Apologetics Class #1 Arguments for the Existence of God

Apologetics Class #1 Arguments for the Existence of God

· Apologetics can be defined as the reason for the hope that lies within us.
· 15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:1 Peter 3;15

· Apologetics may be simply defined as the defense of the Christian faith. The simplicity of this definition, however, masks the complexity of the problem of defining apologetics. It turns out that a diversity of approaches has been taken to defining the meaning, scope, and purpose of apologetics.
· There are differing kinds of apologetics systems such as Classical Apologetics, Evidential Apologetics, Experiential Apologetics, Historical Apologetics, and Presuppositional Apologetics.
· Our purposes are not to learn theory but some different approaches for defending the Christian faith.
· For example: if a God exists, miracles are possible, indeed the greatest miracle of all, creation, is possible.
· Confirmed historical evidence substantiates the truth. The New Testament documents are shown to be historically reliable.
· Classical apologists turn to evidences showing that God has revealed himself in the Bible and incarnated himself in Jesus.
· Evidentialists, on the other hand, think the case for Christianity can be most effectively presented using evidences for creation, for the historicity of Jesus and especially his resurrection, and other evidences in one ‘cumulative case’ for Christianity.
· Some Christians appeal primarily, if not exclusively, to experience as evidence for the Christian faith. Some appeal to religious experience in general. Others to special religious experiences, mystical experiences & others identify what they believe are particularly supernatural conversion experiences.
· Historical apologists believe that the truth of Christianity, including the existence of God, can be proven from the historical evidence alone. The earliest apologists, including "Tertulian, Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen", defended the historicity of Christianity.
· Cosmological Argument for the existence of God is the argument from cause & effect. As everything that exists must have an adequate cause, so an all-powerful and intelligent God is an adequate cause to explain the universe. The scripture identifies that "cause" as the creative power of God(Gen. 1;1; Rom. 1;19,20 & Ps. 94;9)
· Teleological Argument for the Existence of God says God is proven by the order & useful arrangement in the universe. The orderly world in which we live clearly demonstrates that a great mind was behind it's arrangement. The scriptures identify God as that great intelligence. Primary reference is Ps. 94;9 but also Heb. 3;4.
· Ontological Argument=the word ontological comes from the root "being" and is a deductive arugment that only indicates the probable existence of God. It reasons that the idea of a perfect and infinite Being cannot be derived from a finite & imperfect human being. Therefore, a perfect & infinite Being who exists must have placed the idea in mankind. Primary reference is Heb. 3;4 & Rom. 2;15.
· Anthropological Argument for the existence of God says that the existence of man as a moral and intellectual being is an argument for the existence of a moral & intelligent being called God. This is true because man was created in the image & likeness of God(Gen. 1;26), and even after the Fall he has the law of God written in his heart(Rom. 2;15). Application: So today, Christians ought to be careful to reflect the character of God in their lives & not become a stumbling block to the gospel.
· Likewise, William Lane Craig has developed the cosmological and teleological proofs into complex arguments combining philosophical reasoning with scientific evidence. Craig is perhaps best known for his articulation of the kalâm cosmological argument, a philosophical proof for God’s existence based on the premise that the universe cannot exist without a beginning.
· For our purposes tonight, I want us to understand that a person's worldview/belief system/spiritual belief provides answers for four categories: Origin, Meaning, Morality, and Destiny.
· We'll be discussing at least one example of all four this evening.
· Let's begin w/worldview subject #1- Origin: God makes sense of the origin of the universe;Typically atheists have said that the universe is eternal.
· Discoveries in astronomy & astro-physics have rendered that theory less likely.
· Evolutionary theory presents the big-bang creation scenario w/ the idea that nothing existed prior to big-bang.
· So the question lends itself to ask how can something come from nothing. It's impossible and that points itself to a cause that is a force or a being that exists outside of our natural world, beyond the universe, that brought the universe into being.
· The power would have to be that which is outside of time, space, therefore being immaterial, changeless, & enormously powerful. These qualities are already some of the central attributes of what believers ascribe to God.
· 2) God makes sense out of the complex order in the universe. It's been shown that there had to be 50 constants/physical quantities given in the big-bang that if they were altered in one part to 100,000,000 x 3, the universe could not have permitted the existence of life.
· The ratio between the weak force & the gravitational force has to be a certain proportion in comparison to the ratio of the mass of the neutron & the electron, for example.
· The odds against a life permitting universe are too numerous to be calculated.
· It makes more sense to say that the universe exists as the result of intelligent design, w/ the source of the origin not being an impersonal force, but a personal, intelligent creator, God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, we cannot have come here by accident.
· Let's continue w/ worldview subject #2-Meaning:

Complaints or Contentment?
Gregory Koukl
Does God owe us a perfect world? Your answer to that question will determine your ability to be content in this life. Greg discusses how two different responses to the untimely death of a teenager reveals two contrasting views prevalent the Christian world today...and which of them more closely reflects the biblical perspective.

· Some of you might have heard of a tragedy here on the West Coast recently. A teenager snow-boarding in the Angeles Crest Mountains was lost for ten days. When they found Jeff Thornton over a week ago he was alive--shaken and frostbitten, some broken bones, but alive--and apparently in good shape. It was a great victory, front page news. Search parties had tracked him in the snow over difficult terrain and finally found him. They got him to the hospital and all seemed well. A week later, though, Jeff Thornton was dead. Thornton was from a small, religious farm community here in California named Brawley. While the boy was lost, the town prayed, as is often the case when tragedy strikes. By the way, have you noticed that nobody ever raises any questions about separation of church and state in cases like these? Classrooms are filled with prayer when personal tragedy strikes with no hint of impropriety. You'll even see appeals to pray on the evening news. "Please pray," news anchors say, or "Our prayers are with you." This happens with every major catastrophe we've faced as a country. It's interesting that nobody balks at this. In this particular case, the community was alive with prayer. Sure enough, the prayers were answered when the young boy was found. But then there was a turn-around. A week or so later, as a result of complications of gangrene, frostbite, exposure, shock, and broken bones, the young man died. [As an aside, isn't it interesting that when a young person dies like this we use the term "untimely" to describe it? It was an "untimely" death at an "untimely" age. We use the word because we believe the person died before his time. To put it more precisely, he died before his appointed time. Isn't this a tacit admission that their life had purpose, a purpose that was beyond what that individual intended--a grander purpose, a transcendent purpose which was not fulfilled because he was cut down early in life? Responses like this are spontaneous, bearing testimony to something we know deep down inside--there is a God, and He has established a purpose for each individual, a purpose that is not fulfilled when someone is struck down "before his time."] This morning I read the headlines in the LA Times : "Stunned Town Mourns Snow-Boarder's Death." Fifteen hundred people attended the memorial service for Jeff that was held at the high school. The main thing that struck me about this account was the different ways people responded to this tragedy. Some were thankful to God that they had been given ten extra days with Jeff Thornton. Others were angry at God because He gave the boy back just to take him away again. God was either gracious or cruel, depending on who you asked. His mother, choking back the tears, thanked her son's friends for their prayers and thanked the members of the search-and-rescue team that refused to give up the search. Then she told the crowd, "Imagine my joy when my baby was found alive. We shared precious moments, but I didn't know those moments wouldn't last. I want to thank God for giving me back my son, if just for a short time." The pastor, Reverend Scott Peterson, agreed: "Through the grace of God, the prayers of his friends, and the hard work of the search-and-rescue team, Jeff was brought back alive to his mother." Tuesday night at a private service, members of the football team other students reflected on the death of their friend, Jeff Thornton. One 15-year-old coed had a different take on the tragedy. "It's just not fair. Not fair! That God gave him back to us and then took him away again. A lot of kids don't understand it at all." Isn't it interesting, the contrast here? Each response represents two fundamentally different views of God's role in the world. Both had the boy for just a short period of time, returned to them back from the dead, as it were. Jeff's mother thanked God for giving her son back to her for ten more days. The 15-year-old coed said God was unfair to give Jeff back for a short time and then take him home again. These two contrasting responses show us two different expectations about God. Maybe the young lady's response was just a function of grief. I don't know for sure, but I suspect it goes much deeper than that. Could the co-ed's grief have been greater than Jeff's mom's? Something else is going on. This 15-year-old student seemed to have the view that I hear echoed even by what many consider to be mature Christians. When hard times hit they say, "What happened? Why did God allow this?" They are not just expressing emotion or grief. They are genuinely stunned that God would allow evil to touch their lives like this. God hasn't kept His part of the bargain. Each reaction betrays a particular view of God. One view is that God aids us as we maneuver through the contingencies of a fallen world. When He helps us as we navigate through life we thank Him for His grace. We consider anything God might do on our behalf an added benefit to us--a gracious, unmerited favor. Jeff Thornton's mom was like this. Though her son was eventually going to die, the fact that he was able to spend a week with his family-- talking with his mother, sharing his last moments with his friends-- was seen by her as a gift of God, a special work of grace in the midst of tragedy. The second view--the co-ed's--is that God owes us something like a perfect world. We have a divine right to happiness, fulfillment, and prosperity. If we don't get them, God has not fulfilled His end of the bargain. If God lets us have something good for a moment and then takes it away, it's "not fair" because, on this view, we deserved the good thing to begin with. We deserved the best. We deserve heaven on earth, and we've been cheated. A lot of Christians think this way. It's one of the serious flaws of the so-called faith/prosperity movement. They're looking for heaven's rewards and heaven's perfection right here on earth. They're expecting God to protect them, as a divine obligation, from the contingencies of living in a fallen world. When God gives them something wonderful, that's par for the course. When everything is going smoothly, that's the way it ought to be. It's owed them. People like this are not excessively thankful for things, and they complain when they don't get what they want. Two completely different ways of viewing things. I guess you can guess which one I think is biblical. It's the first one. This is why we're not just encouraged but commanded to give thanks in all things. It emphasizes the fact that everything we have, "every good and perfect gift comes down from the Father of lights, in whom there is no variation or shifting shadow." (James 1:17) This is why, in humility, we give thanks for whatever joys we are given in this fallen world. It explains why we give thanks when we get a son back before his ultimate homecoming-- if only for a couple of days-- instead of blaming God for not letting him stay longer.

