual, I mostly stuck to notes, but not completely.)

(Oh, and my hat states, “Be Nicene. It’s that simple.” with the chi rho symbol making the “p” in simple. It can be found at the More Than Cake store.)

TQ25 – Workshop: Doubt & Deconstruction: How can I keep my faith?

(Recording from the event by the host: https://youtu.be/BnuptZ6b-IQ?si=wOammWbBKAZG4CED)

My presentation (slides): https://prezi.com/view/QVKTOsS1vJ48wTehlPbg/

Doubt can be scary.

  • Doubt is called the enemy of faith.
    • Jesus said that if we have faith and DO NOT DOUBT, we could command a mountain to be thrown into the sea (Matthew 21:21; Mark 11:23).
    • James said to ask for wisdom without doubting or be like one tossed on the sea, unstable in our thinking (1:5-8).
  • Many preachers and teachers have said to never ask questions, just have faith.
    • Doubt is often associated with fear, and John says there is no fear in love (1 John 4:18).

Yet,

  • Jude said to have mercy on those who doubt (1:22), and even some who followed Jesus after the resurrection had doubts (Matthew 28:17).
  • King David asked where God was (Psalm 22), or the other psalmists who wondered if God was truly helping (ex: Psalms 74, 77, 79, 88), yet they still reached out for God.

What about people who doubted in the Bible?

  • Abraham – Was not sure he could have children in his old age (even trying to make it happen.)
  • Moses – Doubted he could be used by God.
  • Elijah – Doubted he could be kept safe, even after defeating 450 priests of Baal miraculously.
  • Mary?
    • Was not sure how she could have a child without a husband. (Luke 1:34)
    • May have doubted Jesus’ sanity (Mark 3:21)
    • Mary Magdalene – Doubted Jesus’ resurrection
  • John the Baptist – Was imprisoned and had doubts that Jesus was the coming Promised One.
  • Thomas – Doubted Jesus was really resurrected.
  • John Mark – Doubted he could be useful or safe when sharing the gospel (and then wrote the Gospel of Mark).

What is “deconstruction”?

Many if not most who deconstruct their faith begin with doubts.

• Doubts that the Bible is reliable.
• Doubts that Jesus said/did the things in the Bible.
• Doubts about how Christians treat others.

Most of the prominent people who deconstructed said it was usually one of four things:

  • Christians avoiding talking about difficult things, including Bible passages and Christian history;
  • Christians being unscientific or anti-scientific;
  • Christians not loving neighbors through accepting LGBT, other faiths, or immigrants;
  • and pastors, teachers, and others abusing power, making “it all about them,” or spiritually abusing others.

When it comes to defining deconstruction, Alisa Childers and Tim Barnett, in chapter 1 of their book The Deconstruction of Christianity, argue that there is not a clear definition, finding as many as eleven definitions in their research.

Deconstruction broadly can be understood as moving away from historical Christian teachings and often to de-converting, or it can be understood as the process of re-examining the beliefs you grew up with (p. 10).

We should be careful, though, as most who proclaim their deconstruction publicly have fallen away from the faith, but even Alisa Childers explained in her first two books (Another Gospel and Live Your Truth & Other Lies) that she went through a deconstruction due to her pastor (at the time) but came out stronger.

It helps to know that deconstruction has its roots in the teachings of French philosopher Jacques Derrida. He argued that words do not have inherent meanings, so everything should be questioned, especially in literature, philosophy, and political institutions. The only context of words is what we make of them.

This gets applied to religion when we begin to question the meanings of biblical texts and role of the Church. Most people have never heard of Derrida, but they apply his methods when they begin to have doubts about what is true (usually based on how they feel.)

Let’s start with a simple syllogism:

Premise 1: Words do not have inherent meaning.
Premise 2: If no one agrees on the meaning, then I can decide what everything means.
Conclusion: I decide what is right and wrong based on my own definitions.

What is wrong with this argument?

[Why argue there is no meaning to then apply some meaning?]
[If there is no inherent meaning, then nothing is true. Yet people get upset when we define things the way they don’t like.]

The biggest issue is that this thinking uses Christian definitions of right and wrong while claiming there is no absolute right and wrong. Then, it is argued that Christians are those who are wrong based on derived definitions (that may change at any moment), and the Christians should accept the changing definitions as true.

“Let everyone decide what is right for them, and if you don’t then you’re wrong!”

[Judges 21:25b]

If these are all true, then it can be argued that, if God exists, He also changes with society. Or God can be whatever we want Him to be.

