So the Mormons came to Visit...

I just want to make sure before I write all this that anyone who reads this knows that this is in no way meant to be a bragging session or a slam on the Mormons who came to visit me. It's not my desire to boast of how I won an argument. Instead, I hope that this is edifying for those who want to see how I personally dialogued with a couple of mormon missionaries last night. I also wanted to stress the importance of us trying not to win an argument, but also win these people to Christ. So here it goes...

One of the things Norman Geisler encouraged us to do was to read texts like the Book of Mormon and the Koran in order to be able to better dialogue with people of those faiths. I figured that if I could find a free Bible online then I could find these other two texts for free as well. I ordered both for free last week from various websites, and I figured that there would be Mormon missionaries who would personally deliver the Book of Mormon. I was right, and yesterday I received a call from them and we set up an appointment for them to come last night and visit. What follows are some observations from what took place.

First, let me say that the two guys who came by were really nice, respectful, and personable. Both were former athletes and big sports fans, and were very down to earth. I certainly think these were two guys I could be friends with. I think that we as evangelicals sadly salivate at the chance to nail a Mormon in a debate. We must defend doctrine boldly, but we must also remember that this is an opportunity to show the love of Christ and to hopefully bring two more people to the place where they make a decision to truly accept Jesus Christ. I think that we can defend doctrine but still not be nasty about it in situations like this. I pray I did that last night - my first comment to them was actually telling them that I didn't agree with them whatsoever, but I did love them with the love of Jesus and looked forward to having a friendly debate).



So here's some random thoughts -

1. It's important for we Christians to know what we believe in respect to Mormonism. We can't rely on a few Mormon stereotypes as our defense - those will be shot down quickly. Instead, we must be better equipped than that. I was thankful that I had done a good bit of research before they came last night. There were a number of verses that they quoted out of context that I was glad that I had read up on before they came.



2. There were three places in particular where I posed questions that I did not get any real answer to:

A. The first was when I asked them if the Bible is inerrant and without any error and they said, "yes, absolutely." I then turned to Mark when Jesus comments that there is no marriage in heaven and asked them how they can have a doctrine of eternal marriage if Jesus clearly teaches in the Bible that they claim is without error that there is no marriage in heaven. (Note: I had researched what their response would probably be - that Jesus was saying that no one will get married in heaven. If anyone reads that passage in its context Jesus is responding to a question about a woman who was married here on earth, so clearly that is not what he is saying. Also, the verse that was used to defend this was when Jesus says, "whatever your bind on earth shall be bound in heaven." This is again a clear example of the need to understand verses in context.)

B. The second was the issue that they believe that God is still giving revelation today to their prophets. I asked them if their prophets ever made a mistake and they said no, but there was a prophecy made by Joseph Smith that a huge temple would be built in Missouri within his generation. They said that this prophecy was not fulfilled because of "circumstances," by which they mean that the Mormon church was persecuted at the time of the prophecy making it impossible to build the temple. I asked them how it can be that Joseph Smith could be a true prophet if

a. the criteria for a biblical prophet is that his prophecies always come true,

b. that true prophecy is the word of God (who does not lie),

c. that God is all-knowing and sovereign and therefore no "circumstances" catch Him off guard that makes Him have to modify His prophecy.

d. Therefore, if they believe that God is in sovereign, all-knowing, and doesn't lie, then there cannot be true prophecy that God has to change just because His church was persecuted.

C. Sadly, I asked them when they decided to repent of their sin and recognize the need for a savior and reconciler towards God. Both testimonies were almost identical - they consisted of reading the book of Mormon and asking God if it was true and said that the "Holy Ghost" had confirmed it for them.

3. I think a lot of these guys really just need to lovingly be shown the contradictions in their doctrine. As I was pointing stuff out to them it seemed (at least to me) that they were somewhat surprised by many of these contradictions and had not considered them before.

4. Why are these guys so much more evangelical than we are? They have a faith that is built mostly on a book that is not historically reliable whatsoever. We Christians have a book that is the most historically reliable document in all of ancient history. We should be embarrassed that the Mormons are more eager to talk about a distorted Jesus than we are to talk about the Biblical Jesus.



