God's Not Dead - the film has me pondering

Page 1 of 3 (45 items) 1 2 3 Next >
This post has 44 Replies | 0 Followers

Posts 1753
JoshInRI | Forum Activity | Posted: Sat, Apr 11 2015 7:23 PM

I enjoyed the movie as entertainment tonight at my stepson's church but struggled with how ill prepared the student was left in the film (as heroic in his attempt to honor God as he was and how miraculously "Hollywood" equipped the student was with fancy videos, etc) and how all of a sudden so many (based upon the teacher's rationale for distrusting God) suddenly changed their minds in the film.  I kept placing myself in the student's place and wondering if I would trust God to equip me as He seemed to.

I am not trying to stir up controversy here or discuss the film's merits (it tried to cover a lot and telescoped quite a bit too) but wondered - what Logos applet or book would you pull up or out if you were the student in this film and felt led to obey and honor God in the "pulpit" in front of your peers for 3 sessions as he did?

Could we rely upon Logos to assist us in reasoning with others and show God is not dead as the film proposed?

I know and believe the answer is yes - but ask you to join me in listing simple easy to pull up resources for where you might go to give a reason for your/our faith?

I would bring a few books or sections of books from

Paul Copan https://www.logos.com/product/27359/paul-copan-apologetics-collection and

Ray Comfort

https://www.logos.com/product/20498/scientific-facts-in-the-bible-100-reasons-to-believe-the-bible-is-supernatural-in-origin 

https://www.logos.com/product/10172/ray-comfort-collection 

for starters.

What would you all suggest as more concise more accessible and more reasonable/convincing please?

Its ok if you have not seen the film....if you have to defend your faith - what Logos resources (and yes Bible quotes) would you want at your fingertips if you could have them in a class of your peers and most of them initially doubting Thomas?

ps. yes I know Thomas demonstrated great faith more than once.  Consider this secondary ? - if a student came to you and said "Can you help me defend my faith?" how would or could we all use Logos to assist him/her please?  Was anyone else concerned when the Pastor in the church quoted Scripture but didn't seem to follow up with the student who clearly needed help in forming reasonable arguments against a biased atheist teacher?  I know the Pastor has his own sidestory and merit in the overall film but I wanted to stand up and say to that screen - "Help that boy will ya Pastor?...don't let him walk away discouraged with just a couple of easily memorized by you Scriptures...at least offer to pray for him the precise moment he was stepping in front of his classmates or offer to go there!"

By the way, Newsboy Michael Tate and the others in the band, if you read this, I am glad you were used of God in the film to reach that poor girl with cancer in the story.....you were not just portrayed as rock stars singing songs....you were/are true believers...Glory to God...Jesus Lead On!"

Posts 108
William M. Harper | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Apr 11 2015 7:47 PM

I would recommend some of Dr. Robert A. Morey's books, especially this one: https://www.logos.com/product/10532/the-new-atheism-and-the-erosion-of-freedom. Logos offers several other resources on " the New Atheism " as well. If you do a search on that topic on the Logos website you will find a good selection. 

Posts 525
Kent | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Apr 11 2015 7:55 PM

Has not been updated in a while and Logos has added much but look here, New Bundle

Posts 10817
Forum MVP
Jack Caviness | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 12 2015 4:46 AM

JoshInRI:
What would you all suggest as more concise more accessible and more reasonable/convincing please?

I would look to Norman Geisler. Apologetics is his area of expertise. He is not always an easy read like Comfort, but I have more confidence in Geisler.

I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist

When Critics Ask

Posts 60
Alan | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 12 2015 5:02 AM

Reasonable Faith by William Lane Craig.

https://www.logos.com/product/2844/reasonable-faith-christian-truth-and-apologetics

would be my number one choice.

Posts 4134
abondservant | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 12 2015 5:21 AM

Craig was a friend of one of my professors while I was an undergraduate, and I was blessed to be able to go out for breakfast with the man (and the rest of my class) a couple times.

He IS a molinist. But, he does a good job of picking his opponents apart.

L2 lvl4 (...) WORDsearch, L9

Posts 1602
Deacon Steve | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 12 2015 6:34 AM

Sorry, not necessarily concise or simplified for a high school student unless they are really into science, but very helpful for those that teach them.  Robert Spitzer's resource is about as up-to-date and compelling as you can find.  You would need to do some work to make it accessible to them.  Spitzer has a high school curriculum, videos included on the whole subject but not in Logos.  This is my go-to resource when the science "zealots" start trumpeting around.

https://www.logos.com/product/50121/new-proofs-for-the-existence-of-god-contributions-of-contemporary-physics-and-philosophy

The preview on the product page has been truncated severely so I have pasted the TOC here.