This is already seen in our culture.

If there is no absolute truth (a statement that refutes itself by having an absolute), then everyone can do what they want. But if there is absolute truth, then it must be discovered and applied.
If there is no absolute truth, how can anyone apply their truths to others? But if there is absolute truth, then it must be true for everyone.

Therefore, deconstruction is dangerous, because it removes meaning to be filled with whatever makes us feel better. We might use the ideas of some other people, but we don’t have to use the ideas of the original writers, including of the Bible.

“Who cares what the original intent was, this is how I see it.”

What keeps this logic from being turned around on the person deconstructing or transitioning or having some epiphany?
Deconstruction is dangerous because it makes personal circumstances and feelings general reality, feeding personal bias rather than seeking actual truth.

This then leads to falling into several logical fallacies:

  • Hasty generalization: applying to the whole from a small sample.
  • Strawman: claiming Christians believe certain things based on new definitions than the actual definitions historically used.
  • Ad hominem: attacking Christians for being horrible because of how others have acted.
  • Appeal to Authority: claiming authority that is not necessarily recognized, in this case personal experience as a greater authority than thousands of years of teachings and understandings.
  • And many more.
  • And to be fair, it is easy to fall into many fallacies when refuting those who fall away from Christianity.
    • For example, when it is claimed that all who deconstruct fall away (hasty generalization), that those who deconstruct just want to enjoy their sin and cause harm to others (potentially strawman and/or ad hominem), or that we have to believe because the Church has taught this for 2000 years (potentially appeal to authority.)
  • Because of these issues and problems, Childers and Barnett argue for saving deconstruction for those who fall away from the Christian faith.
  • What should I do?
    • Their suggestion is to say Christians go through “Reformation” rather than deconstruction.
    • Doubt is like pain. It is a warning of danger: Watch out for lies!
    • Don’t Lie or Avoid!
      • There is value in Derrida’s and the deconstructed people’s view of examining beliefs and definitions. Words do have meaning, but meanings can and do change. (Consider the word “gay” changing.)
    • Church hurt is real. It should be dealt with.
    • Abuses are real. People in power should be disciplined or removed for abusing power. Those who spiritually, emotionally, or physically abuse others should be removed from power, possibly even sent to prison.
    • Doubts are real. Sometimes from ignorance and sometimes from zeal for God, people avoid discussing certain topics.
  • We must be willing to tackle the hard problems with charity, love, and compassion in a reasonable manner.
  • There are passages that seem problematic, possibly contradicting or inconsistent.
    • To claim they have never been talked about or addressed is either a lie or a sign of laziness in research. The Bible has been attacked for 2000 years, yet it continually withstands the attacks, either because they were weak attacks or refuted.
    • No, the Bible does not support polygamy when it discusses all the men who married multiple women. It does not support chattel slavery (like seen in the colonies and nation of America in the 1600-1800s), as stealing people and treating them like animals or worse is specifically condemned.
  • There are words that change meanings, but intent in meaning matters.
    • It’s true that the word “homosexuality” was invented in Germany in the 1860s and not put into an English translation of the Bible until the Revised Standard Version of 1946 used it in 1 Corinthians 6:9. Yet, the original meaning of both “homosexual” and “arsenokoitai” (the Greek term Paul wrote) is the same.
    • It’s true that the King James Bible and others mention unicorns and dragons, words that mean “animals with one horn” and “scaly lizards” in a general sense. (The original 1828 Webster’s Dictionary even saying “unicorn” often refers to a rhinoceros, and consider the Komodo dragon also known as the monitor lizard.)
  • The Bible was not compiled at Nicaea and then translated and retranslated over and over throughout the centuries.
    • The Council of Nicaea primarily was to resolve the Arianism debate and set a standard date for Easter (not a pagan holiday) amongst some other items. We have manuscripts going back to the 2nd Century for the New Testament (possibly the 1st Century, but either way within 100 years of the writers) and before the time of Christ for the Old Testament (showing they were written before His life on Earth) that show the same texts as manuscript copies from the past 1000 years. Nearly all the changes are minor spelling differences or word order, nothing affecting doctrine. Modern translations look at all available manuscripts (families) to be as close to the original as possible. Translations also deal with language drift and changes. (“Nice” originally meant something quite opposite to today.)
  • People have done horrible things in the name of God and the Church.
    • This can be a reason for doubts, but if it is the only reason that is foolish. People have done horrible things for all sorts of reasons. We don’t avoid all restaurants for some bad service at one restaurant. We don’t avoid YouTube or TikTok because of some bad videos people made. Remember, atheists have done horrible things, people in other religions have done horrible things. We should focus on what the founder of Christianity called for (no, it was not Paul). If we can love the teachings but not the followers, then actually look at the teachings.

