June 1, 2022 by Bob Elliott

 I would like to express opinion on the topic of skepticism. It seems that our society is steeped in the idea that you are a wise person if and only if you doubt everything that you hear or read. Not only should you be skeptical, but you should be sarcastic toward an other person’s opinion as well. Our media is ripe with some very wealthy people who have done nothing but scoff at anyone and anything that they find on their radar.

Tim Keller states “there is a kind of fool listed in the bible that is described as a mocker. The mockers prove it is not mental capacity, but rather attitude that determines whether we become wise or foolish. At the root of ‘mockers’ character is a high pride that hates submitting to anyone. Their strategy is to debunk everything, acting very smug and knowing in the process. Mockers, though fools, appear to most eyes as worldly-wise and highly sophisticated.”

While I would admit that there are things that we should be skeptical about that deserve critique, however a high level of cynicism in a person’s life is not healthy. In our current woke culture which attempts to deconstruct everything, there is so much mockery abounding that it is literally poisoning us.

So where should a person begin to repair the breach? I think that it can begin by starting to doubt your doubts. Keller further says that “if a skeptical person attempts to see through everything (as through a window) eventually you will see nothing at all.” If you are critical of every opinion except your own, what makes your ideas any more valid than all other ones? You take a scalpel to everyone else, why not take it upon yourself as well?

Keller also says the “the only way to doubt Christianity rightly and fairly is to discern the alternate belief that you have under each of your doubts and ask yourself what reasons you have for believing it. How do you know that your belief is true? It would be inconsistent to require more justification of Christian belief than you do for your own, but that is frequently what happens. In fairness you must doubt your doubts.” As you begin to seek real proofs for your worldview, you will find that your doubts are not as substantial as you may have envisioned.

If you are skeptical of Jesus’ claims, have you read any of the gospels in the new testament? Is your cynicism based on understanding or is it based on assumptions? If so, I would encourage you to read the gospel of Mark. It is the shortest in length of the 4 gospels and will take about 45 minutes to read. 

May 26, 2022 by Bob Elliott

Our society holds as one of its core beliefs that there is no such thing as objective truth. Many people also hold tightly to the idea that there isn’t any grand overarching purpose and meaning of life.  They believe, rather that life is merely a long string of vignettes that you perceive and align to your own individual perspective in order to create meaning. So, the idea that something is true for you, but not for me, is woven into the fabric of secular culture. So much so, that a person holding this worldview will tend to instantly block out any other person’s alternate ideas or perspectives without even beginning to consider its validity.

The posture held is that any grand truth claim is nothing more than an attempt to grab power in order to control or manipulate the masses, which seems ironic from the perspective of tolerance. Because tolerance is another core belief to the post-modernist. The reality is that there is only a selective tolerance that fits the individual’s taste buds.

Christianity is a grand overarching metanarrative truth-claim. The very thing that many will reject as simply a power play with no sense of any objective truth associated with it. It is tragic that they are intolerant about this, while claiming that we need to be tolerant about everything else. D.A. Carson describes this as the “intolerance of tolerance. “Alister McGrath states that “Postmodernism has endemic aversion to the questions of truth.” Ironically, even the statement that there are no objective truth claims, is actually an attempt to make an objective truth claim.

The reality is that at some point, we need to draw a line in the sand to be able to make the distinction of what is really objectively true. Was Hitler just as righteous and benevolent as Mother Teresa? Was his idea of truth disparate from hers, but also holding equal validity? Was it OK for him to say about her, that it is true for you, but not for me? Or furthermore for her to say about him, that it is true for you, but not for me?

When Jesus was arrested and was to be crucified, he was brought to the Roman authority Pontius Pilate. Here is the dialogue between them which is found in John Chapter 18. Then Pilate said to him, “So you are a king?” Jesus answered, “You say that I am a king. For this purpose, I was born and for this purpose I have come into the world—to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice.”  Pilate said to him, “What is truth?”. How paradoxical is this question, particularly when he is standing with and looking at the person who embodies the truth. Jesus says that He is the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. John Chapter 14:6.

This is the most important truth claim found in the entire history of humanity. Much more important than being tolerant to everything except Christianity.

May 4, 2022 by Bob Elliott

 In the movie titled The Water Boy, Adam Sandler is often quoted as saying “now that is some high quality H20.”  Today I would like for us to consider H20. Let’s look this in the context of the field of Astronomy and see our consuming desire to try to find water on other planets.

 They reason that all you need to do is find a planet with liquid water and it just naturally follows that life will form from the presence of H20. My question would be, is that a reasonable conclusion? It may seem logical on the surface however; the reality is that this plausibility structure that is so deeply rooted in our culture is absolutely absurd.

