About Roger

(For much-more information about this blog, see the home page at https://reasonbasedfaith.com/.)

Note: the above photo of a starry night’s sky reflects the fact that I love optical astronomy. But this is NOT a view through a telescope! The stars really are this clear and bright far away from the lights of a city or town, and also when viewed from high terrain. The higher the elevation, the thinner the atmosphere—the less atmosphere starlight has to pass through to get to one’s eyes or to a camera. Hence, the images of stars at a high elevation (on one’s retinas or on camera film) will be clearer and brighter. From another perspective: “The heavens are telling the glory of God; and the firmament proclaims his handiwork.” (Psalm 19:1, Revised Standard Version) Photo credit: Phil Botha, Unsplash.com.

Who am I? I describe myself as a logical thinker and analyzer of complex matters, who was an atheist, but who now (on the basis of reason or evidence plus logic) believes in the biblical God, and who also has a serious desire to help people avoid unnecessary suffering in this life and in the next.

Why we sometimes suffer

There are various types of suffering in this life. For example: there are times that we don’t know what we (hypothetically) could have known in order to have made the decision that would have (hypothetically) enabled us to avoid the suffering that we encountered. Thus, we sometimes suffer because of a lack of knowledge. This suffering could have been avoided or at least minimized if we had known ahead of time what to do in order to avoid or minimize it, but we didn’t have access to that knowledge.

But there is also clearly–unnecessary suffering in this life—suffering we enter into, even though we did have possible access (such as on the Internet) to the information that would have (hypothetically) enabled us to avoid this suffering or to have minimized it. But we inadvertently ignored this information—or possibly never knew it was available—and therefore entered into the suffering anyway.

Thus, we sometimes suffer because of a lack of knowledge OR because we inadvertently choose to ignore information that’s available. The remedy for the second, clearly-unnecessary type of suffering is an input of information, by which we can choose to take action to minimize or to avoid the suffering. This is the kind of suffering I hope to help people minimize or avoid entirely!

My former atheism

As I will share in some posts, I used to be a very committed and passionate atheist who tried to persuade Christians to become atheists! In the process of this, I developed a logical argument based on the Bible that seemed to prove that God doesn’t exist. I thought it was persuasive; on one occasion, it completely blocked a Christian in his attempt to convert me; he didn’t know how to respond. I was very proud of that argument!

However, I later met a Christian who knew how to counter and invalidate my precious argument! After exposing its false premise and (metaphorically) shredding it into unusable bits and pieces, she then challenged me to investigate and determine for myself whether there was actual evidence for the biblical God’s existence, as she claimed.

I did so and found a number of evidences, three of which were particularly compelling or cogent (two of these I’ll feature in a post titled, “The Bible’s Strongest Proof for God”). I studied these evidences with a fair amount of objectivity because my Christian friend seemed to be so certain that they were compelling. I was therefore motivated to try to be sure of the real truth, one way or the other.

I spent months in careful, conscientious study because I tried my best to be objective and to come face-to-face with reality, whatever it might be like. In retrospect, I now see that this attitude (of wanting to know the truth more than anything else) is what it took for me to be brutally honest: I had to admit to myself that I could actually be mistaken about such an important feature of reality as God’s existence.

I believed and became a Christian

To make a long story short, in part because of my newly-acquired objectivity, and in part because of the compelling nature of three of the evidences, I became a Christian myself! I understood how the evidences demonstrated that the biblical God’s existence is highly probable, especially from a cumulative perspective or within a cumulative case.

(Of course, there are those who have faith instinctively, without apparently basing it on evidence or logic. The Bible does not say that this is wrong—it may be the faith mentioned in 1Corinthians 12:8-9. But I’ll speak for myself here: since, as an atheist, I wanted to base what I believed on evidence and logic, I felt a need to be sure that my newfound faith in the biblical God was similarly based on evidence and logic, and so it is.)

A photo of a man wearing a "Faith and Reason" jacket, which implies that faith is compatible with reason.
Man with “Faith and Reason” jacket. This is not myself, but this is a perfect representation of my basic philosophy: that faith and reason are fully compatible. Photo credit: Jon Tyson, Unsplash.com.

This reason-based faith that I received (from this study) was strong; I only needed three compelling evidences to fuel the logical arguments that I formulated, which convinced me that the biblical God was real. (Today I know of thirty-eight groups of evidences and associated arguments supporting generic theism and biblical theism.)

I wrote in my first post: “…since these three evidences were very compelling, it would have actually required more faith for me to continue to disbelieve, rather than to simply believe in the biblical God’s existence! In other words, since I couldn’t bring myself to believe CONTRARY to the evidence—it’s only rational (or only makes sense) to believe in ACCORDANCE with the evidence—therefore, I realized that it would be more rational for me to believe rather than to disbelieve, and thus, I chose to believe—I took a step of faith—and became a Christian.”

The DIFFERENCE was that, formerly, as an atheist, I didn’t see any evidence for God. Now, after careful study, I saw three potent or convincing evidences. (Two of these evidences will appear in a post titled, “The Strongest Historical Evidences for Jesus and the Resurrection.”)

I agreed with Lee Strobel

I was then able to agree with journalist and former atheist, Lee Strobel, who is also a nationally-known author. He holds a Master of Studies in Law degree from Yale Law School and has been interviewed numerous times on national television, including CNN, ABC’s 20/20, and Fox News.