Our response should always be the same:
No one can have 100% assurance of anything in this life (at least from a scientific point of view.)
It’s okay to say, “I don’t know” or “Let me look into that.”
Have mercy on those who doubt (Jude 1:22). Love others and listen to them (Lev. 19:18; Matt. 22:39; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27; Romans 13:9; Galatians 5:14; James 1:19-20 & 2:8). Be honest (Luke 8:15). Seek truth (John 4:23) not “my truth” (Romans 2:8).

Bibliography:

  • Childers, Alisa and Tim Barnett. The Deconstruction of Christianity: What it is, why it’s destructive, and how to respond. Carol Stream: Tyndale House, 2023.
  • Lawlor, Leonard, “Jacques Derrida”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2023 Edition), Edward N. Zalta & Uri Nodelman (eds.), accessed March 7, 2025, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/derrida/
  • WebstersDictionary1828.com, s.v. “unicorn,” accessed March 7, 2025, https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/unicorn.

Truth Quest 2024: GOD 101 – Does God Exist?

The annual Truth Quest Youth Apologetics Conference in Prescott, AZ, happened again! The theme this year was “Truth & Freedom”. It was Friday and Saturday, April 12-13, 2024, and I was blessed and able to once again give the presentation “Does God Exist?”

I came in exhausted, so if I stumble through some parts, know that. The extra blessing this time was the addition of a panel for QnA discussion. Pastor Matt Kottman of our hosting church, Solid Rock Christian Fellowship, was our panel host. NextGen Pastor Titus Vester of Willow Hills Baptist was our fellow panelist.

Below are the video, my presentation, and the notes. (As usual, I mostly stuck to notes, but not completely.)

(Oh, and my shirt states, “If at first you don’t succeed, try doing what your math teacher taught you the first time.”)

TQ24 – Workshop: GOD 101 – Does God Exist?

https://prezi.com/p/embed/xg36AAmJNpb0JOEHOVSX/

“God does not exist.”
• From etymology.com: from Latin – existere/exsistere = “to step out, stand forth, emerge appear”
o Therefore, God does not exist
• Just Kidding! It also means “to be”, and as we know God simply is.
o Exodus 3:14: “I AM WHO I AM” or simply “I Am”
 Not “I was” or “I will be” or “I can be” – God eternally is.
Can we know anything?
Do we fall into the fallacies of infinite regress, that “there are turtles all the way down?”
Perhaps we fall into circular reasoning. “We know this because of that, and that’s true because of this.”
Infinite regress looks like asking, “If God created everything, then who created God?” Or “everything came from something before it.”
Evolutionary theorists do these often, such as saying we know the age of rock layers because of the fossils we find, and we know the age of the fossils because of the rock layers they’re in.
Ultimately, all arguments resort to circular reasoning, meaning it’s not necessarily a fallacy. However, with God the argument is that He is the uncaused first cause.
But can we believe in God?
What is faith?
Blind faith – believing without evidence.
True faith – belief in action based on evidence.

What is evidence?

Merriam-Webster: (all text original)
“1a: an outward sign : INDICATION; b: something that furnishes proof : TESTIMONY; specifically : something legally submitted to a tribunal to ascertain the truth of a matter
2: one who bears witness; especially : one who voluntarily confesses a crime and testifies for the prosecution against one’s accomplices”
Should be: Testable, Observable, and/or Confirmable
o What is Gravity? How does it work? [Play video] , but it is a Law of Nature
 “However, if we are to be honest, we do not know what gravity “is” in any fundamental way – we only know how it behaves. Gravity is a force of attraction that exists between any two masses, any two bodies, any two particles. Gravity is not just the attraction between objects and the Earth”
(NASA.gov – Retrieved February 28, 2023 from https://starchild.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/StarChild/questions/question30.html#:~:text=However%2C%20if%20we%20are%20to,only%20know%20how%20it%20behaves.&text=Gravity%20is%20a%20force%20of,between%20objects%20and%20the%20Earth.)
 No one really understands how a bicycle stays upright even without a rider [minutephysics video – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZAc5t2lkvo%5D