 The formation of life from the non-living is off the charts crazily complex. It’s so labyrinthine that the more we research its complexity, the more we realize that we have no idea how to overcome the problems necessary for it to even exist. The more we know, the more we realize what we don’t know. It is such a thorny challenge, and it just continues to escalate over time. More questions that remain unanswered.

 Because the riddle is unsolvable, pop-culture resorts to hiding their heads in the sand and say, “all you need is water.” This understatement is crazy talk and because it is so implausible, it must be repeated over and over again. Say it enough times and eventually we will actually start to believe it to be true.

 And that is exactly what has happened. We have said it enough times that we believe it to be true. “all you need is water.”

 So why am I making such a big deal about this? The reason is that life is so extraordinary that it requires a designing hand, a creator. No amount of luck or improbability can possibly can explain life forming apart from God. 

Our quest for discovering extra-terrestrial H20 and associated conclusion of there being life is… unbelievable.

April 27, 2022 by Bob Elliott

Recently I have been reading the book, The Gospel in a Pluralist Society By Lesslie Newbigin. The book is the second installment in a two-book series; the first book is titled Foolishness to the Greeks. The works were written in the late 1980’s I am amazed at how poignant his work is today. For today’s post, I would like to lay out some of the groundwork displayed in these two volumes. I would say that if you like to read, both of these books are highly recommended.

Newbigin was originally from Great Brittan and traveled to India as a missionary for many years. Upon returning to England, he was shocked to see all of the change that had taken place there. He realized that there was a great need to be a missionary in his home country. A changed nation that had embraced post-modern pluralist society structures.

He describes the term” plausibility structures” that are based on the work of Michael Polanyi. These structures are built much the same way as buildings are built in a city. However, they are not physical; rather they are built into the minds of the prevailing culture as to what is acceptable to believe as true.

In a pluralistic society, the complexity of these interwoven plausibility structures is extreme and presents a great barrier to the Gospel narrative. He describes the naturalist viewpoint as a two-story structure. On the first floor, you have facts. This includes all of the scientific laws of the universe. The second floor consists of values or opinions. These are matters of personal opinions about things. There is no overarching moral imperatives found on this level.

 To the Christian mind, the truth of the redemption of Jesus should be on the first floor. For the skeptic, he or she places the gospel narrative on the second level. Christianity is good and true for you… but not for me. This is the true challenge for sharing the gospel in a pluralistic society, which the west has become. Newbigin then describes how the gospel narrative comes against these plausibility structures and provides ideas for how we can share our faith in this context.

Newbigin also develops a deep understanding of where western societies are headed from a political perspective. He describes how the West developed great wealth based on the idea of human progress as being a part of God’s purposes for humanity. Many of these advances were based on Christian values. When God is taken out of the plausibility structures in a society, there is a loss of purpose. New Testament hope is erased from the equation. Vision is lost and a vacuum ensues. He talks of the dangers of utopian fanaticisms, especially Marxism filling in the void. This is exactly where our society is struggling at the present time. The interesting thing is that Newbigin wrote this in 1989.

He also develops the idea that faith in God can overcome the lack of purpose found in naturalist plausibility structures.  Richard Dawkins describes the universe as “cold, heartless and pitiless.” Christianity offers hope, purpose and destiny.

It is here in these two divergent scenarios that Newbigin says, “The more actively we challenge these plausibility structures in the name of Jesus, the more violently they will attack. But exactly when this attack is most violent and when we are at our most vulnerable, signs will be given of the presence of the kingdom, the power of the Spirit to speak the word that bears witness to Christ’s kingly power and assures us that the victory is to him and not the powers of darkness.

We are called to challenge the status quo, swim against the stream, glorify God and share the good news of the gospel.

April 20, 2022 by Bob Elliott

One of the important questions for people to ask is about faith and reason. Are they opposites? Does a person need to sacrifice one in order to believe the other? Is it possible to be a thinker and a Bible-believing Christian at the same time? There are some people who do not think this is possible.

Atheist George H. Smith, says “reason and faith are opposites, two mutually exclusive terms: there is no reconciliation or common ground. Faith is belief without, or in spite of reason.” These are pretty big truth claims to make. Does the evidence support such a viewpoint?

Christian educator W. Bingham Hunter who takes the opposite view, “faith is a rational response to the evidence of God’s self-revelation in nature, human history, the scriptures and his resurrected son.” So here, we see a dramatic contrast. One person claims that faith and reason are not compatible, another claims the opposite, how can a person sort this out?

If we look at the propositions put forward, it is clear to see that the atheist’s claims have gone too far. Hunter’s testimony is in fact evidence that the “truth claim” Smith has made is refutable. Even if Smith does not believe the same way as Hunter, it is still at least possible for someone to combine faith and reason together.