Contents

Acknowledgments

Introduction

       I.   The Contemporary Theistic Scene

     II.   Why Are These Proofs New? A Brief History of the Five Approaches

    III.   The Rest of the Book

part one

Indications of Creation and Supernatural Design in Contemporary Big Bang Cosmology

Introduction to Part One

Chapter One: Indications of Creation in Big Bang Cosmology

Introduction

       I.   The Big Bang Theory

     II.   Can Science Indicate Creation?

    III.   Arguments for a Beginning of the Universe in Big Bang Cosmology

           III.A.   The Second Law of Thermodynamics

          III.B.   Why a Bouncing Universe Cannot Have Been Bouncing Forever

          III.C.   Space-Time Geometry Arguments for a Beginning of Time

          III.D.   Quantum Cosmology

          III.E.   The Borde-Vilenkin-Guth Theorem’s Boundary to Past Time

    IV.   Conclusion

     V.   Metaphysical Implications

Chapter Two: Indications of Supernatural Design in Contemporary Big Bang Cosmology

Introduction

       I.   Universal Constants

          I.A.      Constants of Space and Time

          I.B.      Energy Constants

          I.C.      Individuating Constants

          I.D.      Large-Scale and Fine-Structure Constants

     II.   The Extreme Improbability of Our Anthropic Universe

    III.   Many Universes or Supernatural Design?

Conclusion to Part One

Postscript to Part One: Inflationary Cosmology and the String Multiverse, by Bruce L. Gordon, Ph.D.

Introduction

       I.   All Inflationary Cosmologies Must Have a Beginning and a Transcendent Cause

          I.A.      String Cosmologies Entail a Beginning and a Transcendent Cause

          I.A.1.   A Primer on String Theory

          I.A.2.   Steinhardt-Turok Cyclic Ekpyrotic Universes Require a Beginning and a Transcendent Cause

          I.A.3.   Gasperini-Veneziano Pre-Big-Bang Scenarios Require a Beginning and a Transcendent Cause

          I.B.      Deflationary Intermezzo for Strings

     II.   A Preliminary Assessment of Inflationary Cosmology

    III.   All Inflationary and Non-Inflationary Cosmologies Appear to Require a Beginning and Transcendent Cause

    IV.   Inflation and Cosmological Fine-Tuning

     V.   Fine-Tuning and String Cosmology

    VI.   Conclusion

part two

Three Philosophical Proofs for the Existence of God

Introduction to Part Two: Methodological Presuppositions of Philosophical Proof: Reasonable and Responsible Belief

Chapter Three: A Metaphysical Argument for God’s Existence

Introduction

       I.   Step One: Proof of the Existence of at Least One Unconditioned Reality

          I.A.      Complete Disjunction Elucidating the Whole Range of Possibilities for All Reality

          I.A.1.   Definitions

          I.A.2.   Consequences of the Complete Disjunction

          I.B.      Proof That “Hypothesis F” Must Be False for Any Conditioned Reality

          I.C.      Proof That “Hypothesis ~F” Must Be False for Any Conditioned Reality

          I.D.      Proof That a Circular Set of Conditions Is False for Any Conditioned Reality

          I.E.      Conclusion: There Must Exist at Least One Unconditioned Reality in All Reality

          I.F.      Another Refutation of Hypothesis ~UR

     II.   Step Two: Proof That Unconditioned Reality Itself Is the Simplest Possible Reality

          II.A.    The Principle of Simplicity

          II.B.    Unconditioned Reality Itself Must Be the Simplest Possible Reality

    III.   Step Three: Proof of the Absolute Uniqueness of Unconditioned Reality Itself

    IV.   Step Four: Proof That Unconditioned Reality Itself Is Unrestricted

     V.   Step Five: Proof That the One Unconditioned Reality Is the Continuous Creator of All Else That Is

          V.A.    The Unique, Absolutely Simple, Unrestricted, Unconditioned Reality Itself Is the Creator of All Else That Is

          V.B.    The Creator Must Continuously Create All Else That Is Real

Conclusion

Chapter Four: A Lonerganian Proof for God’s Existence

Introduction

       I.   Definitions of “Understanding” and “Intelligibility”

     II.   Proof of the Existence of God

          II.A.    There Must Be at Least One Unconditioned Reality

          II.B.    An Unconditioned Reality Must Be Unrestricted Intelligibility

          II.C.    Unrestricted Intelligibility Must Be Unique—One and Only One

          II.D.    Unique, Unrestricted Intelligibility Must Be an Unrestricted Act of Understanding—Understanding Itself