Beginning in 1980, Strobel spent a year and nine months carefully studying evidences. He wrote in his bestseller, The Case for Christ: “On November 8, 1981, I summarized the evidence for and against Christianity on a yellow legal pad. Based on the avalanche of evidence that pointed so powerfully toward the truth of Christianity, I concluded that it would take more faith for me to maintain my atheism than to become a Christian.” (The Case for Christ Movie Edition: Solving the Biggest Mystery of All Time, Zondervan, 2017, from the appendix, “An Interview with Lee Strobel,” Kindle locations 5592-5594)

In my case, the words were different, but the meaning and perspective were the same. I knew I couldn’t continue to believe contrary to where the evidence pointed. Some may say, “What evidence?” That’s what I’ll discuss and explain in my posts. However, I can present the following:

Evidences and logical arguments for God

Here’s a list of videos – many of them animated videos – that feature logical arguments for God, based on evidence, from Reasonable Faith, the organization founded by Dr. William Lane Craig:

Calvary Chapel and Pastor Chuck Smith

Theologically, I agree with the biblical teaching of the late Chuck Smith, former Senior Pastor of Calvary Chapel, Costa Mesa, California, USA, and founder of the “Calvary Chapel” movement. (I only disagree with some of his perspectives on science/faith issues.) His church grew in attendance to around 35,000 and reproduced itself into a fellowship or association of churches that today numbers over 1,000 churches worldwide!

How did this occur? Everyone realized that Pastor Chuck’s teaching was carefully and accurately biblical. Since he was also extremely knowledgeable, he was therefore highly respected. It was clear that he never deviated from the originally-intended meaning of a verse or a passage, as determined by its proper historical-cultural-theological context and by harmonization with other, directly-related Scripture passages. In this manner, he would teach through the Bible, verse by verse and book by book, explaining the meaning and significance of each verse (and how it related to other Scripture passages and concepts) as he went along. This type of expository teaching is a hallmark of Calvary-Chapel type churches, particularly those involved in the fellowship or association.

Better explanations of this, by Pastor Chuck himself, are available in two of his books: Calvary Chapel Distinctives: The Foundational Principles of the Calvary Chapel Movement, Word for Today, 5th Edition, 1993 and The Man God Uses: 14 Characteristics of a Godly Man, Word for Today, 2011. The Kindle versions are here and here; the free, Kindle reading app (for iOS, Android, Mac, and PC) is here.

My perspective on theology and doctrine

Teaching on theology and doctrine (the beliefs of Christians and typically, of a church or denomination) is vitally important in order for Christians to learn what to believe and why to believe it; this ideally results in life transformation. What we believe results or manifests in our actions, behavior, and habits. (E.g. Luke 6:45; Romans 12:2) Without understanding what to believe and why, minimal life transformation occurs; people tend to remain in whatever bad habits of thought and behavior that they may have accumulated. And in this world, there’s a tendency for everyone (to some degree) to develop bad habits of thought and behavior. (Cf. 1John 2:15-17)

By the way, an extremely-powerful ministry (in terms of life transformation) for teen and adult addicts is found at https://teenchallengeusa.org/about. People who have been powerfully addicted for years (to alcohol, drugs, eating disorders, or other addictions) have been set free; some have been delivered from the worst addictions imaginable! (A list of addictions is at https://teenchallengeusa.org/addictions.) As they say on their website, “Throughout the years, studies have been conducted about our process. These studies show that faith in God is the main reason our students are still sober after completing the program.” (https://teenchallengeusa.org/about)

Pastor Chuck’s beliefs and mine

In terms of his doctrinal beliefs: in a nutshell, Pastor Chuck believed in the Trinity, the atoning work of Christ, salvation by grace through faith, the verbal plenary inspiration of Scripture, the personal Second Advent of Christ, premillennialism, and in the pretribulation rapture. I concur; I believe in these doctrinal points (though my purpose in this blog is not to focus on theology, but rather on apologetics; i.e. evidences and reasons for both generic theism and biblical theism). Pastor Chuck’s audio feed is at https://calvarychapel.com/pastorchuck/c2k.

To this description (of doctrinal beliefs), I’ll add that I’m essentially a Calminian (part-Calvinist, part-Arminian) with Molinist leanings, thanks to the teaching of Dr. William Lane Craig. Someone might say, “That’s quite a combination! How do you fit those together?” My answer: Very delicately! It’s a balancing act, figuratively speaking, and I have some ideas on this. I don’t know with certainty, of course, how God combines these concepts in terms of their application, but I believe He does this successfully. (Cf. Calvinism vs. Molinism debate on Premier Christian Radio)

Dr. Skip Heitzig

I also like and theologically agree with the teaching of Dr. Skip Heitzig, Senior Pastor of Calvary Church in Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA. Christians will be interested to know that he studied under Pastor Chuck; my agreement with Skip’s teaching is thus understandable. He holds a Ph.D. in Philosophy, Biblical and Theological Studies from Trinity Southwest University and is an Associate Professor of Pastoral and Biblical Studies at Veritas International University. (https://viu.ves.edu/undergraduate-faculty/) Skip’s course (“The Bible from 30,000 Feet”) is a distance-learning course in more ways than one! (https://viu.ves.edu/the-bible-from-30000-feet/)

His messages are balanced, informative, and edifying; his radio website and audio feed are at http://connectwithskip.com/; his teaching library is at http://www.calvaryabq.org/teachings.asp?AcceptsCookies=yes and also at http://skipheitzig.com/teachings.asp. The “Calvary Church with Skip Heitzig” YouTube Channel is at https://www.youtube.com/user/CalvaryABQ. Videos of Skip’s distance-learning course (“The Bible from 30,000 Feet”) are here.

My perspective on the reasoning in this blog

As I wrote in my personal profile: I’m now blogging about my journey and about how evidence and logic point to God’s existence and identity. I believe that this reasoning is cogent by means of many (thirty-eight) inferences to the best explanation within a cumulative case. (No knowledgeable Christian uses the obviously-fallacious “God of the gaps” reasoning.) If more Christians were familiar with this valid method of reasoning, I believe there would be fewer atheists—the evidences are that strong, especially when they are cumulatively considered.