NASA helps us see that no one really understands gravity.
Evidence of this is that no one really understands why the physics work that makes a bicycle stay upright, even without a rider.
Can we scientifically measure … science?
Science comes from the Latin for knowledge, and it is a PROCESS for evaluating evidence.
“Christianity does not profess to convince the perverse and headstrong, to bring irresistible evidence to the daring and profane, to vanquish the proud scorner, and afford evidences from which the careless and perverse cannot possibly escape. This might go to destroy man’s responsibility. All that Christianity professes, is to propose such evidences as may satisfy the meek, the tractable, the candid, the serious inquirer.”  Bishop Wilson, Evidences of Christianity, 1.38.
“Christians do not claim that their faith gives them omniscience or absolute knowledge of reality. Only God has that. But they believe that the Christian account of things – creation, fall, redemption, and restoration – makes the most sense in the world.”  Timothy Keller, The Reason for God, p. 127

Evidence

Naturalism vs. Theism
• Naturalism believes that nature is the only thing that has creative properties so they reject any creative force outside the box (the universe).
• “That is, science is assumed to be, not only rational and causal and unified, but also naturalistic, banning by definition even the possibility of a supernatural First Cause of the rationality, causality, and unity of the universe with which science deals. But such an assumption is purely arbitrary (even emotional, as Isaac Asimov had admitted) and was certainly not held by the great scientists of the past, nor is it indicated by any actual scientific data.” (Dr. Henry M. Morris, The Biblical Basis for Modern Science, p.23)
BIAS
Let’s remember that we all have the same evidences, but we bring our own biases.
It is closed minded and unscientific to only believe in the material.
We all have bias in our approach of discovery but which is the greater bias, naturalism or theism?
“The current bias of science arbitrarily eliminates certain answers before the game gets started. Many scientists and historians must come up with conclusions that leave the supernatural out of the picture because their philosophy demands it. A theist is not so encumbered. She believes in the laws of nature, but is also open to the possibility of supernatural intervention. Both are consistent with her worldview. She can judge the evidence on its own merits, unhindered by a philosophy that automatically eliminates supernatural options before the evidence receives a hearing. Ironically, Christians bias broadens her categories making her more open-minded, not less. She has a greater chance of discovering truth because she can follow the evidence wherever it leads.”
-Greg Koukl, Tactics, p.174-175
“For me it is more reasonable to believe, based on the laws of logic as well as the observable scientific evidence that God exists, rather than to believe what the atheist believes that nothing, times nobody, equals everything we see in the universe.”
-Charlie Campbell, http://www.alwaysbeready.com/component/content/article?id=137
Isn’t it interesting that the first “scientists” were all theologians or Christians in their respective disciplines?
Why? Romans 1:20 …
This is called “General Revelation.”

The Cosmos

“Cosmogony is the study of ideas about the origin of the cosmos. The term is closely related to cosmology, which is the study of the cosmos in all its aspects.”
-Dr. Henry M. Morris, The Biblical Basis for Modern Science, p.119
What is the cosmos?
“The cosmos, in simplest terms, is the space-mass-time universe and all its arrays of complex systems…God created the heavens (i.e., ‘space’) and the earth (i.e., ‘matter’) in the beginning (i.e., ‘time’).”
-Dr. Henry M. Morris, The Biblical Basis for Modern Science, p 119

Kalam Cosmological
In 1979, Christian philosopher William Lane Craig published his research on the Kalam Cosmological Argument, reduced to a simple syllogism (“1. This is a truth, 2. This is a fact about something, therefore 3. This fact is true.):
1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.
Taken a few steps further, here are other arguments he has posited:
1. Something exists.
2. Nothing does not produce something.
3. Something must have always existed, leaving two options: either the universe or something outside of the universe.
4. If the universe were infinite, we could never arrive at “Today” because time would never truly advance. Math would fail. For time to work, a beginning is necessary. Entropy helps prove this, as all things break down over time. (Time is not an illusion, it is merely affected by other things, such as speed and energy … and gravity.) Thus, the universe must have had a beginning with a cause.
5. If the universe has a cause, then an uncaused, personal Creator of the universe exists who sans (without) the universe is beginningless, changeless, immaterial, timeless, spaceless, and enormously powerful, because an effect cannot be greater than its cause.
6. Therefore, an uncaused, personal Creator of the universe exists, who sans the universe is beginningless, changeless, immaterial, timeless, spaceless, and enormously powerful.
“The most basic scientific principle, and the criterion that governs all human experience, is the law of causality. This law states that although one cause can have many effects, no effect can be either quantitatively greater than or qualitatively superior to it’s cause. An effect can never be greater and, in fact, will always be less-than it’s cause. Thus a chain of effects and their cause must eventually trace to an essentially infinite first cause.”
-Henry Morris, The Biblical Basis for Modern Science
We all know that nothing happens in isolation. When we try to trace an event to it’s cause, or causes, we find that we never seem to reach a stopping point. The cause of an event itself caused by a prior cause, and so on back. Eventually we must face the question of a possible uncaused First Cause.
The universe itself is evidence.
Why?