          II.E.     All Other Intelligibility Besides the One Unrestricted Act of Understanding Must Be Restricted and Be a Thought Content of the One Unrestricted Act of Understanding

          II.F.     Conclusion to the Proof

    III.   The Mystery of Human Understanding: The Notion of Being

Chapter Five: Proof of a Creator of Past Time

Introduction

       I.   An Analytical Contradiction

     II.   An Ontological Explanation of Real Time

          II.A.    Description, Scientific Explanation, and Ontological Explanation

          II.B.    An Ontological Explanation of Space

          II.C.    Real Time

          II.C.1. Existential Non-Coincidence

          II.C.2. Real Time as a Non-Contemporaneous Distensive Manifold

          II.C.3. Time as the Limiting Condition of Existence

          II.C.4. The Succession of Time and the Asymmetry of Events

          II.C.5. Manifestations of Real Time

    III.   Hilbert’s Prohibition of Actual Infinities

          III.A.   Three Kinds of Infinity

          III.B.   The Mathematical Prohibition of C-Infinities

    IV.   A Formal Argument Against the Infinity of Past Time in Any Changeable Universe

     V.   Proof of a Creator of Past Time Which Is Not Itself Conditioned by Time

Conclusion

Chapter Six: Methodological Considerations and the Impossibility of Disproving God

Introduction

       I.   Common Methodological Elements

          I.A.      Complete Disjunction Within Metaphysical Assertions

          I.B.      The Notion of “Infinity”

          I.C.      Causality

     II.   Three Approaches to the Notion of “God”

    III.   The Impossibility of Disproving the Existence of God

    IV.   The Tenuous Rationality of Atheism

part three

The Transcendentals: The Divine and Human Mysteries

Introduction to Part Three

Chapter Seven: The Divine Mystery: Five Transcendentals

Introduction

       I.   The Interrelationship Among Absolute Simplicity, Perfect Unity, and Unrestricted Understanding

     II.   The Ontological Status of Love, the Good, and the Beautiful

          II.A.    The Ontological Status of Love

          II.B.    The Ontological Status of the Good

          II.C.    The Ontological Status of the Beautiful

Conclusion

Chapter Eight: The Human Mystery: Five Yearnings for the Ultimate

Introduction

       I.   The Desire for Perfect Truth

     II.   The Desire for Perfect Love

    III.   The Desire for Perfect Justice/Goodness

    IV.   The Desire for Perfect Beauty

     V.   The Desire for Perfect Home

Conclusion to Part Three: The Divine and Human Mysteries

conclusion

Five Questions Toward the Unconditional Love of God

References

Index

Posts 2521
Forum MVP
John Fidel | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 12 2015 6:52 AM

I have found some of James White's Youtube videos, especially his debate with Bart Ehrman very helpful. He is a very skilled apologist. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moHInA9fAsI

Posts 5200
David Paul | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 12 2015 8:46 AM

I'm not much of a James White fan, but I think he did the best job against Erhman that I've seen so far. Even seemed to have him on his heels a bit. His point about "tenacity" is one that Bart avoids. I wonder if Bart could ever back off his position at this point or if he feels committed to it "come hell or high water".

Regarding textual variants and translational variations (MT vs. LXX, for instance), I happen to think that YHWH, in certain instances, has allowed and (who knows?) perhaps even inspired certain differences to get more mileage out of a given bit of Scripture. Regarding the pericope of the woman caught in adultery, I am convinced that it is supposed to be in the text now, regardless of whether it was in the autograph. There are numerous fulfillments of prophecy in that passage that effectively have to occur somewhere and that's they only place where they occur.

ASROCK x570 Creator, AMD R9 3950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, Asus Strix RTX 2080 ti, 2tb m.2 Seagate Firecuda SSD (x2) ...and other mechano-digital happiness.

"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not."

Posts 525
Kent | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 12 2015 11:43 AM

I like White's tie in the video

Posts 10817
Forum MVP
Jack Caviness | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 12 2015 12:55 PM

Steve:

https://www.logos.com/product/50121/new-proofs-for-the-existence-of-god-contributions-of-contemporary-physics-and-philosophy

The preview on the product page has been truncated severely so I have pasted the TOC here.