This method of reasoning is supported by Christians such as William Lane Craig, J. P. Moreland, Victor Reppert, Paul Copan, Gregory Ganssle, Craig Keener, Craig Evans, Craig Blomberg, Michael Licona, John Lennox, Timothy and Lydia McGrew, Robert Spitzer, Edward Feser, Frank Turek, Hugh Ross, Fazale Rana, Kenneth Samples, Anjeanette Roberts, Jeff Zweerink, Michael G. Strauss, James Sinclair, Sean McDowell, Ravi Zacharias, Vince Vitale, Abdu Murray, Amy Orr-Ewing, J. Warner Wallace, Gregory Koukl, and Lee Strobel—among many others.

Generally in a blog post, my modus operandi (mode of operation OR systematic method or pattern of procedure) is (1) to present an issue or question, (2) to quote from a scholar or scholars, and then (3) to make an inference or inferences that are clearly warranted and justified by what the scholar or scholars have said or written. Sometimes I’ll add the step of (4) combining several inferences into a probabilistic or a deductively-certain argument, the conclusion of which supports God’s existence or identity. Within a single post, steps 2 and 3 are often repeated cyclically. I find that this method works well to establish the cogency of my main points or argument, bearing on the initial issue or question.

My perspective on apologetics in general

Apologetics refers not to apologizing (!), but to a presentation of evidences and reasons for a particular truth-claim, especially in defense against criticism. More specifically, it’s a method of supporting a truth-claim by means of logical reasoning based on an analysis of the evidence. One examines the evidence and then logically derives a probabilistic inference to the best explanation or, in some cases, a deductively-certain conclusion. Cf. God-of-the-Gaps or Best Explanation?The Compatibility of Faith and Reason; How Theists and Atheists Reason Differently about God; Best Explanation Apologetics; Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Abduction; Inference to the Best Explanation; How to Evaluate an Abductive Argument.

The Christians who have influenced me the most in my study of apologetics are William Lane Craig, Hugh Ross, Fazale Rana, Kenneth Samples, Ravi Zacharias, Norman Geisler, and Frank Turek.

My perspective on deductive arguments

A deductive logical argument is an extension and application of the principle of truth by definition. The following paragraphs explain why this is a very-important and powerful type of apologetic reasoning; in my opinion, it’s the most powerful.

Here’s a textbook example of a deductive argument:

  1. All men are mortal.
  2. Socrates was a man.
  3. Therefore, Socrates was mortal.

The concept is that, since all men are mortal, and since Socrates was an individual example in the category of “men”; therefore, Socrates must have had the inherent characteristics possessed by every individual in that category—including mortality, by definition. This is how a deductive argument is an extension and application of the principle of truth by definition.

And this is precisely why valid deductive arguments (of course, with true premises) are so powerful, can’t be correctly contradicted or overcome, and leave no realistic or truthful “wiggle room” for the critic: standard definitions can’t realistically or truthfully be distorted to a significant degree or else, everyone will know it—it will be obvious to practically everyone that the deductive argument is true and valid, and that the criticism is erroneous and false.

The majority of scholars

Additionally, we can be assured that all our premises are true—or most-likely true—by being careful to observe that they are in agreement with the opinions of the majority (ideally, the vast majority) of reputable scholars. Who knows more about a particular subject than the majority of scholars within that field or discipline? (Arguably, only God!)

As I wrote on the home page, it’s my contention that, if you use the opinions of the majority of astrophysicists and biochemists as premises in certain logical arguments, the conclusions of those arguments will support the intelligent design or God hypothesis—essentially, the existence of the theistic God. (Therefore, I don’t find that science detracts from God’s existence; science, objectively interpreted, supports His existence. Cf. https://www.reasons.org/; https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs; https://www.youtube.com/user/ReasonsToBelieve1?reload=9)

If you use the opinions of the majority of New Testament scholars as premises, the conclusions will support the historical reliability of the New Testament and arguably, the identity of that theistic God as the biblical God! (Cf. https://www.reasonablefaith.org/; https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/reflections; https://www.youtube.com/user/ReasonableFaithOrg; https://www.youtube.com/user/drcraigvideos)

All of these arguments can be formulated deductively, with each premise being more plausible or much-more plausible than its negation. And, with the premises I have in mind, the logic (leading to the conclusion) will easily be valid. This means that the conclusions to these arguments will validly follow; specifically, that the theistic God, or (for some arguments) the biblical God, exists.

Valid deductive arguments and the skeptic

Thus, if the Christian apologist employs clear and strictly-valid deductive arguments having true premises, this leaves practically no “wiggle room” for the skeptic of God’s existence! In order to deny such arguments, the skeptic must make outlandishly-erroneous and thus obviously-false claims that will be understood as such by practically everyone!

More specifically, in order to deny the conclusion of such an argument, the skeptic must deny one of the obviously-true premises, or else, the conclusion will validly follow. This can be too high a price for the skeptic to pay, though apparently not always.

I wrote “apparently not always” and I used “practically” as an adjective three times in the above paragraphs because there are SOME skeptics who are willing to pay that high a price (of appearing outlandishly-erroneous) in order to maintain their skeptical beliefs. However, many others are not so willing, and they are able to discern the erroneous and false nature of claims that oppose valid deductive arguments (with true premises) supporting generic theism and biblical theism.

This is the type of deductive argument that I will frequently employ in this blog. To fair-minded and objective individuals, these arguments will hopefully demonstrate God’s existence and identity beyond a reasonable doubt—of course, within a cumulative case consisting of many evidences and reasons. (Since so many evidences and reasons support His existence, it would be extremely unlikely for the biblical God not to exist.) This adventure should be both interesting and enjoyable, for many evidences yield themselves readily to being used in this way.