Fine-Tuned Universe
• Fine-Tuning of the Universe
o [Fine-Tuning of the Universe video by Reasonable Faith]
 Some even suggest we may live in a simulation … which means … created …
 So, we have a universe that has a definitive beginning. (Even if arguments are being made saying otherwise.)
 It is so finely tuned that a severely minor change would mean at best no life and at worst no universe.
 And Christians get made fun of for discussing “elephants all the way down” (which is what a multiverse is) or something outside of the physical universe (showing they have faith in Science and human potential.)

DNA

There is so much complexity and fine-tuning in a universe with a beginning, and it includes biology.
We could discuss all of the amazingly complex parts of biology that seem to be irreducibly complex, including the eye, of which Darwin himself was terrified to consider the complexity.
“Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose.”
-Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker
“Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed, but rather evolved.”
-Francis Crick, cited in William Dembski, Science and Design
However, today we will focus on one element of biology in particular that ties to the very evidence scientists search for when they search for life in the universe: information …
• Biology is an expression of information, i.e. DNA, and information only comes from a mind.
• DNA – The code of life – Is it all a happy accident?
o Francis Crick, one of the two scientists who discovered DNA, having observed the complexity of DNA, estimated that the odds that intelligent life exists on the Earth as the result of non-directed processes to be around … 1:102,000,000,000 (That’s one with ten to the two billionth power.) – [Cited in Gary Habermas and Mike Licona, The Case for the Resurrection, 2004, p. 179]
o 01000111 01001111 01000100 00100000 01100101 01111000 01101001 01110011 01110100 01110011
 This is binary, a code of just 2 characters, but DNA is made up of 4 characters that tell every living cell how to build itself, grow, and reproduce.
 This binary  “GOD exists”
The universe and life itself proclaims a Creator exists.

Jesus!

The ultimate proof of God is the death and resurrection of Jesus: He presented His physical body to His disciples.
• Naturalism or Intelligent Design: both require faith because both cannot observe the past, but what is more probable? What is the most likely, reasonable reality?
• Think 4th Dimensionally:
o Hearing from an atheist …
 What is the supernatural?
• “But we need more than naturalistic sciences. We cannot derive meaning, human value, and equality from a laboratory.” -Abdu Murray, Saving Truth, p. 173D
 Is there something outside of space and time?
• The more we understand the cosmos the bigger and the more intricate the design is observed. We have to conclude that there is a God that is incredibly detailed, unfathomably large, and surpassing beautiful.
 What would a higher being be like?
• [Flatlanders video by Carl Sagan from Cosmos]
• It is perfectly reasonable to believe in a more than probable God who exists outside of space-time.
• “For me it is more reasonable to believe, based on the laws of logic as well as the observable scientific evidence that God exists, rather than to believe what the atheist believes that nothing, times nobody, equals everything we see in the universe.” -Charlie Campbell, http://www.alwaysbeready.com/component/content/article?id=137
• The Ultimate Proof: Jesus presented Himself as God and proved it!
o The Hebrew Bible (what we call the Old Testament) made over 100 distinct prophecies about One who would come to save all people from sin.
o Jesus of Nazareth was born the way prophesied, lived a life performing miracles and pointing people to God, and then He said He would be killed and raised to life again.
o And Jesus did that. Evidence? John 20:19-20, 24-29
o 1 Corinthians 15:17-24
Why?
Did God need to create anything, especially us?
No. Acts 17:24-25 – God is a free Being who has no need for anything.
Did He have to save us? Did He have to become a human and die?
No. He could have just destroyed us in our sin, but He was free to choose to save us out of His love for us. (Consider Genesis 6:5-7 [destroying the world by flood]; Exodus 32:9-10 and Deuteronomy 9:13-14 [wanting to destroy Israel for the golden calf])
Because of His freedom to choose us, if we choose to follow God, we become free from sin and shame, and one day all of creation will be free from corruption. Romans 8; 2 Corinthians 3:17; Galatians 5:1,13

Call to Prayer: Truth Quest 2024

Tonight and tomorrow (April 12-13) is the Truth Quest Youth Apologetics Conference in Prescott, AZ.

We have about 250 youth present.