Thank you for the link and the TOC. It is now sitting in my shopping cart.

Posts 769
Alan Charles Gielczyk | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 12 2015 1:11 PM

Most apologetics try and meet the unbeliever on their turf. I think the best approach is represented by Bahnsen.

Posts 1753
JoshInRI | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 12 2015 1:24 PM

I thank all of you for the great suggestions and replies.  God will and does give us the words to say - of this I have no doubt. I just long to be ready and (no one chuckle) I hope my Logos is up and running and easily searched (choke, gasp, cough) for brief answers that convict and or convince when I need them.  

The young college student got 3 sessions to deliver his proof that God exists....and seemed to do a lot of research without much help from anyone else in the film - but of course, God (at least thats how I saw it).

I thought it was maddening that the Pastor in the film didn't come alongside the student but he had "engine trouble" issues and seemed to be stuck in a rut.  Could cite Scripture but didn't seem to be living out his job and life with conviction til much later in the film.

Bless us all as we stand in the widening gaps and testify so that Gods Kingdom is expanded even through people with bad memories like mine.

Glory to God...Jesus Lead On!

Posts 1602
Deacon Steve | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 12 2015 4:55 PM

Jack Caviness:

Steve:

https://www.logos.com/product/50121/new-proofs-for-the-existence-of-god-contributions-of-contemporary-physics-and-philosophy

The preview on the product page has been truncated severely so I have pasted the TOC here.

Thank you for the link and the TOC. It is now sitting in my shopping cart.

A couple of samples from the Introduction ...

Introduction

The last few years have seen several books championing agnosticism or atheism making their way into the popular press. These books leave most informed readers quite baffled, because they ignore the vast majority (if not the entirety) of the considerable evidence for theism provided by physics and philosophy during the last few decades. This evidence is capable of grounding reasonable and responsible belief in a super-intelligent, transcendent, creative power that stands at the origins of our universe or any hypothetically postulated multiverse. The main purpose of this book is to give a brief synopsis of this evidence to readers who are interested in exploring the strongest rational foundation for faith that has come to light in human history.

The great physicist Sir Arthur Eddington remarked in his classic work The Nature of the Physical World:

We all know that there are regions of the human spirit untrammeled by the world of physics. In the mystic sense of the creation around us, in the expression of art, in a yearning towards God, the soul grows upward and finds the fulfillment of something implanted in its nature. The sanction for this development is within us, a striving born with our consciousness or an Inner Light proceeding from a greater power than ours. Science can scarcely question this sanction, for the pursuit of science springs from a striving which the mind is impelled to follow, a questioning that will not be suppressed. Whether in the intellectual pursuits of science or in the mystical pursuits of the spirit, the light beckons ahead and the purpose surging in our nature responds.1

 

Perhaps this light is responsible for the persistent rational pursuit of ultimate grounds and causation which has been frequently associated with God since the time of Plato2 and Aristotle.3 Though there have been centuries of controversy about the legitimacy of these proofs (particularly from the late eighteenth to early twentieth centuries), contemporary developments in physics, philosophy, and mathematics have led to a rekindled interest and an expanded pursuit of them.4

In the twentieth century, David Hilbert (the father of finite mathematics) has given new probative force and depth to the argument for the intrinsic finitude of past time (implying a timeless Creator) in his article "On the Infinite."5 Quantum Theory has expanded the horizons of ontology by obliging it to contend with non-location and information fields, which, in their turn, have given new evidence for non-materialistic (information-like) dimensions of physical reality. The General Theory of Relativity has forced us to re-envision the universe as a dynamically integrated finite whole in contradistinction to Newton’s infinite universe of mass points in empty space. Big Bang cosmology has introduced the probability of the finitude of the observable universe and contemporary universal inflationary theory has shown the strong probability of an initial singularity, implying a causative power transcending universal space and time. When these and other discoveries are allowed to complement traditional proofs for the existence of God, they provide a remarkable rational foundation for the existence of a unique, unconditioned, unrestricted, absolutely simple, super-intelligent, continuous Creator of all else that is.

Posts 1602
Deacon Steve | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 12 2015 4:56 PM

I. The Contemporary Theistic Scene

Parts of this book could not have been written before 2003 when Borde, Guth, and Vilenkin established the requirement for a singularity in all inflationary model universes,6 and when the data of the MAP satellite helped to verify the inflationary universe and the age of the universe—13.7 billion years; other parts could not have been written before 1989 when Roger Penrose calculated the odds against an anthropic universe compatible with the second law of thermodynamics emerging from the big bang.7 The classical Big Bang model could not have been addressed before 1964 when evidence indicated the likelihood of finite space and time in our observable universe, and quantum cosmology could not have been addressed prior to that time.