No, I don’t mean “enjoyable” in the sense that I enjoy seeing skeptics squirm; I don’t. I was once one of them and I know what worldview angst and uncertainty are like. Instead, I enjoy the truth; it’s simply beautiful how evidence and logic come together to demonstrate God’s existence and identity!

What about the skeptics?

As to skeptics: if they will seriously consider the many evidences and reasons for God’s existence (such as those that I’ll feature in my posts), they have the potential to enter into—not angst and uncertainty—but instead, the peace and joy that I and countless Christians have received by believing. I know that atheists will say, “It’s a delusion!” But the proof is in the pudding, so to speak—the proof is in the actual evidences and reasons. I urge atheists and skeptics to seriously examine and evaluate them—ideally, with patience and attention to detail. They may find that the powerful evidences for God’s existence outweigh the meager, superficial “evidences” for atheism, which can easily be explained from the perspective of biblical theism, as I will do in some of my posts.

(Parenthetically: yes, I very-much include the so-called “problem” of suffering in this category of meager, superficial “evidences.” And yes, I do know and have experienced how extreme and severe suffering can be. The awful severity of suffering does not diminish the explanatory power and scope of the biblical worldview.)

Why have I studied apologetics?

Because of the recommendation of a friend, I’ve added these last four sections to my “About Roger” page, in order to more precisely answer the question: Why have I studied apologetics? Many Christians are simply content to read the Bible. Why did I have a need to learn and know more? (On Guard Conference: William Lane Craig – What is Apologetics?)

Firstly, a number of years after I became a Christian, and because of a medical issue, I went through years of suffering. This was medically resolved in 2002, though some emotional trauma has remained. This prompted me to seek substantive answers to the question of suffering.

My thirst for knowledge prompted me to study not just the Bible, but also philosophical, historical, biblical, and scientific apologetics (i.e. philosophical or logical reasoning based on evidence, extrabiblical historical information, historical confirmations from and multiple, independent attestations within the Bible, and confirmations of biblical theism from science). Resources pertaining to philosophical, historical, and biblical apologetics are listed in the second section that follows. Resources pertaining to scientific apologetics are listed in the third section that follows.

(By the way, Christian apologetics has become a recognized discipline at some universities and, of course, seminaries, including Oxford University, Biola University, Liberty University, Houston Baptist University, Wheaton College Graduate School, Azusa Pacific University, Union University, Princeton Theological Seminary, Fuller Theological Seminary, Denver Seminary, Southern Evangelical Seminary, Dallas Theological Seminary, Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Westminster Theological Seminary, Luther Rice College & Seminary, Reformed Theological Seminary, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Veritas Evangelical Seminary, and Moody Bible Institute.)

Following My Blog

Get new content delivered directly to your inbox, within minutes after a new post is online.

Lingering questions and unresolved issues

Also, as a former atheist, I had many lingering questions and unresolved issues, such as:

Is science anti-God or pro-God?

• Do scientific evidences point toward or away from God?

The answer is: the scientific evidences point powerfully toward God. Cf. explanatory animated videos on the Kalam Cosmological Argument and The Fine-Tuning of the Universe; Reasons To Believe (from science and theology); Big Bang—The Bible Taught It First! Anthropic Principle: A Precise Plan for Humanity and How Does Science Show that God Is a Personal Being? Both are by Dr. Hugh Ross, as is The Creator and the Cosmos: How the Latest Scientific Discoveries Reveal God by Dr. Hugh Ross, RTB Press, 2018; Creating Life in the Lab: How New Discoveries in Synthetic Biology Make a Case for the Creator by Dr. Fazale Rana, Baker Books, 2011; Origins of Life: Biblical and Evolutionary Models Face Off by Drs. Fazale Rana and Hugh Ross, RTB Press, 2014; An astronomer’s quest by Dr. Hugh Ross; Orphan genes puzzle by Dr. Paul Nelson; The Kalam Cosmological Argument by Dr. Craig at Georgia Tech; Article by Dr. Craig on the Kalam Cosmological Argument; A Beginner’s and Expert’s Guide to the Big Bang by Dr. Hugh Ross; Design of the Quantum Tunneling Phenomenon; Designer Water; Milankovitch Cycle Design; Elegant Hurricane Design; Good God, Cruel World (on natural evil); The Wonder of Water.

How feasible is the prime Darwinian mechanism at all levels?

• Is Darwinian natural selection a feasible mechanism to produce macroevolutionary change?

The answer is: the prime Darwinian mechanism of natural selection indisputably accounts for microevolutionary changes (within a species) and perhaps for limited speciation (one species changing into a closely-related species). But scientifically, macroevolutionary change above the biological classification of “family” is unlikely apart from intelligent intervention. Cf. Darwin Devolves: The New Science about DNA that Challenges Evolution by Dr. Michael J. Behe, HarperOne, HarperCollins Publishers, 2019; Orphan genes puzzle by Dr. Paul Nelson; Mismatches between genetic data and the fossil record; Modern Brains Emerged in the Cambrian Explosion; Welcome Back, My Friends to the Show that Never Ends, Part 2; Welcome Back, My Friends to the Show that Never Ends, Part 3; Welcome Back, My Friends to the Show that Never Ends, Part 4; Analysis of Genomes Converges on the Case for a Creator; Who Was Adam? A Creation Model Approach to the Origin of Humanity by Dr. Fazale Rana with Dr. Hugh Ross, RTB Press, 2015; The Creator and the Cosmos: How the Latest Scientific Discoveries Reveal God by Dr. Hugh Ross, RTB Press, 2018, Chapter 14.  

