| Dear Friends of Reasonable Faith,
April was an exciting month highlighted by two significant events!
| |
The first was my dialogue with Jeff Hester, the editor emeritus of Astronomy magazine, on “Is Belief in God Rational in an Age of Science?” at Holy Cross College in Massachusetts. Hester is one of the astronomers responsible for taking the astonishing photograph with the Hubble Space Telescope known popularly as “The Pillars of Creation.” He is, unfortunately, bitterly anti-religious and terribly condescending toward religious believers of any sort. That’s why he insisted on the wording of the question, which is really a no-brainer. Even if religious believers are wrong, that doesn’t imply that they’re irrational. So my task was fairly straightforward: not to demonstrate that God exists but simply to prove that a rational, scientifically informed person can believe in God. Notice how modest that claim is. It leaves it open that people who do not believe in God may also be rational. Reasonable people often disagree.
| |
|  |
The Pillars of Creation
Credits: NASA, ESA and the Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA) | |  |
A Near-Infrared View of The Pillars of Creation
Credits: NASA, ESA and the Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA) | |
| | |
|
So in support of my claim that a rational, scientifically informed person can believe in God, I gave two arguments: (1) There are indisputable examples of rational, scientifically informed people who believe in God. Here I showed powerpoint slides of some of the greatest contemporary astronomers and astrophysicists who are outspoken theists and even Christians. They are decisive counter-examples to Hester’s claim that rational, scientifically informed people cannot believe in God. Since there was no possibility of disputing that these great scientists in Hester’s own field of expertise are scientifically informed, Hester was forced to deny that they are rational--a claim that is as arrogant as it is false. (2) There are good arguments that make belief in God rational. Here I sketched the kalām cosmological argument, the fine-tuning argument, the moral argument, and the ontological argument. This last one was particularly apropos because it shows that if it is rational to believe the key premiss (that it’s possible that God exists), then it’s rational to believe that God exists. To avoid the conclusion Hester had to deny that it is rational to believe that it’s even possible that God exists.
| |
Hester’s opening statement was a tissue of logical fallacies. As a scientist and not a philosopher, he constantly stumbled into logical mistakes and conceptual confusions. His strategy was to show that religious belief arises as a result of evolutionary pressures, tribalism, mental projection, and so on. Over and over again he committed the genetic fallacy, which is trying to invalidate a belief by showing how it arises. When I called him on this, he replied that even if theism were true, we would still have no reason to think that it is true. I retorted, “But Jeff, that’s why I presented four arguments in support of theism.” That really set him back on his heels because he’s used to dealing with religious believers who have no good arguments for theism and thus succumb to his genetic arguments.
| |
It was an exciting evening. In contrast to the calm and stately pace of a formal debate, our dialogue was fast-paced and in-your-face. You can watch a video of our exchange on YouTube here or click the video below.
| |
The second important event was my appearance on the Ben Shapiro Sunday Special program. I flew out to Los Angeles to record the interview in his studio. Craig Hazen of the Apologetics Department at Talbot School of Theology arranged for me to film several lectures in the days prior to the interview for use in their on-line curriculum. So Sunday night, one week after Easter, I spoke in Talbot’s Calvary Chapel on the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus. In contrast to the short and popular-level talk I give on secular campuses, this lecture to the seminary community was a lengthy exploration in greater depth of the historical credibility of the central facts undergirding the inference to Jesus’ resurrection. The next day I spoke in the department’s new recording studio for more than two hours on the problem of divine foreknowledge and human freedom. Once again, the longer time afforded a much more in-depth discussion than is normally possible. Finally, the next day I spoke again in studio on the absurdity of life without God, an update of a talk which the Apologetics program has found to be very popular in its on-line program. Once these lectures are edited, we’ll make them available on our YouTube channel.
| |
 | WLC and Ben Shaprio on set of The Ben Shaprio Show Sunday Special |
| Finally on Wednesday came the much-anticipated interview with Ben Shapiro. I was driven to the studio and after a few minutes with the make-up artist escorted into the studio to meet the man himself. He looks about 19 years old, has a slight build, and was wearing a black yarmulke, which was probably not visible on screen against his black hair. He has amazing drive and energy. I was told that in addition to our show he had already recorded another show earlier in the day and had spent two hours on radio. The staff told me that he basically talks all day long. He was friendly and joking and told me that they had been getting lots of requests to have me on the show (so that does make a difference!). We immediately took our seats facing each other and got down to business.
| |
Our conversation was wide-ranging and energetic. We talked about arguments for the existence of God, the problem of suffering and evil, the person and claims of Jesus, and the evidence for his resurrection. Sometimes he asked what were really two questions rolled into one, requiring me to differentiate them. For example, he asked, “What do you think is the best argument for God’s existence? Which one is the most convincing?” I explained that that’s two different questions. I find the kalām cosmological argument to be the best argument, but the moral argument to be the most convincing. That gave me a chance to lay out and explain the premises of each argument. He played devil’s advocate a bit, offering a couple popular objections to the arguments, which I easily answered. One of the objections confused the kalām argument with Leibniz’s contingency argument, which gave me the opportunity to lay out the premises of that argument as well. To my surprise Ben likes the ontological argument and asked me to explain it. So in all I was able to give four arguments for God’s existence in the interview.