There was much more that happened over the course of our 90 minute discussion, but these were just a few points that I was thinking over today.

Some thoughts from spending a week with Norman Geisler

This past week, my good friend J.P. Harmon and I decided to man up and take an entire class in one week. The class was Christian Apologetics & World Religions with Dr. Norman Geisler, one of the leading thinkers of the 20th century in Christian apologetics. This was particularly momentous for me because Dr. Geisler had had a unique impact on my decision to come to seminary. He taught and inspired Ravi Zacharias while at Trinity, and Ravi's sermons, lectures, and question and answer sessions on college campuses had a major impact on me feeling the responsibility to be intellectually prepared for ministry. Dr. Geisler was also an author I would read when trying to understand the usual criticisms of the Christian faith.

Needless to say, the experience was incredible. We spent the mornings having Dr. Geisler lecture through his twelve-step apologetic method which is the following:

1. Truth about reality is knowable

2. Opposites cannot both be true

3. The theistic God exists

4. Miracles are possible

5. Miracles performed in connection with a truth claim are acts of God to confirm the truth of God through the messenger of God

6. The New Testament documents are reliable

7. As witnessed in the New Testament, Jesus claimed to be God

8. Jesus’ claim to divinity was proven by an unique convergence of miracles

9. Therefore, Jesus was God in human flesh

10. Whatever Jesus (who is God) affirmed as true, is true

11. Jesus affirmed that the Bible is the Word of God

12. Therefore, it is true that the Bible is the Word of God and whatever is opposed to any biblical truth is false

Following morning lectures, we were given an hour for lunch in which that we spent watching the Euro 2008 with fellow students from across the world who knew an exponentially greater amount about soccer than I did. The afternoons were spent watching some of Dr. Geisler's debates with leading thinkers in secular humanism or other religions, as well as lectures on other world religions.

The experience was powerful and made me all the more thankful for men like Dr. Geisler who I could look to while at USC when challenged with difficult questions and criticisms of Christianity in my various classes. While the world doesn't often admit it, there truly are great thinkers who also happen to be conservative, evangelical, Bible believing Christians.

C.S. Lewis said...

"The world might stop in ten minutes; meanwhile, we are to go on doing our duty. The great thing is to be found at one's post as a child of God, living each day as though it were our last, but planning as though our world might last a hundred years."

- God In The Dock

Ravi Zacharias said...

"G. K. Chesterton correctly remarked that the problem with Christianity is not that it has been tried and found wanting but that it has been found difficult and left untried. In response to an article in The Times of London entitled 'What's Wrong with the World?' Chesterton replied,

'I am.

Yours truly,

G. K. Chesterton.'

That is precisely Jesus' point - we are wrong with the world."

A Week with Norman Geisler

If any of my 3 faithful readers are wondering why I haven't written in the past week, it's because I'm doing a semester's worth of material in one week. I am in the middle of spending an incredible week studying underneath one of the leading Christian apologists of the 20th century: Norman Geisler. After three days I have been so encouraged and challenged to love the Lord with all my mind. To the right is the book that I've been getting familiar with all week. (By the way, if you ever get the chance to study with a guy who has written an entire encyclopedia on a topic, take it!)


I'll be posting some more thoughts when I'm able to come up for air, as well as the second part of the series I started titled, "Just want to be like Jesus?" Also, I will be sure to post some responses to the criticisms received from Clemson and UGA fans on the best entrances in college football. The fall is almost here, and it's about time to start talking some smack. J.P. Harmon and Bert Watts have posted responses on their blogs. Gentlemen, prepare for a response soon enough...

A New Christian Debate Resource

(This post is a work in progress and will be cleaned up and improved upon in the coming days).
Last updated 5/29

This is something I'm incredibly excited about working to put together. I often enjoy listening to debates more than anything else because it can never be a one-sided argument. Of course, when the Christian debates the atheist I don't side with the atheist; however, a debate presents both sides of the argument and provides the opportunity to hear the Christian response and defense to objections. This is a facet that is not always offered in a sermon since that is not the proper forum for such objections.