Some atheists address this problem with the panspermia hypothesis—the supposition that intelligent, extraterrestrial aliens supposedly seeded the Earth with, perhaps, many different forms of life in the distant past. However, this hypothesis leaves many questions unanswered; firstly: where did these intelligent, extraterrestrial aliens get their seeding, so that their genomes could fully develop? From other intelligent, extraterrestrial aliens? If so, where did the second group of aliens—and the third group and the fourth group, ad infinitum—get their seeding? A hypothetical infinite regress of extraterrestrial aliens is limited by the probable beginning of the universe; also, an infinite regress is impossible because there’s no way for it to begin.

By contrast, a theistic explanation—that an intelligent Designer or theistic God has intervened in order to, at minimum, provide the required genetic information to produce the vast array of organisms above the biological classification of “family”—is a more-logical and satisfying explanation than an infinite regress of intelligent, extraterrestrial aliens! The theistic explanation also has the advantage of being confirmed by an abundance of other scientific, historical, and biblical evidences, while the infinite regress of intelligent, extraterrestrial aliens is, as yet, entirely unconfirmed!

Has science demonstrated the probable beginning of the universe?

• Has science shown that the universe was essentially created in the finite past, at the apparent Big Bang singularity?

The answer is: from the perspective of general relativity, absolutely yes; from the perspective of quantum gravity, probably still yes; as to the multiverse hypothesis: even a possibly-existing multiverse must have had an absolute beginning in the finite past, according to the Borde-Guth-Vilenkin Theorem, which holds with any spacetime that expands, on average, over its past history. Yes, the multiverse, predicated on inflation, obviously qualifies! Cf. explanatory animated video on the Kalam Cosmological Argument; Big Bang—The Bible Taught It First! The Kalam Cosmological Argument by Dr. Craig at Georgia Tech; Article by Dr. Craig on the Kalam Cosmological Argument; A Beginner’s and Expert’s Guide to the Big Bang by Dr. Hugh Ross; Escaping the Beginning? Confronting Challenges to the Universe’s Origin by Dr. Jeff Zweerink, RTB Press, 2019; The Creator and the Cosmos, RTB Press, 2018, Chapters 3-12; Inflationary Spacetimes Are Incomplete in Past Directions by Drs. Arvind Borde, Alan Guth, and Alexander Vilenkin.

Does the fine-tuning of the universe point to God or a multiverse?

• Is the fine-tuning of the universe caused by God (acting as an Intelligent Designer) or by the fact that we live in a huge, virtually-infinite multiverse (i.e. a great number of universes) and we just happen (by random chance) to live in a universe with hundreds of parameters that are fine-tuned for life’s existence?

The answer is: the intelligent design explanation is logically more-probable because there are many independent evidences confirming it; the multiverse explanation is purely-hypothetical, with no supporting evidence. Cf. explanatory animated video on The Fine-Tuning of the Universe; Anthropic Principle: A Precise Plan for Humanity and How Does Science Show that God Is a Personal Being? Both are by Dr. Hugh Ross, as is The Creator and the Cosmos, RTB Press, 2018, Chapters 15 & 17; Design of the Quantum Tunneling Phenomenon; Designer Water; Milankovitch Cycle Design; Elegant Hurricane Design; Good God, Cruel World (on natural evil); Quantum Uncertainty and Relativity Especially Fine-Tuned for You!

What about the advanced scientific knowledge found in the Bible?

• Can we reasonably postulate that the advanced scientific knowledge found in the Bible came from God? I refer to the biblical information on the following:

1. The beginning of the universe in the finite past—a fact that was unknown to scientists until the 1920s. (Big Bang theory was first formulated by Albert Einstein, Alexander Friedmann, and Georges Lemaître. It was confirmed by Edwin Hubble, George Gamow, Arno Penzias, Robert Wilson, and others.) Today, the majority of physicists believe that the universe probably began at the Big Bang. Yet the four basic features of the Big Bang (the beginning of the universe, the beginning of our time dimension, the expansion of the universe, and the law of entropy or decay) were taught in the Bible thousands of years ago! (Big Bang—The Bible Taught It First!) The best-known scripture reference is Genesis 1:1: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” Other biblical references for the beginning are: Genesis 1:1; 2:3-4; Nehemiah 9:6; Psalm 33:6; 136:5-9; 146:5-6; 148:1-5; Proverbs 3:19; Isaiah 40:26; 42:5; 45:12, 18; Jeremiah 32:17; Zechariah 12:1; John 1:1-3, 10; Acts 4:24; Colossians 1:15-19; Hebrews 1:10-12 & Psalm 102:25-27; Hebrews 11:3; Revelation 4:11.

2. Specifically, the beginning of our time dimension,unknown to scientists until the 1920s, but taught in the Bible thousands of years ago. (Big Bang—The Bible Taught It First!) Titus 1:2 speaks about the “hope of eternal life which God, who cannot lie, promised before time began.” (NKJV) Another rendering is the “hope of eternal life, which God, who never lies, promised before the ages began.” (ESV) There is a phrase in 2Timothy 1:9, which reads, “…according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began …” (NKJV) Furthermore, in Hebrews 1:1-2, the Greek plural noun aionas is best rendered “ages,” not “world” or “worlds.” In a similar construction in 1Corinthians 2:7, the Greek plural noun is best rendered “ages,” not “world.”

3. The continuous expansion of the universe, unknown to scientists until the 1920s, but taught in the Bible thousands of years ago. (Big Bang—The Bible Taught It First!) Before the 1920s, scientists thought that the universe was static or motionless overall. But because of Einstein’s discovery of general relativity, and because of Hubble’s discovery of the red shift of distant galaxies, they were forced to admit by 1929 that the universe was indeed expanding. The best scripture reference is Isaiah 40:22, which refers to God: “It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain and spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.” (NASB) The stretching out of a curtain is a two-dimensional analogy; the spreading out of a tent is an accurate three-dimensional analogy that’s very similar to the expansion of the universe! Isaiah wrote this around 2,700 years ago! At that time, only God knew about the expansion of the universe! Other biblical references for this expansion are: Job 9:8; Psalm 104:2; Isaiah 40:22; 42:5; 44:24; 45:12; 48:13; 51:13; Jeremiah 10:12; 51:15; Zechariah 12:1.