Please pray all of us speakers speak well the words of truth, and may all find freedom in Christ!

Does God Exist? (Presentation at Truth Quest Youth Apologetics Conference Prescott 2023)

The second weekend of April, 2022, many of the youth pastors and leaders of the Prescott, AZ area came together to hold a youth apologetics conference. It was a lot of fun, and very impactful for everyone there. I spoke on the existence of God, but I did not have a good recording and felt it could have been better.

For 2023, Truth Quest took place on the evening of Friday, March 24 and all day Saturday, March 25, and the theme this year was “Truth & Unity”.

I was one of the workshop speakers. Here is my presentation, both video of my presentation and my less-than-rough notes (though I still went off script a few times. I borrowed quite a bit from the original presentation Ryan Lynn made, but I made my own adaptations and additions, especially to include the unity we are called to in Christ because of the unity found in the Trinity.

Presentation slideshow to follow along and see totally excellent graphics and videos: https://prezi.com/view/AID95OCLDgDzS6cPVDQe/

Notes to follow along with the words:

Truth & Unity: Does God Exist?

“God does not exist.”

  • From etymology.com: from Latin – existere/exsistere = “to step out, stand forth, emerge appear”
    • Therefore, God does not exist
  • Just Kidding! It also means “to be”, and as we know God simply is.
    • Exodus 3:14: “I AM WHO I AM” or simply “I Am”
      • Not “I was” or “I will be” or “I can be” – God eternally is.

Proving God – Approaching Evidence

  • “You can’t prove God exists!”
    • “Your own God said He hides Himself, that He wants you to have blind faith!”
      • Yes, God hides Himself from sin and disobedience (Isaiah 45:15, 59:2; Deuteronomy 31-32; many others).
      • He never calls us to blind faith (Isaiah 1:18; Matthew 11:4-6; 1 Corinthians 15:1-10; Hebrews 11:1; 2 Peter 1:16-18)
  • We should only believe the evidence, right? Is it:
    • Reliable?
      • Can we trust the evidence?
    • Consistent?
      • Does it line up with reality and other evidences?
    • Unbiased?
      • What presuppositions are attached?
      • All worldviews, including atheistic naturalism, use both faith and reason.
  • For example:
    How does gravity work? No one really knows, but it is a Law of Nature
    “However, if we are to be honest, we do not know what gravity “is” in any fundamental way – we only know how it behaves. Gravity is a force of attraction that exists between any two masses, any two bodies, any two particles. Gravity is not just the attraction between objects and the Earth” (NASA.gov – Retrieved February 28, 2023 from https://starchild.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/StarChild/questions/question30.html#:~:text=However%2C%20if%20we%20are%20to,only%20know%20how%20it%20behaves.&text=Gravity%20is%20a%20force%20of,between%20objects%20and%20the%20Earth.)
    No one really understands how a bicycle stays upright even without a rider [minutephysics video – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZAc5t2lkvo%5D
    • Can we scientifically measure … science?
      • Science is a method used to study the physical realm, yet it is trusted by most people to find answers.
      • Many have come to say that we can only know things by science, a tool we can’t physically verify.
      • Thus, logic itself is unscientific while being used in science, but that is not a proof we are looking at today.
  • We must remember that no amount of evidence or argumentation can convert people:
    • “Christianity does not profess to convince the perverse and headstrong, to bring irresistible evidence to the daring and profane, to vanquish the proud scorner, and afford evidences from which the careless and perverse cannot possibly escape. This might go to destroy man’s responsibility. All that Christianity professes, is to propose such evidences as may satisfy the meek, the tractable, the candid, the serious inquirer.”  (Bishop Wilson, Evidences of Christianity, 1.38.)
    • “Christians do not claim that their faith gives them omniscience or absolute knowledge of reality. Only God has that. But they believe that the Christian account of things – creation, fall, redemption, and restoration – makes the most sense in the world.”           (Timothy Keller, The Reason for God, p. 127)

What Evidence?