· Continuing on, our #3 worldview category is Morality: (OMV)=Objective Moral Values
· An opening statment could be; God makes sense out of objective moral values in the world. If God does not exist, then it seems that objective moral values don't exist. Objective moral values=are true whether everyone believes them or not.
· For example, if the Nazis had won WWII & either exterminated or brain washed anybody that disagreed w/ them, anti-Semiticism would still be objectively wrong, even if the Nazis convinced everybody it was right.
· I think one of the best arguments for the existence of God is the presence of evil in the world. One way I can demonstrate that is to ask the non-Christian that raises this question, do you believe there is evil in the world? They must believe it because that's what prompts the question they are raising. Then I ask them to tell me, as a non-Christian, where it comes from. Secondly, tell me where good came from. Thirdly, tell me how you distinguish between good and evil. Those are very thorny problems of which the Christian only has to answer one, but the non-Christian has to answer three.
· If God doesn't exist, then many OMV's don't exist. The common evolutionary atheist will tell you that moral values are just the by-products of Socio-biological evolution/the means by which the selfish gene propagates itself or else they're simply expressions of personal taste, like saying," I like broccoli" or "the news".
· So then we should bring up examples like, what if someone likes killing innocent people or rape? So if God doesn't exist, it's realistic that there are no OMV's, only subjective ones.
· Dr. Ravi Zacharias said, in his book,"the Real Face of Atheism", in every society, no matter what the cultural underpinnings, there is a code of "oughtness". While the specifics vary from culture to culture, in each case, those specifics are rooted in a prior set of beliefs as to what ought to be. One common agreement emerges: That wherever one finds an "oughtness", it is always linked together w/ a believed purpose in life. Purpose and oughtness are helplessly bound, and any effort to sever them meets w/ individual discord & societal disruption. The result is anarchy.
· Consider a watch. Any description of its goodness or badness is bound up w/ what a watch is supposed to do. The story is an old one, but the point it makes is worthy of repitition. On his way to work every day, a man walked past a clockmaker's store. He would ritualistically stop outside & synchronize his watch w/ the clock that stood in the window of the clockmaker's shop. Observing this routine, the clockmaker one day struck up a conversation w/ the man & asked him what kind of work he did. The man timidly confessed that he worked as the timekeeper at the nearby factory & that his malfunctioning watch necessitated daily readjustment. Since it was his job to ring the closing bell every day @ 4 pm, he synchronized his watch w/ the clock every morning to guarantee precision.
· The clockmaker, even more embarassed than the timekeeper, said," I hate to tell you this, but my clock doesn't work very well either, and I have been adjusting it to the bell that I hear every afternoon from the factory @ 4 pm! How does he know the right time when the only recourse is to a poorly functioning watch that is in turn corrected by a faulty clock? What happens to a society that does not know which way to turn to gain an understanding of right & wrong?
· There's no reason to deny that OMV's do exist. Somethings like torturing innocent people, child abuse, rape, & murder are objectively wrong. While love, sacrifice, equality are objectively good. If an atheist says he doesn't believe in God, ask him," do you think the inquisition was a good thing? That it's morally neutral to persecute people because of their religious beliefs & then burn them at the stake? To wage war among nations because of religious prejudice?" People will intuitively recognize that, if they're being honest w/you. Many times it takes some creative listening to find out what the real issue is w/ an individual, as well as some real praying and humbly asking the HS to intercede on their behalf.
· Worldview #4 is are final subject for this evening, Destiny:

· Though you forget the way to the Temple, There is one who remembers the way to your door; Life you may evade, but death you shall not, You shall not deny the stranger. T.S. Eliot
· To be, or not to be--that is the question; ...To die, to sleep; To sleep, perchance to dream. Ay, there's the rub; For in that sleep of death what dreams may come, When we have shuffled off this mortal coil, Must give us pause. William Shakespeare, Hamlet

· The subject of death has been addressed by a majority of the great thinkers because it is the last "enemy" & the one common experience we're all forced to face. It is the great human equalizer.
· Any worldview that does not know the origin of human beings and cannot give our reason for being, certainly must remain silent on our destiny, or at best, argue for nothingness.
Hitler and Mother Teresa
Gregory Koukl
What kind of God would allow a Hitler to go to heaven if he believed in Jesus and a Mother Teresa to go to hell if she didn't?

"You're saying that Hitler and Mother Teresa would both suffer the same fate before God if they didn't believe in Jesus?" The words echoed over the radio airwaves as the host of "Religion on the Line" on ABC's L.A. affiliate station patiently waited for me to answer. I knew the question was coming, but I had no tidy theological retort that would put the ball back into his court. Someone once said that if you word the question right, you can win any debate. The question that evening was a classic case in point. The host might as well have asked, "Do you still beat your wife?" Simply answering "yes" or "no" wouldn't do. At the root of this discussion is the issue of Jesus as the only way to salvation. It is one of the biggest stumbling blocks of Christianity to those who are sincerely interested in leading moral lives and working hard to mitigate the impact of evil in the world. To make Jesus the sole issue of salvation seems to ignore the obvious difference between people of conscience and others who are entirely without scruples. Does that make sense? Radical Surgery Required Let me give an analogy that may add perspective. All things being equal, it's good to practice healthy living. People who eat their vegetables, get proper rest, exercise sensibly, and don't smoke or drink to excess, generally reap the benefits of longevity and vitality. Those who don't, get sick. But what if all things aren't equal? What if there's a hidden element, a terminal disease quietly sucking life out of the body? Healthy living does nothing to avert the underlying disease. In that case, the undisciplined junk food addict and the diligent athlete suffer the same fate. The silent tumor breaks its silence; the grave claims them both. There's a parallel to this in the spiritual realm. On the one hand, it's good to live righteously. Holy living contributes to spiritual health. Those who continually practice sin eventually suffer its consequences. There's another side to the equation, however, a crucial element too often ignored. Our most valiant attempts at goodness are met with failure because a deep-seated malignancy sucks the life from our efforts. No matter how hard we try, each of us is dying from a spiritual disease no amount of righteous living can heal. The sad truth is this: Ultimately, no person lives completely right. Sure, they're capable of doing good things, sometimes phenomenal things. Even a dying patient can have healthy eating habits. But good works, like good meals, cannot restore vitality to a diseased patient; they can only maintain it. Restoration must come through surgery. At first glance, it seems unfair that God wouldn't consider all the good we've done. Think about it, though. When was the last time you received a letter from the D.A. congratulating you for not holding up a bank or shooting your neighbor? Obedience to the law is expected. A year of good behavior doesn't cancel out a year of lawbreaking, evening up the record. Every person, from the greatest to the least, has broken God's law. That makes them guilty, and guilty people must seek God's surgery: forgiveness. Agreed, some need more forgiveness than others--sometimes much more, just as a disease can ravage one body more violently than another. But every person is fatally stricken, nonetheless. Ever