4. The fourth basic feature of the Big Bang, the law of entropy (increasing disorder or decay), is found in Isaiah 51:6; Psalm 102:25-26; Luke 21:33; Romans 8:20-21. (Big Bang—The Bible Taught It First!) Psalm 102:25-26 declare about God: “Of old you laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands. They will perish, but you will remain; they will all wear out like a garment …” (ESV) Note that the earth and the heavens will grow old and wear out; this aspect is especially consistent with the law of entropy or decay, and, applied to the universe, was unknown to ancient men. Everyone of course knew that dead bodies decay and that various materials wear out by reason of use. But to the ancients, the earth and the heavens seemed to be, for the most part, unchanging. Yet Psalm 102:25-26 declare that the heavens and the earth will wear out. Scientists first began to understand entropy (in this universal sense) in 1824, with the work of French scientist Sadi Carnot, the “father of thermodynamics.”

5. The Earth as a sphere, hanging in empty space, a fact unknown to the ancients. Job 26:7 & 10 say about God: “He stretches out the north over empty space and hangs the earth on nothing. … He has inscribed a circle on the surface of the waters at the boundary of light and darkness.” (NASB) This “circle on the surface of the waters at the boundary of light and darkness” is today called the Terminator, where sunrise and sunset occur on the Earth. From space, it’s seen as a circle going around our entire planet — but it can only be seen this way from space! The first half of Isaiah 40:22 is also pertinent: “It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers …” (NASB, ESV) There seems to be good evidence to date the Book of Job in the patriarchal period (about 2100 to 1800 BC). If so, Job and Isaiah (about 700 BC) were written over a thousand years apart.

6. The early Earth as a world completely covered with water, as in Genesis 1:2, 9-10, and Psalm 104:5-9. This concept was unknown to the ancients. For years, scientists had presumed that the continents had always existed, but recent scientific evidence has demonstrated that the early Earth was indeed completely covered with water. The Bible’s account predated this discovery by 3,400 years. Cf. Continental Landmass Growth and the Genesis 1 Chronology; Rapid Landmass Emergence Affirms Creation Day 3; The Age(s) of the Continents.

7. The progressive appearance of life forms (from simple to complex) during much of Earth’s history, as we now see in the fossil record; this is clearly taught in Genesis (1:11-27), but was unknown to the ancients. Jean-Baptiste Lamarck was the first scientist to propose a similar scenario in 1809. The Bible’s account predated his proposal by 3,200 years.

8. The reason why many new species of life appeared over Earth’s history before the arrival of humans but virtually-none have appeared since. The reason is that God ceased His creative work after creating humans. (Genesis 2:1-3) Dr. Hugh Ross describes this as answering a “fossil record enigma” that scientists have been unable to definitively answer. (A Matter of Days: Resolving a Creation Controversy, NavPress, 2004; chapters 7, 11, and 21) Cf. Mismatches between genetic data and the fossil record.

9. Blood is a source of life (Genesis 9:4; Leviticus 17:11; Deuteronomy 12:23-25),a concept rejected by ancient physicians, who taught that sick people must be bled in order to balance the “humors” or fluids of the body and (supposedly) restore health. This practice of “bloodletting” was harmful to patients in most cases, but it continued until the late 1800s! Again, the Bible’s information predated man’s apprehension or grasp of the issue, this time by about 3,300 years.

10. The means of protection from bacterial infection (Leviticus 7:19; 13:1-6, 45-58; 15:1-13; 17:11-14; Numbers 19:7-22; Deuteronomy 12:23-25; 23:12-13). When something was exposed to possible bacterial contamination, it was to be washed in running water or burned. When someone was exposed, he or she would wash in running water and then stay outside the camp (i.e. quarantined) until it was clear that they were not infected. These passages date to 3,400 years ago; thus, the Bible was over 2,900 years ahead of man’s scientific efforts: the transference of an infectious agent was not proposed until 1546 (by Girolamo Fracastoro); the existence of bacteria was not known until 1676 (they were discovered by Antonie van Leeuwenhoek), and it was not until the late 1800s that microorganisms were unquestionably recognized as the source of infection. Yet once again, the Bible’s information predated man’s understanding by about 3,300 years.

The answer is: most-probably yes, this advanced scientific knowledge came from God; and if so—since this knowledge was in the Bible thousands of years ago—God knows a lot more about science than we do! Cf. The Creator and the Cosmos, Chapter 3.

These questions (and more) prompted me to study science apologetics. Resources pertaining to this discipline are in the second section following.

Basically, my desire to study apologetics arose from my psychological need and drive to have my questions answered. And this arose (1) because of my atheistic background, unresolved issues, and my seeking to develop a fully-integrated worldview (that takes into account most, if not all, aspects of reality) and (2) because of my years of intense suffering. In a nutshell, that’s why I’ve studied apologetics and learned what I’ve learned.

As to this blog, I thought, “Why not share what I’ve learned?” Plus, the four factors I mentioned in my first post contributed to my motivation as well.

Resources for philosophical, historical, and biblical apologetics

In regard to answering questions pertaining to philosophical, historical, and biblical apologetics, I recommend the following resources:

The lay-level book: Why Suffering? Finding Meaning and Comfort When Life Doesn’t Make Sense by Ravi Zacharias and Vince Vitale (FaithWords, 2014). Careful responses are given to the questions: If a loving and powerful God exists, why would He allow so much suffering in this world? And: What can one do to cope with suffering?