  • The Box
    • Naturalism
      • Naturalism believes that nature is the only thing that has creative properties so
        they reject any creative force outside the box (the universe).
    • Theism
      • “That is, science is assumed to be, not only rational and causal and unified, but also naturalistic, banning by definition even the possibility of a supernatural First Cause of the rationality, causality, and unity of the universe with which science deals. But such an assumption is purely arbitrary (even emotional, as Isaac Asimov had admitted) and was certainly not held by the great scientists of the past, nor is it indicated by any actual scientific data.” Dr. Henry M. Morris, The Biblical Basis for Modern Science, p.23
  • Consider that virtually all of the first scientists were Christians wanting to know more about God and His Creation.
  • Bias: It is closed minded and unscientific to only believe in the material. We all have bias in our approach of discovery but which is the greater bias, naturalism or theism?
    • “The current bias of science arbitrarily eliminates certain answers before the game gets started. Many scientists and historians must come up with conclusions that leave the supernatural out of the picture because their philosophy demands it. A theist is not so encumbered. She believes in the laws of nature, but is also open to the possibility of supernatural intervention. Both are consistent with her worldview. She can judge the evidence on its own merits, unhindered by a philosophy that automatically eliminates supernatural options before the evidence receives a hearing. Ironically, Christians bias broadens her categories making her more open-minded, not less. She has a greater chance of discovering truth because she can follow the evidence wherever it leads.” Greg Koukl, Tactics, p.174-175
    • “For me it is more reasonable to believe, based on the laws of logic as well as the observable scientific evidence that God exists, rather than to believe what the atheist believes that nothing, times nobody, equals everything we see in the universe.” -Charlie Campbell, http://www.alwaysbeready.com/component/content/article?id=137
    • Romans 1:20
      • This is called General Revelation
      • We see the beauty of built things:
        • “Did a tornado blow through a junkyard and manage to build the Eiffel Tower? A thunderstorm shaped a mountain to have faces? That’s absurd.”
        • “But we believe a beautiful sunset, a spinning galaxy, or strands of DNA ‘just happened’?”
        • What is the evidence of a God?
      • We will look at three clues:
        • Cosmogony/Cosmology with …
        • Physics – Fine-tuning
        • Biology – Biological information
      • [“No Evidence for God” Debunked video]

“Fine Bodies Show God”

Fine – A finite, finely-tuned universe

  • Kalam Cosmological Argument
    • 1. Everything that exists has a cause2. The universe began to exist3. Therefore, the universe has a cause
      • The Universe Is Evidence That God Exists
        • 1. Something exists.2. Nothing does not produce something.3. Something must have always existed.
          • Now, there are only two options as to what that “something (No.3) [that] always existed” might be:
            • A. The universe, or B. Something outside the universe
          4. The universe has not always existed.
          • The Motion of the Galaxies and The Second Law of Thermodynamics
          5. There must be an eternal power beyond the universe that caused the universe to come into existence.
      We all know that nothing happens in isolation. When we try to trace an event to its cause, or causes, we find that we never seem to reach a stopping point. The cause of an event itself is caused by a prior cause, and so on back. Eventually we must face the question of a possible uncaused First Cause.
    • Why? As Dr. Henry Morris explained in The Biblical Basis for Modern Science:
      • An effect cannot be greater than it’s cause.
      • What does a First uncaused cause have to look like?
        • The first cause of limitless space must be infinite.
        • The first cause of endless time must be eternal.
        • The first cause of boundless energy must be eternal.
        • The first cause of infinite complexity must be omniscient.
        • The first cause of love must be all loving.
        • The first cause of life must be living.
  • Fine-Tuning of the Universe
    • [Fine-Tuning of the Universe video by Reasonable Faith]
      • Some even suggest we may live in a simulation … which means … created …
        • So, we have a universe that has a definitive beginning. (Even if arguments are being made saying otherwise.)
          • It is so finely tuned that a severely minor change would mean at best no life and at worst no universe.
          • And Christians get made fun of for discussing “elephants all the way down” (which is what a multiverse is) or something outside of the physical universe (showing they have faith in Science and human potential.)

Bodies – Biology is an expression of information, i.e. DNA, and information only comes from a mind.