Heard of the Ten Commandments? Have you read the Ten Commandments recently? Take a quick inventory by asking yourself these questions. Have you ever given allegiance to anything else over God in your life or used anything as an object of worship or veneration? Have you ever used God's name in a vain or vulgar fashion? Have you worshipped God on a regular basis? Have you even once disobeyed or dishonored your parents? Have you murdered anyone, or even had harsh thoughts about someone (see Matthew 5:22)? Have you had sex with someone other than your spouse, or even thought about it (see Matthew 5:28)? Have you taken something that wasn't yours? Have you lied? Have you simply wanted something that wasn't yours? Sound tough? It is. This is God's Law. These are God's requirements. Even in grammar school, 60% is a flunking grade, yet who among us has not violated each of these commandments many times? Reducing the Ten Commandments to only two doesn't help. Jesus said, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind," and "You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets" (Matthew 22:37-40). Even the best of us violate these two laws daily. Whenever you're tempted to trust in your own ability to please God, take a good look at the standard, God's Law, then look at your own score card. To use Paul's words, each of us is "shut up under sin" (Gal. 3:22). Our mouths have been closed, and we all have become accountable to God (Romans 3:19). Saved by our own goodness? The Law gives us no hope. Try this calculation. If you sinned only ten times a day from your tenth birthday to your sixtieth--and keep in mind we're not just talking about rape, pillage, and murder, but the full range of human moral failing, including heart attitudes and motives--what would your rap sheet look like? You would have amassed 182,500 infractions of the law. What judge in his right mind would turn you loose with a record like that? Ghandi vs. Al Capone The worst of us tend to whitewash our own contribution to evil. Al Capone said, "I have spent the best years of my life giving people the lighter pleasures, helping them have a good time, and all I get is abuse, the existence of a hunted man." [1] By contrast, Ghandi--a man utterly committed to a life of virtue--was not so optimistic. Towards the end of his life he lamented, "It is an unbroken torture to me that I am still so far from him whom I know governs every breath of my life and whose offspring I am. I know it is because of the evil passions within me that keep me so far from him; yet I can't get away from them." C.S. Lewis captured this contrast with these words: "When a man is getting better he understands more and more clearly the evil that is still left in him. When a man is getting worse, he understands his own badness less and less....Good people know about both good and evil: bad people do not know about either." [2] If Lewis is right, then the One who is most holy sees sin most clearly. The One who is perfectly righteous understands the full tragedy of even the most "trivial" breach of goodness. God's purity is without flaw, so He sees sin as it really is. That's why He is not so inclined to dismiss our moral imperfections with a "boys will be boys" mentality. Hitler and Mother Teresa Could Adolph Hitler and Mother Teresa suffer the same fate? No and yes. No, because they'd answer for different crimes and, as such, their judgment would be different. Just as there are degrees of sin (see John 19:11), there are degrees of punishment. Jesus said Sodom would fare better than Capernaum in the day of judgment (Matthew 11:24), though each would be condemned. Yes, because each person must ultimately answer for his own sins--Hitler for his, Mother Teresa for hers, you and I for ours. Unless, of course, Jesus is allowed to answer for them. That is the good news: Jesus, though rich, for our sake became poor, that we through His poverty might become rich (2 Cor. 8:9). To stay alive physically, first cure the disease, then keep fit to maintain your health. To experience spiritual well-being, God must do surgery on the root problem, sin. Living righteously afterwards secures our spiritual vitality, but it can never cure our disease. Only Jesus can do that.

A Good Reason for Evil
·