These developments not only have an important effect on Chapters 1 and 2 of this book, but also on the philosophical proofs given in Chapters 3–5, because they give greater credence to classical and medieval philosophical ideas that lost credibility during the era of Newtonian mechanics (which affected philosophy all the way through the early twentieth century). Today, concepts like "ontological simplicity," "conditioned and unconditioned realities," and "formal cause" (particularly in the "information fields" intrinsic to quantum fields) enjoy a veracity and significance beyond that of their classical and medieval origins. These discoveries provide experimentally verifiable examples of concepts used to prove the existence of God in Chapters 3–5.

In view of this, I here offer my rendition of a "state-of-the-art" formulation of the proofs. I hope to provide a staging area to assemble the work of great astrophysicists, cosmologists, and philosophers who have contributed so much to this field, and to bring their thoughts together in a single, comprehensive volume.

II. Why Are These Proofs New? A Brief History of the Five Approaches

Significant updates in rational approaches to God have been achieved in five major areas over the last seventy years:

1) evidence from physics and cosmology about an initial singularity (implying a creation event transcending universal space-time asymmetry—Chapter 1),

2) evidence of the extremely high improbability of an anthropic universe (one that will allow the emergence of any life form), implying the possibility of supernatural design (Chapter 2),

3) development of the notions, and corroboration of the reality, of causation and simplicity in quantum theory and cosmology, which can be applied to what was traditionally conceived as the "uncaused Cause argument" (Chapter 3),

4) an ontological grounding for Bernard Lonergan’s proof for the existence of God in Insight: A Study of Human Understanding (Chapter 4), and

5) contemporary developments in the ontological explanation of time and the Hilbertian prohibition of "infinities hypothesized within finite structures," which has led to a credible contemporary formulation of the long-discarded proof of the impossibility of infinite past time (Chapter 5).

Posts 1602
Deacon Steve | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 12 2015 4:57 PM

Chapter 1 begins with a brief account of the general elements of classical Big Bang cosmology, and shows how those combined elements ground the contemporary position that our observable universe is approximately 13.7 billion years old and 13.7 billion light years in radius (from its theoretical originative center). The chapter then gives a brief account of developments in the contemporary Big Bang model that allow for an initial state that may be conceived in terms of quantum cosmology and/or string theory, and universal inflation (a hyper-accelerating phase of expansion in the early universe, seemingly caused by "vacuum energy" or "dark energy").

The classical Big Bang model seemed to indicate a beginning of the universe at a Hawking-Penrose singularity, but this was mitigated by the contemporary Big Bang model, which opened up the possibility of an early quantum cosmological era and an inflationary dynamic (allowing our universe to be but one amidst a multiplicity of possible universes within a theoretical multiverse). This mitigating view was itself subsequently mitigated by the discovery of Borde, Guth, and Vilenkin that every inflationary model universe (and/or multiverse) must have a beginning. Since this indicates an edge of time (prior to which there is no time), the conclusions of Borde, Guth, and Vilenkin point strongly to a creation of the universe (from no previously existing physical matter-energy). The cause of such a creation would then have to transcend our universe (and any multiverse in which it may be situated).

Posts 1602
Deacon Steve | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 12 2015 4:57 PM

Chapter 2 considers the so-called teleological argument (the argument from design) from the vantage point of contemporary Big Bang cosmology. Prior to the time of Newton, the argument from design had an intuitive appeal because it was grounded in the idea that the number of higher-order complexes (producing higher-order activities such as self-motion, eyesight, intelligence, etc.) which could be produced by the interaction of simpler constituents is extremely remote by comparison to the number of non-productive combinations of those simpler constituents. From the vantage point of both physics and probability theory, this is not an erroneous idea.

However, when Newton theorized that space, time, and mass points were infinite (and his theories were virtually dogmatically accepted), philosophers began to reason that even though "higher-order complexes giving rise to higher-order activities" were extremely improbable, literally any highly improbable event could occur in an infinite amount of time, in an infinite amount of space, with an infinite amount of mass. Once an infinite number of possibilities is inserted into the probability equations, improbability disappears—and literally anything becomes possible. Thus, the teleological argument slipped from the horizon for nearly 270 years.

