If there are good reasons to believe, then why does the Christian faith have some really vehement detractors?
That’s the question I look at in this episode. It was originally given as a talk at the end of a church camp I was speaking at. Having already explained in previous talks that faith and reason work together and that there really are good intellectual reasons to believe that the Christian faith is true, I wanted to essentially prepare the audience for disappointment. You’re not going to walk out there and blow everybody away with the brilliance of your arguments. There are a number of reasons why people don’t believe, and in the time allowed for a wrap-up talk, I discussed some of them.
In this episode I continue to re-trace my steps through my mini speaking tour earlier this year. This talk was the second in a series of introductory talks on apologetics. In it, I introduce and explain the moral argument for the existence of God.
The podcast is back! This short series consists of talks that I recently gave on a speaking tour, speaking at a church camp in Auckland as well as at Thinking Matters events in Hamilton, Auckland and Tauranga. The theme was Christian apologetics, and this first talk was to set the scene on the general issue of faith and reason.
Episode 42 presents the “minimal facts” approach to the resurrection of Jesus.
This episode doesn’t just present the argument in order to persuade you, it’s also meant to show you what the argument is like so that you can use it yourself (if you find it persuasive of course). It starts out with four facts granted by the majority of New Testament critics, and then works towards an explanation of those facts.
In this episode I refer to other blog posts and podcast episodes, and as promised here are links to those:
Is Jesus just Osiris with a new face? In Episode 19 I look at the sceptical argument claiming that Christianity was really just a collection of beliefs borrowed from pagan religions, and that Jesus was just a re-hash of one or many other Messiah or god-man figures. As there would be no way to deal with all of these other religions in one episode, I’ve chosen to use the example of the ancient Egyptian deity Osiris. In short, the sceptical argument is not particularly well supported by the facts.
This episode is about Intelligent Design – sort of. I don’t argue here for intelligent design. What I’m doing is looking at a couple of philosophical objections to ID which, I argue, are just contrived for no other purpose than to exclude intelligent design from “science.”
Here’s Episode 13, which is part 2 of my coverage of Plantinga and presuppositional apologetics.
In this episode I present Alvin Plantinga’s Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism. I then close by summing up the similarity between Plantinga and Van Til and co., and respond to one objection that is common to them both.
Also, for the first time ever – we have mail! I reply to it at the end of this episode.
Here’s Episode 12: “Plantinga and Presuppositional Apologetics.” I’ve decided to give Plantinga two episodes, as it ended up filling up a big chunk of time. This is part 1, which looks at Plantinga’s argument for theism from Warrant.