This combination actually creates a beautiful explanation for many of the big questions that face humanity. I believe that faith and reason are not in opposition to one another. Rather, they complement each other in a very dynamic way. If a person will look at the evidence for Christianity to be true with an open mind, the reasonable explanation will be a position of both faith and reason to be compatible with one another.

Most skeptics cling to a worldview that only allows for “natural” occurrences.  Any reference to things of supernatural origin are automatically viewed as irrational. Those who hold this viewpoint may be very aggressive in trying to tell a Christian person how antiquated their viewpoint is.

However, the Bible is very clear to declare that the fool says in his heart that there is no God (Ps. 14:1).  It is possible for a person to be intellectually smart, but to be very foolish in refusing to look at the evidence for a grand designer of our universe.

The reality of the universe coming into existence from nothing and also being so incredibly fine-tuned for life to exist actually requires an intelligent designer in order to make any sense at all.

We should be quite encouraged by this and not allow the critic to impart an ideology that attempts to drown out these truth claims.

April 13, 2022 by Bob Elliott

What about Creation by chance?

 Today I would like to look at some of the history behind the naturalist viewpoint that the Universe and everything in it is the product of chance.

This idea is not new. R. C. Sproul in his book titled Reason to Believe states “During the period of the Enlightenment, some French skeptics maintained that the God-hypothesis was no longer necessary because they knew that the universe came into being by spontaneous generation.”  For example, without having sophisticated science like a microscope, they reasoned that the sudden appearance of bacteria on bread was undeniable evidence of spontaneous generation.  We obviously now know this is not true. The point that I would like to make is that the seeds of materialism were planted in the minds of people a long time ago, and that as science progresses, the harder it gets to validate such an a nonsensical theory. When one looks at all of the amazing complexity in the macro of stars, planets and galaxies, and the micro of particles, atoms and DNA: They all tell a repetitive story that only design can be the source of all the information used to form this sophistication. The odds of creation forming itself by chance alone is essentially zero.

There is also the problem of needing to have something able to create itself. Sproul goes further to say “What is wrong with the notion of (spontaneous) self-creation? What would have to happen for something to create itself? Obviously, for something to create itself, it would have to exist if it were to create its own existence. Are you getting a headache? For something to create itself, it would have to be and not be at the same time and have the same relationship. To do that it would have to violate the law of science, the law of contradiction. The notion of self-creation is irrational in the extreme.”  Chance does not have any intrinsic power to create or cause anything.

Well maybe it was mathematics that created the universe. There is a naturalistic viewpoint that describes; in the beginning there were these mathematical points. Really? Can a person actually describe the character and origin of such points? Mathematics are a product of something already created. They are discovered by people. They have no intrinsic creative ability within themselves.

In Romans chapter 1, Paul talks about the obvious attributes of the cosmos are designed, (not random accidents) and deep down inside everyone knows this intuitively.

If a person is willing to go where the evidence leads them without any preconceived ideology. The necessity of a universe creator God is undeniable. What about you? What is your belief about origins?

March 30, 2022 by Bob Elliott

Many are familiar with the New Age movement. The hallmark of their thinking is to search out the god that is within you. It’s there, you just have to find it. Explore the power that is at your disposal, tap into your own god consciousness.

Well… the truth of the matter is that even though a person may think that they are a god, they are not. Humans did not create the universe or originate the laws of nature. We did not create time or design DNA or gravity. You can’t even be a mini-me version of a god. So how can a person even seriously consider such a disjointed world-view? New age philosophy is a ruse. It can’t be true.

In contrast, a Christian perspective that resonates with the reality of how things are looks like this. Instead of attempting to find a false god inside of yourself, you consciously work on establishing Godly values in your personal lifestyle.

This is where true meaning and purpose for life becomes real. We take on the understanding that Jesus wants us to become more like himself. We build Godly character by desiring to please God in our thoughts, words and deeds. This covers a broad spectrum. We hold to personal discipline and we learn to “play well with others.” The reason for making the most of our relationships with others is so that we don’t end up being a dufus when we get to heaven.

We also hold to an eternal perspective concerning time. Life is more than accumulation of stuff. You can’t take any of your wealth or accomplishments with you when you die. The only thing you take to heaven with you is your character. This is certainly good for us to have an attitude of Godliness even when things look bleak around us. We are built for eternity and God (the real God) has great things in store for us.

March 23, 2022

The debate goes like this. Is man made in the image of God? Or is God a manmade image after his likeness, made in order to console himself? The Christian will hold the first opinion, the Atheist will conform to the latter. There is a very distinct difference of perspective based on worldview.