But then came two remarkable developments in cosmology: (1) the classical and then later contemporary models of Big Bang cosmology, and (2) the discovery of additional universal constants. (A universal constant is a fixed quantity that mathematically governs the fundamental equations of physics throughout the observable universe during its duration, such as the speed of light constant, Planck’s constant, the gravitational constant, weak force constant, strong force constant, mass of a proton, mass of an electron, charge of an electron/proton, etc.)

As noted above, Big Bang cosmology put an end to the Newtonian assumptions of infinite time and mass in our observable universe. Now the universe was thought to be only 13.7 billion years old and to have 1053 kg of visible mass, and a finite amount of dark matter and vacuum (dark) energy. It was all quite finite, and that meant that the probability equations would once again have to be taken seriously. When this eventuality was combined with the discovery of additional universal constants, a host of exceedingly improbable "cosmic coincidences" were discovered.

Essentially, our universe should not be anthropic (capable of sustaining any kind of life form), because the range of anthropic values for our universe’s constants is exceedingly small by comparison to the immense range of non-anthropic values. This meant that a random occurrence of the anthropic values of our universe’s constants is so remote as to be virtually impossible. As a result, physicists began to advocate that it might be just as reasonable, if not more reasonable, to believe in a super-Intellect "setting the values of the constants at the inception of the universe," as to believe in their random occurrence. Even persistent atheists like Fred Hoyle changed their minds and openly declared their belief in such a "super-Intellect."

Chapter 2 will set out seven of these cosmological coincidences so that readers might be able to verify for themselves the unbelievably high improbability of an anthropic universe emerging from the big bang by pure chance. Notice that we are not talking about the emergence of life as we know it, but about the very conditions necessary for the possibility of any life form. It is this universality that makes the teleological argument more powerful than it ever could have been in any previous age.

I am not responsible for the research set out in Chapters 1 and 2, and so I am deeply indebted to the fine work of Roger Penrose, Arvind Borde, Alan Guth, Alexander Vilenkin, Brandon Carter, Walter Bradley, Fred Hoyle, Paul Davies, and many others whose insight and research have contributed so much to unveiling the mystery behind our anthropic universe.

I include a Postscript to Chapters 1 and 2 written by Dr. Bruce Gordon, who analyzes and criticizes some recent attempts by physicists to wriggle out of the preponderance of evidence for intelligent, transcendent, universal design. His incisive response to Steinhardt’s and Turok’s cyclic ekpyrotic hypothesis, Gasperini’s and Veneziano’s string perturbative vacuum phase within inflationary cosmology, and Susskind’s, Polchinski’s, Bousso’s, and Linde’s inflationary string landscape theory reveals the strength and probative force of the conclusion that our universe had its origin in an intelligent transcendent cause. He concludes with the words of the string landscape theory’s key proponent, Leonard Susskind, who worries out loud that if his theory proves to be inconsistent, physicists will be left without any alternative to intelligent design.

Posts 370
Lonnie Spencer | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 12 2015 5:18 PM

The weakness of apologetics is that just because I can convince someone in their head that there is a God, it doesn't  mean their heart will automatically follow. 

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 12 2015 5:20 PM

Lonnie Spencer:

The weakness of apologetics is that just because I can convince someone in their head that there is a God, it doesn't  mean their heart will automatically follow. 

 Well said. The real work is done by the Holy Spirit.

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 2304
David Thomas | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 12 2015 5:24 PM

Several good apologists have been referenced and I am glad that their perspectives are available to the Bride of Christ and those who are searching with objective minds.

While I believe that every believer needs to be convinced in his own mind of the hope that we have, I do not believe each believer needs to possess the apologetic skills to confront every antagonist. I learned long ago that I cannot be an expert in every discipline and sometimes I just need to know enough to know which expert I will trust.

Just because I take certain medicines that have been prescribed for me does not mean that I need to research the biochemistry of each one and be able to defend its consumption. Sometimes I know just enough to trust my physician and take what he recommends.

In theology I often know just enough to admit that I am in the same camp with [name your expert] and that he has done the research to satisfy my need for "certainty."

I don't ever want brothers and sisters in Christ to be shamed into silence just because they do not have a well reasoned apologetic for all academic disciplines.

Making Disciples!  Logos Ecosystem = Logos8 on Microsoft Surface Pro 4 (Win10), Android app on tablet, FSB on iPhone, [deprecated] Windows App, Proclaim, Faithlife.com, FaithlifeTV via Connect subscription.

Page 1 of 3 (45 items) 1 2 3 Next > | RSS