Therefore, after realizing that I have not been able to find a site (though it may be out there, I'm not trying to be revolutionary here) that offers audio or video of Christian debates, the following is what I have found on the internet that either has audio or video files. I have listened to many of these debates, but not all of them in their entirety. I don't necessarily agree entirely with every Christian who is represented here, but just hope to provide a resource that will be useful to any who enjoy Christian apologetics and learning by hearing both sides of the argument. I will be adding to this list and updating the post regularly as I come across more debates that are on the internet. I have divided the list into two sections. The first is debates on theology, and focuses more on debates within Christian circles on theological matters such as Calvinism or eternal security of the believer. The second division is broadly labeled as debates proving the existence or nature of God. These are between Christians and and those of other faiths, atheism included. I recognize that this is also a theological matter, so my labels are not entirely accurate, but this was how I deemed it best to divide the categories. Without further delay...

Debates on Christian Theology:

Al Mohler (president of Southern Seminary) and Paige Patterson (president of Southwestern Seminary) "discuss" the matter of Calvinism at the Southern Baptist Convention here.

My reaction: This is one of the best debates out there - Mohler and Patterson present their positions in a clear and respectful fashion. I think pretty much anyone in the SBC should be required to listen to this.

Mark Driscoll debates Dan Corner over the eternal security of the believer here.

My reaction: Good debate - the audio quality is not great, but Driscoll does a good job defending the security of the believer.

Debates on The Existence/ Nature of God:

"The Great Debate" - Greg Bahnsen (Christian apologist) debates well-known atheist, Gordon Stein, here.

My reaction: Excellent - one of the most famous debates out there. Greg Bahnsen is brilliant

John Lennox (Oxford mathematician & Christian Apologist) and Richard Dawkins (Oxford scientist & author of The God Delusion) debate here.

My reaction: This is a great debate between one of the leading Christian apologists and probably the best known atheist of our generation. The worst part of this is the debate format. It doesn't seem like the moderator really let the two talk without interrupting. Having heard Lennox speak at Southeastern chapel, many of his best arguments (especially his conclusion) were cut off as he was getting to them because of time restraints.

A video conversation between Alister McGrath (of Oxford) and Richard Dawkins here.

My reaction: This video format is somewhat awkward. You can see the same interview on YouTube in a series of ten minute videos as well. This is a good video that is more of a conversation than a debate. This comes from Richard Dawkins' website, so it's important to recognize that he is asking the questions to McGrath. Therefore, Dawkins is able to be on the offense throughout the entire discussion - a significant advantage.

Ray Comfort (from The Way of the Master) vs. Ron Barrier (atheist) here attempting to prove/disprove the existence of a Creator.

My reaction: This is a very poor debate, and I've included it only for the sake of completeness. Barrier's arguments are very poor and mostly simple logic that appeal to the emotions of his audience. Comfort isn't too impressive either for the Christian defense...

William Lane Craig (Christian apologist) debates Jamal Badawi (Muslim apologist) at Emory Univeristy. Part of 1 of 11 is below, and the remaining 10 parts are also on YouTube.

Lessons learned from my first year at Southeastern Seminary

It's hard to believe, but as I finished my Old Testament II final on Wednesday I also finished my first year of seminary. It has been a wonderful and rewarding experience which has far exceeded Megan and I's expectations. Here's just some quick thoughts on different things I've learned or experienced after my first year...

In the past year I completed classes such as Hermeneutics, Greek I and II, Evangelism, and Theology I. I would say that almost every class has been great, with each professor adding their own twist to the class through their unique personalities. Top professors for the last year have been Dr. Akin (hermeneutics), Dr. Black (Greek I, II and NT II), and Dr. Reid (Evangelism).

I will probably stay away from the "practical" classes for my last two years (by practical I mean classes like counseling, pastoral ministry, etc). It's not that they aren't rewarding, but I've found that seminary is a place to learn things that you could never learn on your own. I found that I probably could have learned as much about counseling by just reading the books that were assigned. If you're serving in a good church you should be learning the practical aspect of ministry there, which will save your seminary electives for classes like the languages.