Genesis 1:26 states, “Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” Here we see that the trinity of the Godhead spoke of how we were to be created. We are the handiwork of God on display. To me, this makes total sense from a rational perspective. We are God’s workmanship, we are fearfully and wonderfully made.

It is interesting that there were also manmade gods listed in the Old Testament. We read in Isaiah 42:17
“They are turned back and utterly put to shame, who trust in carved idols, who say to metal images, “You are our gods.” So, in some sense, the Atheist is correct to say that little “g” god(s) are manmade. However, these little “g’s” are not the real thing. They have no power to create the universe or life or people. The atheist will attempt to lump all notions of God into an object of man’s creation, including the God of the universe himself.

God actually told the Israelites not to make idols of wood and stone because he knew that they would have the propensity to worship false gods. The psalmist says in Psalms 31 I hate those who pay regard to worthless idols, but I trust in the Lord.

So, I would agree with the Atheist to the extent that a manmade god is meant to console him or herself. However, there is a great deal of difference between something manmade and an eternal awesome God who has created all that we can see. He exists beyond time and in his wisdom, has chosen to make us in his image. His power to create is seen in the complexity of how amazingly we are made.

March 16, 2022 by Bob Elliott

Recently I watched a very interesting video featuring Dr. James Tour and J. Warner Wallace. These two men are among my favorite Christian Apologists. The topic of focus is based on the idea that there is so much historical evidence for Christianity integrated in differing societies through out the world, that even if we did not have access to the New Testament, we would still have enough evidence to make the case for the truth of Christianity.

It is important to note that they are not saying that we don’t need the New Testament, we certainly do need it. In fact, Wallace purposed a scenario in which some despotic world dictator despised Christianity so much that he removed every Bible known to man in an effort to persecute the church. Wallace is a committed Christian who loves the Bible, but he says that even if it was taken away from us, the church would continue.

Christian heritage is woven into the fabric of hospitals, universities, charities and scientific endeavors spanning multiple centuries. When you think about it, Christian ethics and compassion has literally turned the world upside-down. All of this while not even  mentioning physical evidence of Churches all around the globe.

Concerning ancient literature, there is no other figure in the entire documented history of humanity that can even come close to that of Jesus. This includes literary works outside of the Bible.

Switching gears, Dr. Tour talks about origin of life studies. He declares that even world renown scientists have no clue as to how life began. The write papers claiming that they know, but it is all a ruse. Tour has taken on the establishment at great cost to himself. He has been ostracized from receiving critical grant funding needed for research not because of his scientific ability, but because he is a defender of the faith. Tour describes that many other members of the society tell him behind the scenes that he is absolutely right about origins of life research being a sham. They just tell him not to reveal their identity to the society for fear that they will be ostracized as well.

These two topics are potent evidence that our Faith in Jesus and God as creator of the universe is based on the reality of history. Faith in Jesus is real. It is alive and well!

Video Link: Afraid to Speak Up!

March 9, 2022 by Bob Elliott

Much of the information found in todays post is from the same title in a book authored by Alister McGrath. Kudos to him for such an excellent work.

The story goes like this. Science is the penultimate truth that literally destroys religion. The more we know about and elevate science, the smaller and smaller God becomes. So much so, that eventually God just goes completely away, because there is nothing left of him. That certainly was the prevailing mindset of the naturalist of the twentieth century.

The idea of a diminished God that is just the wish fulfillment of a bunch of kooky Christians is certainly alive and well for much of the population today. The question is: is there any truth to such a viewpoint?

I am here to tell you that God isn’t going away any time soon.

McGrath states “The relation of science and faith changed decisively in the later twentieth century. Although New Atheist propagandists regularly declare that scientific advance and progress have eroded the case for belief in God, the facts are otherwise.” The research in cosmology involving the big bang shows that the universe had a definite beginning, rather than always existing in a steady state. The theological implications for this are massive.

Atheist Fred Hoyle, who actually came up with the terminology of “big bang” lamented that science had thrown him such a curve ball. Between the origin of the singularity and the finely tuned design of the universe, he begrudgingly had to admit as follows: “it is as if a super intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as chemistry and biology. So much so, that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature.”

Yet that is still the main argument of the atheistic camp today. It’s unguided forces and natural selection that accounts for everything they say. At least Hoyle recognizes a monkey in his statement.

So, at the end of the day, God is not going away. The more we know about science, the more it reinforces the design of a master builder.

I think it is good for us to feel the confidence and comfort in knowing that a designed universe created by God almighty makes so much more sense that attempting to Pidgeon hole chance as the best explanation of how things are. Don’t be intimidated by the atheist’s ruse.

The Emperor’s new clothes are truly transparent.