The lay-level book: I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist by Drs. Norman Geisler and Frank Turek (Crossway Books, 2004). This book is written for the layperson (it’s eminently accessible to non-technical readers), yet it deals with some of the most-important evidences and reasons for believing. It answers many questions pertaining to philosophical, historical, and biblical apologetics on the one hand, AND to science apologetics on the other.

The lay-level book: On Guard: Defending Your Faith with Reason and Precision by Dr. William Lane Craig (David C. Cook, 2010). This is an excellent explanation of apologetic evidences and arguments for the layperson by a reputable philosopher and theologian (with two doctorates). I also recommend the student edition, On Guard for Students: A Thinker’s Guide to the Christian Faith. Topics include the difference made by God’s existence versus His non-existence, the beginning of the universe, the fine-tuning of the universe, the implications of objective morality, the problem of suffering, the identity of Jesus, and the Resurrection.

The lay-level book: The Case for Christ Movie Edition: Solving the Biggest Mystery of All Time by Lee Strobel (Zondervan, 1998, 2016, 2017). My comments: this is the latest edition of Lee’s best-known book describing his investigation into the main evidences for Jesus. It’s a “movie edition” because (in the “Letter to the Reader” and in the “Interview” appendix) it discusses the Pure Flix 113-minute movie (with the title The Case for Christ) released in 1,174 theaters in 2017. As I mentioned earlier, Lee Strobel is a journalist, a former atheist, and a nationally-known author. He holds a Master of Studies in Law degree from Yale Law School and has been interviewed numerous times on national television, including CNN, ABC’s 20/20, and Fox News. In each chapter of this book, Strobel records an interview with a highly respected scholar—Craig Blomberg, Bruce Metzger, Edwin Yamauchi, John McRay, Gregory Boyd, Ben Witherington, Gary Collins, D. A. Carson, Louis Lapides, Alexander Metherell, William Lane Craig, Gary Habermas, and J. P. Moreland. The content of these interviews demonstrates that the historical evidences for Jesus are cogent and compelling.

The lay-level book: The Case for the Real Jesus: A Journalist Investigates Current Attacks on the Identity of Christ by Lee Strobel (Zondervan, 2007). My comments: this is an excellent discussion of the main logical reasons, held by mainstream scholars, against the well-publicized skeptical theories about alternate (i.e. non-biblical) identities for Jesus. In each chapter, Strobel first describes a skeptical theory and then interviews a prominent scholar—namely, Craig Evans, Daniel Wallace, Bruce Metzger, Michael Licona, Edwin Yamauchi, Michael Brown, and Paul Copan—who explain in detail why a particular theory conflicts with evidence and logic. I’m impressed by the compelling nature or cogency of their answers, each of which soundly refutes the theory addressed. The resulting over-all implication is clear: the historical Jesus is accurately described in the New Testament. The topics dealt with are as follows:

  • The supposedly Gnostic Jesus of the apocryphal “gospels,” which were written in the second, third, and fourth centuries to promote Gnosticism
  • The supposedly inaccurately-transmitted Jesus of Bart Ehrman, who ignores the fact that 100% of the doctrinal teaching of the original manuscripts is presently preserved in our modern New Testaments
  • The supposedly un-resurrected Jesus of some skeptical scholars, whose speculations are refuted by a close examination of the evidence  
  • The supposedly mythical Jesus of internet skeptics. Virtually all scholars now reject this long-refuted copycat theory, that the story of Jesus was supposedly based on pagan myths. One distinct factor is that no Jewish writer would have based his writing on a pagan myth, which he regarded as abhorrent according to Deuteronomy 7:25-26 & 12:1-3. If he somehow managed to do this anyway, other Jews would have regarded his writing as abhorrent! If this had occurred, Christianity would have never gained thousands of Jewish adherents, as it did in the first century.
  • The supposedly un-Messianic Jesus postulated by some Jewish rabbis
  • And the supposedly tailor-made or relativistically-perceived Jesus of philosophical relativists.

In addition, I recommend:

Resources for science apologetics

In regard to answering questions pertaining to science apologetics, I recommend the following resources:

This lay-level book pertains to science apologetics as well as to philosophical, historical, and biblical apologetics: I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist by Drs. Norman Geisler and Frank Turek (Crossway Books, 2004). As I wrote in the last section, this book is written for the layperson (it’s eminently accessible to non-technical readers), yet it deals with some of the most-important evidences and reasons for believing. It answers many questions pertaining to philosophical, historical, and biblical apologetics on the one hand, AND to science apologetics on the other.

Likewise, this lay-level book pertains to science apologetics as well as to philosophical, historical, and biblical apologetics: On Guard: Defending Your Faith with Reason and Precision by Dr. William Lane Craig (David C. Cook, 2010). As I wrote in the last section, this is an excellent explanation of apologetic evidences and arguments for the layperson by a reputable philosopher and theologian (with two doctorates), and it includes two current issues in science apologetics. I also recommend the student edition, On Guard for Students: A Thinker’s Guide to the Christian Faith. Topics include the difference made by God’s existence versus His non-existence, the beginning of the universe, the fine-tuning of the universe, the implications of objective morality, the problem of suffering, the identity of Jesus, and the Resurrection.

The scholarly book: The Creator and the Cosmos: How the Latest Scientific Discoveries Reveal God by Dr. Hugh Ross (RTB Press, 2018). Written by a cosmologist and astrophysicist, this is an in-depth explanation of recently-discovered evidences that logically point to the existence of an intelligent Creator. Michael G. Strauss, David Ross Boyd Professor of Physics at the University of Oklahoma, wrote: “This book is required reading for any person who asks if there is sufficient evidence for God obtained through careful observations of nature. The answer is unequivocally, ‘yes.’”