I came into seminary being strongly discouraged from pursuing anything in the field of apologetics. In the past year I didn't take anything within Christian philosophy because of it, but I have found that my love for apologetics has crept back! In the summer I will be taking a class with Dr. Norman Geisler (more on this later) on Christianity in relation to the other world religions, and in the fall I will take two classes with Dr. Bruce Little: Christian Philosophy and Critical Thinking & Argumentation.

Megan and I could be anywhere two years from now. We came in thinking that we were willing to go anywhere or do anything, but we weren't (at least I wasn't). Many professors here are "afflictors of the comfortable," and they challenge you to look beyond the U.S. to find your place of ministry. Megan and I talk about this often, and we look forward to see where the Lord takes us.

The consistent piece of advice I received coming in was to take professors, not classes. They were right - a class is made or broken by its teacher.

Who would have thought that I would enjoy Greek? I'm on to my third semester this summer...

Half of the education in seminary is interaction with the other students. That's why I strongly feel that being a full-time, on-campus student is a huge advantage, and should be chosen (if possible) over online courses. You hear what people are reading, thinking, experiencing, and who they listen to (sermons).

For the last 18 months Megan has been encouraging me to pursue my PhD after finishing seminary. For the last 14 months or so I strongly disagreed, but am feeling more and more called to continuing my education after graduating from Southeastern. I'm hesitant about this, because I want to make sure this isn't a pride thing, but as of now I see this as a likely next step.

I'm so thankful to be at a "Great Commission" seminary. I had many hesitations about coming to a "confessional seminary", but I am so thankful that we came to Southeastern. God has used it to change me substantially, and developed my heart for the nations.

That's all for now, and if I think of more I'll post them as they come to me...

The Case for Theology & Apologetics (Pt. 2)

For anyone who may have listened to the first portion of The White Horse Inn's case for theology and apologetics, here is the second portion of the program. It is excellent!

http://www.oneplace.com/common/player/oneplace/CustomPlayer.asp?bcd=05/11/2008&url=http://boss.streamos.com/wmedia/swn/oneplace/wm/wi/wi20080511.wax&MinTitle=White+Horse+Inn&MinURL=http://www.oneplace.comhttp://www.oneplace.com/ministries/the_white_horse_inn/&MinArchives=http://www.oneplace.comhttp://www.oneplace.com/ministries/the_white_horse_inn/archives.asp&Refresh=&AdsCategory=MINISTRY.WI&Show_ID=26

The Case for Theology & Apologetics (Pt. 1)

I've been listening to "The White Horse Inn" recently. It's a half-hour, roundtable discussion that comes on weekly. Their most recent broadcast featured, "The Case for Theology & Apologetics (Pt.1)." I would highly recommend listening to it and a link is given below. This, along with reading Him We Proclaim, has left me thinking increasingly about about the role of both theology and apologetics while preaching. As I work through it, I'll post more, but it's definitely been on my mind the last couple of weeks...

http://www.whitehorseinn.org/

http://www.oneplace.com/common/player/oneplace/CustomPlayer.asp?bcd=05/04/2008&url=http://boss.streamos.com/wmedia/swn/oneplace/wm/wi/wi20080504.wax&MinTitle=White+Horse+Inn&MinURL=http://www.oneplace.comhttp://www.oneplace.com/ministries/the_white_horse_inn/&MinArchives=http://www.oneplace.comhttp://www.oneplace.com/ministries/the_white_horse_inn/archives.asp&Refresh=&AdsCategory=MINISTRY.WI&Show_ID=26

Some Thoughts on "Expelled"

My friend, Patrick, and I went to see Ben Stein's documentary "Expelled" today. The film is Stein's attempt to investigate the Intelligent Design (ID) vs. Evolution (primarily atheistic evolution) in American academia, with a particular focus on how ID is not given a legitimate voice at the table of free discussion. Below is a long trailer that fills in the details if you haven't heard of it.