| |
But we didn’t stop there. He wanted to know how we might move from theism to a particular religion like Judaism or Christianity. I pointed to Jesus of Nazareth as the key to answering that question. I explained that historical scholars have shown that Jesus claimed to be the Jewish Messiah, the unique Son of God, and the divine-human Son of Man prophesied by Daniel. At his trial before the Jewish Sanhedrin Jesus made all three claims, which resulted in his condemnation for blasphemy. Ben retorted that claiming to be the Messiah was not in Jewish thinking blasphemous, since Messiah was a political figure who would rule Israel. I replied that Jesus had a very different interpretation of the Messiah than did the chief priests and the people and so failed to live up to their expectations, which helped lead to his crucifixion.
| |
That raises the question: whose interpretation of the Messiah should we accept? The chief priests’ and the people’s or Jesus’? The answer to that question, I said, lies in his alleged resurrection. If the God of Israel has raised Jesus from the dead, then He has publicly and unequivocally vindicated those allegedly blasphemous claims for which he was crucified. That then led us to discuss the evidence for Jesus’ resurrection.
| |
Ben also asked why God should reveal Himself to us, as is claimed in Judaism and Christianity. I replied, “The answer can be given in one word: Atonement.” I then pointed to the role of the Old Testament sacrifices in providing atonement for the people and to Christ’s sacrificial death as the final and complete atonement for sins. (After the interview I gave Ben a copy of my book on the atonement.) Near the end of our interview he asked how I became “religious.” He asked me to share my personal story. So I unexpectedly had the opportunity to share my personal testimony of how I came to faith in Christ and how my life was changed.
| |
So it was a remarkable interview. I was told that it would air in about two Sundays’ time. Of course, I have no idea how much of this interview will wind up on the cutting room floor. It felt as though we had talked much longer than an hour! But editing is beyond my control, so we’ll just have to wait and see. Thank you to all of you who remembered us in prayer!
| |
I’m continuing to write up my study on the historical Adam. I just completed a section on the misrepresentation on the part of some Old Testament scholars that ancient Babylonians and Egyptians and, hence, Hebrews believed that the heavens are a solid dome like an inverted bowl resting on the earth with the stars and planets engraved in its hard surface. This is demonstrably wrong and represents a failure to understand Babylonian astronomy and Egyptian iconography. I hope to say more of this later in a Monthly Report when I have more space (no pun intended!).
| |
Having published my short book on the atonement with Cambridge University Press, I am thrilled to report that my more in-depth book on the atonement entitled Atonement and the Death of Christ has been accepted for publication by Baylor University Press. This is a very fine press, and they are enthusiastic about the book and are planning a big rollout. Ironically, the long delay in publishing this book has given me more time to think about some key issues and to significantly revise and strengthen one chapter of the book.
| |
With the arrival of May our much anticipated English Schools Tour is almost upon us. In contrast to the universities at which I normally speak, this trip is taking me to some of the most prestigious public and private prep schools in England, schools at which past kings and prime ministers have been educated. Our welcome there from the Headmasters and staff has been very warm and enthusiastic. Jan and I shall be accompanied by our Executive Director Michael Lepien and his wife Jaclyn, who will film the events. We’ll be joined by our dear English friends Dr. Peter and Heather May, who have been so key in facilitating our previous speaking trips to England. Please pray for the students who will hear my presentations and for us as we travel about. Here is our itinerary:
May 19: Wellington College
May 21: Harrow School May 22: Eton College May 23: Bedales School
Winchester College
May 24: Canford School
Oxford Town Hall Public Lecture
| |
Oh, yes, one more thing! While in London I also have a radio interview scheduled with Roger Penrose, one of the greatest living physicists and cosmologists, whose name is enshrined in the Hawking-Penrose singularity theorems! What an incredible privilege!
While I was at Talbot so many students expressed to me their heartfelt appreciation for what we do. I always tell them, “It’s a joy! We’re having a blast!”
| |
For Christ and His Kingdom,
| |
MONTHLY TESTIMONIAL Hello Dr. Craig, My name is Jonathan. I am a double major in English and Religious at Crandall Univesity, NB, Canada. First off, I would like to thank you for all that you do for the kingdom and all that you have done for me. I was a nihilist--granted, a pretty ignorant one--for a long time until I came across your work. In the midst of anxiety, panic attacks, doubts, etc. I came across your work and everything from your intellect to your charisma shifted my worldview. Your "Teleological", "Kalam cosmological, and "Absurdity of life without God" arguments broke down my nihilist worldview so fast. You played a large part in shifting my worldview from "me" to "Jesus", and, for that, I am forever in debt to God's grace and your ministry. Currently, I am looking at a future in apologetics. However, I realize God may use my gift, or my desires, towards a career in evangelism. Either way, it is in God's hands. I hope, beyond hope, that one day I get to meet you face-to-face and thank you for all that you have done for me. Best Wishes, Jonathan
| |
|
|
|
|