The scholarly book: The Cell’s Design: How Chemistry Reveals the Creator’s Artistry by Dr. Fazale Rana, biochemist (Baker Books, 2008). This is another in-depth explanation of recently-discovered evidences that logically point to the existence of an intelligent Designer of the living cell. Hank Hanegraaff, president of the Christian Research Institute, explained that: “In Darwin’s day, a living cell was thought to be quite simply—for all practical purposes—little more than a microscopic blob of gelatin. Rana lays out what contemporary science has learned about the cell’s design, and he poignantly and provocatively shows that it is the handiwork of not only an Intelligent Designer but specifically the God revealed in Scripture.” 

In addition, I recommend:

More Resources

Here are other lists of resources (including some I’ve already mentioned) that I’ve copied in from my sixth post on “Five Formulations of the Moral Argument for God’s Existence, Part 1 (of 3)”:

Other evidences and reasons (logical arguments) for God may be found in the following resources that I recommend. I describe as “intermediate level” those resources that are scholarly, yet are understandable to the layperson, perhaps with the use of a dictionary or thesaurus.

As I stated in my third and fourth posts, there are abundant evidences for the New Testament’s historical reliability, some of which we covered in the second and third posts, and more of which we shall examine in future posts. I recommend the scholarly or intermediate-level book, The Historical Reliability of the New Testament by Dr. Craig Blomberg; B&H Academic, 2016. I also recommend the lay-friendly book, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist by Drs. Norman Geisler and Frank Turek, Crossway Books, 2004, Chapters 9-14. In addition, for the historicity of Jesus, I recommend the intermediate-level book, The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ by Dr. Gary Habermas, College Press Publishing, 1996. Cf. Are the Gospel narratives legendary or historically reliable?; Are there historical documentations of Jesus outside the Bible?

I recommend the following websites:

I recommend the following books:

  • The lay-friendly book, On Guard: Defending Your Faith with Reason and Precision by Dr. William Lane Craig, published by David C. Cook, 2010.
  • The lay-friendly book, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist by Drs. Norman Geisler and Frank Turek, Crossway Books, 2004.
  • The intermediate-level book, Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics by Dr. William Lane Craig, Crossway Books, 2008.   
  • The lay-friendly book (essentially an anthology in that Mr. Strobel interviews a different scientist or scholar in each chapter and quotes him word-for-word), The Case for the Creator: A Journalist Investigates Scientific Evidence that Points toward God by Lee Strobel, Zondervan, 2004.
  • The lay-friendly book (essentially an anthology again), The Case for Christ: Solving the Biggest Mystery of All Time by Lee Strobel, Zondervan, 2017.
  • The lay-friendly book (essentially an anthology again), The Case for the Real Jesus by Lee Strobel, Zondervan, 2007.
  • The lay-level anthology, Come Let Us Reason: New Essays in Christian Apologetics, edited by Raul Copan and William Lane Craig, B&H Publishing Group, 2012; this anthology has a dynamite chapter (#11) by Dr. Mark Foreman, debunking the Jesus-myth theory; he carefully explains all of their many logical fallacies.
  • The lay-level anthology, Passionate Conviction: Contemporary Discourses on Christian Apologetics, edited by Paul Copan and William Lane Craig, B&H Publishing Group, 2007.
  • The lay-level anthology, Evidence for God: 50 Arguments for Faith from the Bible, History, Philosophy, and Science, edited by William A. Dembski and Michael R. Licona, Baker Books, 2010.
  • The lay-level anthology, Is God Just a Human Invention? And Seventeen Other Questions Raised by the New Atheists, edited by Sean McDowell and Jonathan Morrow, Kregel Publications, 2011.
  • The intermediate-level book, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels by Dr. Craig L. Blomberg, IVP Academic, 2014.
  • The intermediate-level book, The Historical Reliability of the New Testament by Dr. Craig L. Blomberg, B&H Academic, 2016.
  • The intermediate-level book, The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ by Dr. Gary Habermas, College Press Publishing, 1996. 
  • The intermediate-level book, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Drs. Gary Habermas and Michael Licona, Kregel Publications, 2004.
  • The intermediate-level book, Reinventing Jesus: How Contemporary Skeptics Miss the Real Jesus and Mislead Popular Culture by J. Ed Komoszewski, M. James Sawyer, and Daniel B. Wallace, Kregel Publications, 2006.
  • The intermediate-level book, Fabricating Jesus: How Modern Scholars Distort the Gospels by Dr. Craig A. Evans, IVP Books, 2006.
  • The intermediate-level anthology, Jesus Under Fire: Modern Scholarship Reinvents the Historical Jesus, edited by Michael J. Wilkins and J. P. Moreland, Zondervan, 2010.
  • The intermediate-level book, The Creator and the Cosmos: How the Latest Scientific Discoveries Reveal God by Dr. Hugh Ross, RTB Press, 2018.
  • The intermediate-level book, Creating Life in the Lab: How New Discoveries in Synthetic Biology Make a Case for the Creator by Dr. Fazale Rana, Baker Books, 2011.
  • The intermediate-level book, The Cell’s Design: How Chemistry Reveals the Creator’s Artistry by Dr. Fazale Rana, Baker Books, 2008.  
  • The intermediate-level book, Escaping the Beginning? Confronting Challenges to the Universe’s Origin by Dr. Jeff Zweerink, RTB Press, 2019.
  • The intermediate-level book, Who Was Adam? A Creation Model Approach to the Origin of Humanity by Dr. Fazale Rana with Dr. Hugh Ross, RTB Press, 2015.
  • The intermediate-level anthology, Science and Human Origins, by Ann Gauger, Douglas Axe, and Casey Luskin, Discovery Institute Press, 2012.

Leave a comment