Here's my off the top of my head reaction to the film:

A Few Likes:

I was glad that the film was able to show many of the brilliant men and women out there (who aren't neccesarily religious) who don't take neo-Darwinism as a given when it comes to both scientific inquiry and understanding the origin of life. The film does a good job of showing that it's not as simple as intelligent people believe neo-Darwinism and the superstitious believe something else. When you see graduates of Cambridge, Oxford, etc. asking these questions, the debate cannot be as simple as intelligence vs. ignorance.

I thought the film did a good job of showing that American universities and academic communities are no longer a marketplace of free ideas. Many would respond that this is not the case and that ID simply is not legitimate enough to have a place in that marketplace. However, the film clearly shows that this is not a bunch of backwoods high school dropouts who are questioning modern scientific theory. Google someone like John Lennox - just reading his resume makes my head hurt.

One of the most criticized features in the film is the discussion of what happens when neo-Darwinism is taken to its logical conclusions (this was discussing Nazi Germany's survival of the fittest/ethnic superiority theory that led to the murder of the "inferior" races". Also included were the history of Eugenics (google this, not a very pretty picture) in relation to abortion and groups like Planned Parenthood). I am glad this was included. This is rarely understood in the American academic system. Also rarely taught is that this was not an isolated incident in history. Study Latin American history in the 20th century and you get many of the same sad stories.

A few dislikes:

I really wish they had used John Lennox more. Having just debated Richard Dawkins, he is emerging as one of the leading voices in this debate. I figure they decided to limit his time since he is a strong Christian, and the film tries to show more how non-religious scientists are questioning evolution.

My biggest dislike was that the film stooped too often to belittling those who are fundamentalist neo-Darwinians by interjecting a number of old movie clips after presenting the atheist-evolutionist argument. I don't think we have to go to that level. Just let the two sides make their argument and let people decide on their own. I think that when the Christian argument (not that this was a Christian film) is presented responsibly and lovingly at the marketplace of ideas then it will be victorious. We do not have to take low-blows.

In conclusion, the film was good and I would recommend it. It's certainly not perfect, but it does present the legitimate argument that evolution should no longer be assumed by the modern thinking person.

C.S. Lewis: The Man who Made me Think

I came across this very cool picture from an old Time magazine. It was first published over 60 years ago (Sept. 8, 1947), and it is amazing to see the influence that C.S. Lewis still has in America. He is probably the extra-biblical writer who has had the greatest impact on me. He gave me a greater desire to read Scripture, and most importantly gave me the confidence to know that the Christian faith was not an intellectual crutch for the ignorant. This was a great turning point for me- society has generally categorized Christianity as either being a tradition or a superstition. I used to hold a similar belief. But Lewis showed that one can be an orthodox Christian and be a thinking man. In fact, Lewis showed that the Christian must think in a more sophisticated manner than the unbeliever. The critic often throws out what seems like a contradiction- "I could never believe a God who is loving would send people to Hell"- and does no further examination beyond that. The Christian takes these great truths and must recognize that simple thinking will not do, and pursues a greater understanding of God. Lewis showed that when one thinks, Christ and Christian faith become even more beautiful.


"There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right then, have it your way.'"

- C.S. Lewis

"The Great Debate"

If you ever have a while to sit and listen to something I would highly recommend what I have posted below. It is a link to one of the most famous debates of the 20th century and is still referred to as "The Great Debate." This debate is between Greg Bahnsen (pictured above), a brilliant Christian apologist, and Gordon Stein, the well-known and equally intelligent atheist. Stein quickly has to go into retreat due to Bahnsen's incredible ability to reveal the illogical nature of the foundation of Stein's argument against God. Granted, it will probably make your head hurt, but if you have any sort of interest in apologetics this would probably be right up your alley. It's amazing how often you hear about debates between Christian apologists and atheists, but rarely can you find one to listen to. Well, here is one for your listening pleasure.

http://veritasdomain.wordpress.com/2006/12/05/greg-bahnsen-vs-gordon-stein-the-great-debate/