Browsed by
Tag: Evidence for the Faith

Two Radio Interviews Today

Two Radio Interviews Today

Today I’ll have the privilege of taking part in two radio interviews, both of them focusing on my recent Touchstone article on the historicity of the Gospels. The first begins in less than an hour on Michael Brown’s Line of Fire radio. You can listen live or find the podcast afterward. The second begins about 5:15 pm EDT, with Mike Allen on Real Life Radio. If you can’t catch it live, go to that same link afterward and click on…

Read More Read More

“He May Well Be On To Something… This Argues for Historicity” — Daniel B. Wallace

“He May Well Be On To Something… This Argues for Historicity” — Daniel B. Wallace

Daniel B. Wallace, a leading New Testament scholar, responds to my recent Touchstone article on the historicity of Jesus: The May/June 2014 issue of Touchstone has come out. In it is a provocative and, I might say, Lewis-esque piece of writing by Tom Gilson, the National Field Director of Ratio Christi…. He may well be on to something. In turn, this argues for historicity.

“Is This a Powerful New Apologetic Argument?”

“Is This a Powerful New Apologetic Argument?”

Bob Seidensticker looks at my “Too Good Not To Be True” argument against Jesus-legend theory, asking “Is this a powerful new apologetic argument?” He finds it lacking. I find his assessment lacking. Here’s why. To begin with, he says, He would say that Jesus was God and therefore the creator of everything. Let’s ignore the fact that the Trinity was an invention centuries after the gospels and consider what God supposedly created. The doctrine of the Trinity doesn’t enter in…

Read More Read More

The story of Jesus is unimaginably great; therefore it’s true

The story of Jesus is unimaginably great; therefore it’s true

The story of Jesus is unimaginably great; therefore it’s true. That’s a new way I’ve just thought of to summarize my recent Touchstone article, : “What Happens to Apologetics If We Add ‘Legend’ to the Trilemma “Liar, Lunatic, or Lord”?. For those who know the terminology (and others need not worry, since I won’t spend more than a moment on it), this is not some new kind of ontological argument, even though in that one-sentence form it sure sounds like…

Read More Read More

Jesus Christ: Greater Than You Knew, Too Great Not To Be True

Jesus Christ: Greater Than You Knew, Too Great Not To Be True

Today I’m announcing a new argument for the historicity of the Gospels, published just now through Touchstone Magazine. The editors have titled it The Gospel Truth Of Jesus: What Happens to Apologetics If We Add “Legend” to the Trilemma “Liar, Lunatic, or Lord”?. The main point of the argument: Jesus Christ is greater than you knew. I say that with all confidence. I say it to atheists and skeptics, who doubt that his reality is great at all, or who…

Read More Read More

Evidence for God: Humanism vs. Moral Knowledge (Moral Knowledge Part 2)

Evidence for God: Humanism vs. Moral Knowledge (Moral Knowledge Part 2)

Part of the extended series Evidence for the Faith I don’t know why anyone speaks of atheistic “humanism.” Atheism denies humanness. “‘Humanity is dead, and we are its murderers,’ says the Madman.” That’s a bold and controversial statement, I know, and I know that it’s up to me to explain why I would make it. It’s a conclusion that I draw from many streams of information, one of which has to do with moral knowledge. It seems to me that true…

Read More Read More

(Deprecated Post) Evidence for God: Atheism vs. Humanness (Humanness & Moral Knowledge Part 2)

(Deprecated Post) Evidence for God: Atheism vs. Humanness (Humanness & Moral Knowledge Part 2)

Part of the extended series Evidence for the Faith Update April 8: I left out some important context when I wrote this post, which you may find by jumping down to comments 136, 137, and 142. My apologies for the error and the confusion that resulted. I’m deprecating this post because of the errors, and asking you to read here instead. I don’t know why anyone calls it humanism: atheism denies humanness. “‘Humanity is dead, and we are its murderers,’ says…

Read More Read More

Why Professor Fincke’s Analysis of “God’s Not Dead” Didn’t Actually Care About What the Movie Was About

Why Professor Fincke’s Analysis of “God’s Not Dead” Didn’t Actually Care About What the Movie Was About

Professor (of sorts) Daniel Fincke set out to write an analysis of the movie God’s Not Dead. What he accomplished with it ended up being something else entirely. He admitted early on that the topic had gotten away from him, and that this had turned into much more than a review. It seems to me that it also turned into less than a review. We’ll take his points in turn. I must warn you: his post was lo-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-ong. Many of his subpoints…

Read More Read More

Evidence for God: Humanness and Moral Knowledge, Part 1

Evidence for God: Humanness and Moral Knowledge, Part 1

Part of the extended series Evidence for the Faith Introduction: Moral Knowledge We All Share Do you know whether it’s right or wrong for parents to nurture their children? Do you know whether it’s right or wrong for parents to torture their children for fun? Do you know whether it’s right or wrong for a power plant to practice green environmental methods? Do you know whether it is right or wrong for a chemical plant to dump its waste products into…

Read More Read More

Real Time Web Analytics