  • Creation is getting so loud that we have to cover our ears and close our eyes to not see what is plain before us.
    • “Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose.” -Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker
    • “Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed, but rather evolved.” -Francis Crick, cited in William Dembski, Science and Design
    • Could you imagine if the CSI came on the scene and said “It looks like arson but we cannot accept that.”
  • The eye is a ball with [Adapted from Hank Hanegraaff, Fatal Flaws, 2003, p. 43 and Geoffrey Simmons, What Darwin Didn’t Know, p. 283]:
    • a lens on one side
    • a light sensitive retina made up of rods and cones inside the other
    • The lens itself has a sturdy protective covering called a cornea
    • and sits over an iris designed to protect the eye from excessive light
    • The eye contains an amazing watery substance that is replaced every four hours
    • Tear glands continuously flush the outside clean
    • Tears bring oxygen to the cornea, carry chemicals that kill bacteria and proteins to coat the eyes, wash the eyes, and move debris toward a lower drain, or lacrimal duct 7
    • An eyelid sweeps secretions over the cornea to keep it moist
    • Eyelashes protect it from dust
    • And extraordinarily fine tuned muscles are attached to the eye that move the eye and shape the lens for the function of focus.
      • It’s all about perspective. The evolutionist has to assume that it is not designed because their bias does not allow for a designer
      • In his famous book, On The Origin of Species (1859), Charles Darwin said, “To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable [matchless] contrivances [plans] for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree.” [p. 217]
      • “Now I will just run through some points in your letter. What you say about my book gratifies me most deeply, and I wish I could feel all was deserved by me. I quite think a review from a man, who is not an entire convert, if fair and moderately favourable, is in all respects the best kind of review. About the weak points I agree. The eye to this day gives me a cold shudder, but when I think of the fine known gradations, my reason tells me I ought to conquer the cold shudder.” -Francis Darwin, ed., The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, Vol. II (New York: D. Appleton and Co., 1899), p. 67.
  • DNA – The code of life – Is it all a happy accident?
    • Francis Crick, one of the two scientists who discovered DNA, having observed the complexity of DNA, estimated that the odds that intelligent life exists on the Earth as the result of non-directed processes to be around … 1:102,000,000,000 (That’s one with ten to the two billionth power.) – [Cited in Gary Habermas and Mike Licona, The Case for the Resurrection, 2004, p. 179]
      • 01000111 01001111 01000100 00100000 01100101 01111000 01101001 01110011 01110100 01110011   è “GOD exists”

Show – The ultimate proof of God is the death and resurrection of Jesus: He presented His physical body to His disciples.

  • Naturalism or Intelligent Design: both require faith because both cannot observe the past, but what is more probable? What is the most likely, reasonable reality?
  • Think 4th Dimensionally:
    • Hearing from an atheist …
      • What is the supernatural?
        • “But we need more than naturalistic sciences. We cannot derive meaning, human value, and equality from a laboratory.” -Abdu Murray, Saving Truth, p. 173D
      • Is there something outside of space and time?
        • The more we understand the cosmos the bigger and the more intricate the design is observed. We have to conclude that there is a God that is incredibly detailed, unfathomably large, and surpassing beautiful.
      • What would a higher being be like?
        • [Flatlanders video by Carl Sagan from Cosmos]
        • It is perfectly reasonable to believe in a more than probable God.
  • “For me it is more reasonable to believe, based on the laws of logic as well as the observable scientific evidence that God exists, rather than to believe what the atheist believes that nothing, times nobody, equals everything we see in the universe.” -Charlie Campbell, http://www.alwaysbeready.com/component/content/article?id=137
  • The Ultimate Proof: Jesus presented Himself as God and proved it!
    • The Hebrew Bible (what we call the Old Testament) made over 100 distinct prophecies about One who would come to save all people from sin.
    • Jesus of Nazareth was born the way prophesied, lived a life performing miracles and pointing people to God, and then He said He would be killed and raised to life again.
    • And Jesus did that. Evidence? John 20:19-20, 24-29
    • 1 Corinthians 15:17-19

God – God not only is, but He has been in community and unity for eternity.

  • There is enough evidence that God exists that is reliable and consistent, if we are willing to question our biases.
  • And this God has shown He has eternally been in community: unity with others, even though there is only one God:
    • Isaiah 48:16 and 61:1 (God is talking here)
    • Matthew 3:16-17; Mark 1:10-11; Luke 3:21-22
    • Matthew 28:19
    • 2 Corinthians 13:14
  • Community in Unity: The Trinity
    • Father
      • John 6:27; Romans 1:7; 1 Peter 1:2
    • Son
      • John 1:1,14; Romans 9:5; 1 John 5:20
    • Holy Spirit
      • Acts 5:3-4; 1 Corinthians 6:19; Ephesians 4:4-6
  • God exists. God is love (1 John 4:7-16) and invites us into His eternal unity through Jesus Christ.
  • John 17:20-21

Video sources:

Truth Quest Youth Apologetics Conference Prescott – Truth & Unity – March 24-25, 2023

This weekend, I am with my youth group joining several other youth groups for the Truth Quest Apologetics Conference.

Please pray for these students and churches. In a world of division and hatred, we are teaching about the unity we have in the Truth of Christ.

(And I plan on uploading my presentation here, too)

For more info, TruthQuestPrescott.org is the website.

John 17:20-21

Daniel